Council

Table of Contents

MATTERS REQUIRING ATTENTION OF THE COUNCIL

INTRODUCTION

OPENING OF THE SESSION

ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND TIMETABLE

ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSONS, AND DESIGNATION OF A DRAFTING COMMITTEE

INTEGRATED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT FOR SUSTAINABLE INLAND FISH PRODUCTION

PROGRESS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CODE OF CONDUCT FOR RESPONSIBLE FISHERIES

REVIEW OF FAO'S PROGRAMMES IN THE FISHERIES SECTOR

MAJOR FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE ISSUES IN SMALL ISLAND DEVELOPING STATES (SIDS)

REPORT OF THE SIXTH SESSION OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON FISH TRADE,
BREMEN, GERMANY, 3-6 JUNE 1998

FAO STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK (2000-2015)

MEDIUM-TERM PERSPECTIVES FOR MAJOR PROGRAMME 2.3 (FISHERIES)

PROGRESS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF FAO CONFERENCE RESOLUTION 13/97
(REVIEW OF FAO STATUTORY BODIES)

DATE AND PLACE OF THE TWENTY-FOURTH SESSION OF COFI

ANY OTHER MATTERS

ADOPTION OF THE REPORT

APPENDIX A - Agenda

APPENDIX B - List of Delegates and Observers

APPENDIX C - List of Documents

APPENDIX D - Opening Statement by Mr. David A. Harcharik

APPENDIX E - International Plans of Actions

MATTERS REQUIRING THE ATTENTION OF THE COUNCIL

The Committee:

INTEGRATED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT FOR SUSTAINABLE INLAND FISH PRODUCTION

i) stressed the increasingly important role of inland capture fisheries and aquaculture in fish production and in human nutrition and poverty alleviation in many rural areas (para.11)

ii) emphasized the need to combat adverse impacts on the environment and to evaluate and monitor possible environmental risks related to introduction of new or genetically modified species and to devise systems for avoiding growing competition for resources in the sector (recreational versus commercial fishing) (para.11)

iii) acknowledged that integrated resource management could contribute to the enhancement of inland fish production (para.14)

iv) recognized that cooperation between fishers, government agencies and other stakeholders needed to be enhanced when developing general land use plans embracing inland aquatic environments (para.13)

v) acknowledged the need to strengthen institutional arrangements to support inland fishery and aquaculture. (para.14)

PROGRESS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CODE OF CONDUCT FOR RESPONSIBLE FISHERIES

i) emphasized that the Code is an important basic instrument to facilitate sustainable utilization of global fishery resources and hence to contribute to food security and well-being of people (para.17)

ii) recognized that further assistance was required if meaningful progress was to be made towards implementing the Code (para.19)

iii) underlined the important role that the regional fishery management organizations can play in respect of the issues of fishing capacity and illegal fishing activities in high seas (para.20)

iv) underlined the need to clarify and simplify national questionnaires to facilitate reporting on actions to implement the Code and particularly to provide for specific reporting on development of national plans and other actions called for in the three Plans of Action presented for adoption during this session (para.21)

v) expressed its appreciation at the establishment of the Margarita Liz�rraga award in recognition of her work in developing and encouraging implementation of the Code, in accordance with the FAO Conference Resolution (para.23)

REVIEW OF FAO'S PROGRAMMES IN THE FISHERIES SECTOR

i) commented favourably on FAO's implementation of the Fisheries Programme in the 1996-1998 period, especially the efforts made to assist countries in the implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, including its application in conformity with regional specificities (para.25)

ii) expressed its satisfaction at the outcome of the First Session of the Advisory Committee on Fisheries Research (ACFR) and on FAO's follow-up actions to its recommendations
(para.26)

iii) strongly recommended that the Council and the Conference should grant a substantially increased share of FAO's Regular Programme resources to Major Programme 2.3 (Fisheries) in view of the number of urgent tasks which the Fisheries Department was being requested to accomplish by FAO's Members (para.28)

iv) expressed its appreciation for the work of the Consultation and adopted the International Plan of Action for Reducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries and the International Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (para.32)

v) adopted the International Plan of Action for the Management of Fishing Capacity (para.34)

vi) stressed the importance of holding a technical consultation on the measurement of fishing capacity as soon as possible in 1999 (para.36)

vii) agreed that these Plans of Actions are not intended to regulate trade in fish and fishery products which are governed by relative trade agreements (para.37)

viii) agreed that the three Plans of Actions should be submitted to the FAO Council for endorsement (para.38)

MAJOR FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE ISSUES IN SMALL ISLAND DEVELOPING STATES (SIDS)

i) commended FAO for its work on responding to the special problem of SIDS and supported the FAO Programme of Assistance for Small Island States (para.40)

ii) recognized that further international assistance and cooperation will be needed to develop, manage, and conserve fishery resources in order to increase food security and the standard of living of SIDS (para.42)

iii) stressed the importance of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Kyoto Plan of Action, the International Coral Reef Initiative and Chapter 17 of Agenda 21 in the development of a relevant policy framework for the sustainable development of the fisheries of SIDS (para.43)

REPORT ON THE SIXTH SESSION OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON FISH TRADE
BREMEN, GERMANY, 3-6 JUNE 1998

i) expressed its satisfaction at the work of the Sub-Committee on Fish Trade and the important role played by FAO in the field of fish marketing, especially through the fish INFOnetwork.... (para.46)

ii) agreed that further assistance was needed, especially from those countries implementing stringent health related import regulation, in order to build capacity of developing countries in quality control and hazard analysis (para. 47)

iii) endorsed the report of the consultation of the FAO ad Hoc Expert Group on Listing Criteria for Marine Species under CITES and agreed with its results (para.48)

iv) received the report of the Technical Consultation on the Feasibility of Developing Non-Discriminatory Technical Guidelines for the Eco-Labelling of Products from Marine Capture Fisheries which was held in Rome from 21 to 23 October 1998 and expressed thanks to the Nordic Council of Ministers for providing the funding which made the Consultation possible (para.50)

v) noted that any eco-labelling scheme must be transparent and not be an obstacle to trade, that it must be voluntary, non-discriminatory, ensure equivalence of standards between countries and/or schemes, recognize the sovereign rights of States and comply with all relevant international agreements (para.53)

vi) approved the report of the Sixth Session of its Sub-Committee on Fish Trade and accepted the invitation to hold its Seventh session in Bremen in the year 2000 (para.57)

FAO STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK (2000-2015)

i) considered Version 2.0 of the Strategic Framework to be a substantial improvement over Version 1.0, both in presentation and content, but that Version 3.0 should be more concise and less descriptive in order to focus more incisively on strategic issues and better serve its purpose as the framework of FAO's action over a 15-year time horizon (para.58)

ii) welcomed the statements of values, mission and vision for the Organisation (para.59)

iii) fully supported the emphasis given in Part II of the document to inter-disciplinarity and partnerships (para.60)

iv) noted that the cross-organizational strategies formed a set of management principles which FAO would apply to the implementation of the programme strategies, and welcomed the addition of the sixth cross-organizational strategy on Communicating FAO's Messages (para. 63)

v) welcomed the information provided both in the body of the document and in Annex III, and indicated that Version 3.0 should provide further explanation of how these partnerships were being or would be operationalized (para. 64)

vi) appreciated the additional explanations provided in Annex II concerning the criteria of priority-setting including that of comparative advantage (para.65)

vii) stressed that addressing the effective requirements of the membership, building on the Organisation's greatest strengths and taking into account an appropriate balance between normative and field activities, should continue to be the paramount consideration (para.66)

viii) recalled that a fundamental point of reference for considering the Strategic Framework was a World Food Summit Plan of Action, and the challenges facing countries and the international community to achieve its goals (para.66)

MEDIUM-TERM PERSPECTIVES FOR MAJOR PROGRAMME 2.3 (FISHERIES)

i) endorsed the Medium-Term Perspectives, but pointed out that it was difficult to formally approve them in the absence of adequate information on the budget (para.69)

ii) requested that, in view of the importance of fisheries and aquaculture and the ever-growing demand on its work, the Fisheries Department be allocated an increased share of the overall FAO budget (para.69)

iii) agreed that there was a need to prioritize and that demands for important new work to be undertaken implied that the priority of some elements in the existing programme may have to be lowered (para.70)

iv) noted the progress in the application of the Kyoto Declaration and Plan of Action and expressed the need to assess better the cultural and socio-economic aspects of fisheries in relation to food security (para.71)

v) agreed that greater consideration should be given to the development of more appropriate ecosystem approaches to fisheries development and management, optimally in collaboration with both FAO and non-FAO regional fishery bodies, and to continue its work on the development of sustainability indicators for fisheries (para.71)

vi) placed a high level of importance on the implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (para.72)

vii) urged, as a priority, those countries which had not yet ratified the Compliance Agreement to consider doing so as soon as possible in light of the apparent increase in illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (para.72)

viii) took note that the issues related to reflagging of fishing vessels and ship registration would be one of the subjects to be discussed by the IMO Sub-Committee on Flag State Implementation (para.73)

ix) agreed that improvements were needed in FAO's global monitoring of fish stocks (para.74)

x) expressed its satisfaction at the information provided that the fishing capacity of some long-line and other techniques of some major fishing nations was being reduced and encouraged other States to make similar reductions in capacity as appropriate (para.75)

xi) agreed that the three International Plans of Action regarding fishing capacity, sharks and incidental catch of seabirds should be pursued as high priorities (para.77)

xii) agreed that FAO's work on the review of CITES listing criteria for commercially harvested fish species should be continued (para.78)

xiii) agreed that sustainable aquaculture could have high potential in securing food availability and poverty alleviation in developing countries (para.79)

xiv) agreed that the above priorities should be reflected in the Programme of Work and Budget 2000-2001 (para.80)

PROGRESS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF FAO CONFERENCE RESOLUTION 13/97
(REVIEW OF FAO STATUTORY BODIES)

i) expressed its satisfaction with the outcome of the implementation of the FAO Conference Resolution 13/97 (para.81)

ii) commended FAO for convening a meeting of FAO and Non FAO Regional Fishery Bodies and Arrangements on 11-12 February 1999 and recommended that such meetings be held regularly, preferably prior to sessions of COFI (para.82)

iii) endorsed the recommendation of the Twenty-ninth Session of the FAO Conference to abolish two Sub-Committees of COFI: The Sub-Committee on Programmes to Assist Developing Coastal States in Managing and Developing Fisheries in their Economic Zones and the Sub-Committee on Fishery Education and Training (para.83)

ANY OTHER MATTERS

i) discussed the procedure for the preparations for the Ministerial Meeting on the Implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (para.87)

ii) noted the decision of the Secretariat to set up an open-ended Contact Group consisting of representatives of each regional group, under the Chairmanship of Mr. Ronald Rose, Permanent Representative of Canada to FAO, to undertake the preparations for the Ministerial Meeting (para.88)

INTRODUCTION

1. The Committee on Fisheries held its Twenty-third Session in Rome from 15 to 19 February 1999.

2. The Session was attended by 98 members of the Committee, by observers from 7 other FAO Member Nations, the Holy See, and one non-Member Nation of FAO, by representatives from two specialized agencies of the United Nations and by observers from 34 other intergovernmental and international non-governmental organizations. A list of delegates and observers is attached at Appendix B.

OPENING OF THE SESSION

3. In the absence of Mr William Martin (USA), outgoing Chairman of the Committee, the Session was opened by the First Vice-Chairman, Mr Mike Akyeampong (Ghana). The delegation of the United States of America read a letter from Mr Martin expressing his regret at being unable to attend the Session and sending his best wishes for the work of the Committee.

4. The Session was addressed by Mr David A. Harcharik, Deputy Director-General. The full text of his statement is attached at Appendix D.

5. Several delegations regretted the late distribution in all languages of important documents to be considered by the Committee.

6. "Fisheries and Aquaculture (SOFIA) 1998". The Fisheries Department was asked to make available to members of the Committee the data base which made it possible to produce the document.

ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND TIMETABLE

7. The Agenda adopted by the Committee is attached as Appendix A. The documents which were before the Committee are shown in Appendix C.

ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSONS, AND DESIGNATION OF A DRAFTING COMMITTEE

8. Mr Mike Akyeampong (Ghana) was unanimously elected Chairperson of the Committee and Mr Minoru Morimoto (Japan) was elected First Vice-Chairperson. Mr Juan Alberto Arrus Rokovich (Peru), Mr Osman Mohamed Saeed (Sudan), Mr Giuseppe Ambrosio (Italy), Ms Carolyn Risk (New Zealand) and Mr Ronald Rose (Canada) were elected as other Vice-Chairpersons.

9. The Committee also appointed a Drafting Committee consisting of Australia, Brazil, China, Eritrea, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Japan, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Spain, Sudan, Sweden, Thailand and the United States of America.

INTEGRATED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT FOR SUSTAINABLE INLAND FISH PRODUCTION

10. The Secretariat introduced document COFI/99/2, which highlighted the significance of inland fish production for food security and rural development and drew attention to key challenges. The need for integrated resources management (IRM) was stressed and possible measures, policies and instruments of integration for sustainable inland fish production were described.

11. The Committee stressed the increasingly important role of inland capture fisheries and aquaculture in fish production and in human nutrition and poverty alleviation in many rural areas. The Committee also emphasized the need to combat adverse impacts on the environment and evaluate and monitor possible environmental risks related to introduction of new or genetically modified species and to devise systems for avoiding growing competition for resources in the sector (recreational versus commercial fishing). It drew attention to the important roles in this regard of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries.

12. The Committee acknowledged that IRM could contribute to the enhancement of inland fish production through integrated aquaculture-agriculture farming systems and integrated utilization of small and medium size water bodies.

13. The Committee recognized that cooperation between fishers, government agencies and other stakeholders needed to be enhanced and that the "polluter pays principle" should be applied to protect fishery resources. A number of countries suggested that experiences in integrated coastal zone management might be useful in the development of general land use plans covering inland aquatic environments.

14. The opportunities for further international cooperation on sustainable aquaculture and inland fisheries were stressed by many countries. In this respect, mention was made of the role of the Commission for Inland Fisheries of Latin America (COPESCAL), activities of the Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific (NACA) and the FAO/NACA/International Office of Epizootics (OIE) Regional Programme on Fish Quarantine and Health Certification. The Committee recognized the importance of women in aquaculture development and encouraged the sharing of experience between members of different regions. The Committee acknowledged the need to strengthen institutional arrangements to support the inland fishery and aquaculture. Several countries requested FAO to provide further assistance, particularly through the field programme, to support sustainable inland fish production.

15. The Secretariat informed the Committee of its priorities and on-going programme concerning inland fisheries, in particular, cooperation with the FAO Agriculture, Forestry and Sustainable Development Departments.

PROGRESS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CODE OF CONDUCT FOR RESPONSIBLE FISHERIES

16. The Secretariat introduced document COFI/99/3 and invited the Committee to discuss their experiences in implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries at national and regional level and to provide guidance on the information to be requested in the future from governments on their progress and activities in implementation.

17. The Committee emphasized that the Code is an important basic instrument to facilitate sustainable utilization of global fishery resources and hence to contribute to food security and well-being of people. Many countries informed the Committee further on their experiences in implementing the Code.

18. Several countries also reported on problems in implementation and it was suggested by some that progress had been slow. Although some countries reported that they had translated the Code into their national languages, concern was expressed at the need for greater efforts to disseminate the Code to all those involved in fisheries. FAO was asked to assist in this regard through provision of suitable materials and through organizing regional and national workshops. Attention was drawn to the large number of illiterate fishers in many countries and it was suggested that suitable vehicles should be developed, such as audio-visual material, for informing such people of the Code and its objectives.

19. Many countries expressed appreciation to the Fisheries Department of FAO for its role in promoting the application of the Code. Tribute was also paid to the valuable efforts of donor countries in providing technical and financial support to developing countries, both through bilateral arrangements and, through FAO, to assist them in implementation of the Code. However, the Committee recognised that further assistance was required if meaningful progress was to be made towards implementing the Code. Many countries referred to the financial, technological, human resources and frequently geographical constraints they faced. The greatest needs were identified as being in the areas of training, capacity building and institutional strengthening.

20. A number of States reported that they had accepted the Compliance Agreement and/or ratified the UN Agreement on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks and called on other States to consider doing the same. Concern was expressed at the small number of countries that had accepted/ratified the two Agreements to date. The importance of the Compliance Agreement as a binding instrument to address the problem of vessels that undermined the effectiveness of internationally agreed conservation measures was emphasized. Some delegates suggested that the Compliance Agreement and the Plan of Action on the Management of Fishing Capacity could be supplemented by additional measures to address these fishing activities. The Committee underlined the important role that the regional fishery management organizations can play in respect of the issues of fishing capacity and illegal fishing activities in high seas.

21. The Committee underlined the need to clarify and simplify the national questionnaires to facilitate reporting on actions to implement the Code and particularly to provide for specific reporting on development of national plans and other actions called for in the three Plans of Action presented for adoption during this Session. A working group to address this matter was suggested by some delegations. Noting the involvement of NGOs in the implementation of the Code and their strong support for it, the inclusion of such social and professional organizations in the national reporting process might be needed.

22. Some countries requested that monitoring of implementation of the Code needed to be result-oriented and attempt to determine not just what was being done but also what problems were being encountered and what major constraints and issues remained. The Committee was informed about the results of a recent conference in Australia, organized in cooperation with FAO on integrated fisheries monitoring, which recommended that FAO should undertake the preparation of guidelines for the integrated monitoring of fisheries within the context of the Code.

23. The Committee expressed its appreciation for the establishment of the Margarita Liz�rraga award in recognition of her work in developing and encouraging implementation of the Code, in accordance with the FAO Conference Resolution.

REVIEW OF FAO'S PROGRAMMES IN THE FISHERIES SECTOR

Achievements of major programme 2.3 (Fisheries)

24. The item was introduced on the basis of document COFI/99/5 Part I; the Committee also had at its disposal documents COFI/99/Inf.10, Inf.11, Inf.14 and Inf.18.

25. The Committee commented favourably on FAO's implementation of the Fisheries Programme in the 1996-1998 period, especially the efforts made to assist countries in the implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries including its application in conformity with regional specificities. Several delegations noted with concern the decline in funding for field programme activities.

26. The Committee expressed its satisfaction at the outcome of the First Session of the Advisory Committee on Fisheries Research (ACFR) and of FAO's follow-up actions to its recommendations. Discussion by the Committee clarified the role of ACFR as an independent body to advise on FAO's fishery research programmes and not to provide general fishery policy recommendations.

27. In response to queries by several delegations, the Secretariat explained that the apparent under-spending of appropriations to the Fisheries Department in the biennium 1996/97 was caused by the organization-wide policy of not filling vacancies on a temporary basis in order to accommodate a short fall in real budgetary resources. In terms of effective allocations provided, expenditures on the fisheries programme were in near balance.

28. The Committee strongly recommended that the Council and the Conference should grant a substantially increased share of FAO's Regular Programme resources to Major Programme 2.3 (Fisheries) in view of the number of urgent tasks which the Fisheries Department was being requested to accomplish by FAO's Members. Because of the constraints upon funds, it stressed the need for careful prioritization of activities.

29. Some delegations insisted on the need for the work of the Fisheries Department to be financed with resources from the Regular Programme and not be based mainly on extra-budgetary funds.

Follow-Up to the Requests And Recommendations of the Twenty-Second Session of COFI

30. This sub-item was presented by the Secretariat on the basis of document COFI/99/5 Part II, Rev.1.

The Management of Fishing Capacity, Shark Fisheries and Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries

31. This item was introduced by the Secretariat on the basis of document COFI/99/5 Part III. It was decided to postpone discussion of Part IV to Agenda Item 10. The outcome of the Consultation on the Management of Fishing Capacity, Shark Fisheries and Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries, held in Rome in October 1998, was described, with special reference to the three drafts approved by the Consultation for consideration by COFI. One of the drafts had several bracketed phrases indicating the lack of agreement by the Consultation.

32. The Committee expressed its appreciation for the work of the Consultation and adopted:

a) The International Plan of Action for Reducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries as presented in Annex E of document COFI/99/5 Part III; and

b) The International Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks as presented in Annex F of document COFI/99/5 Part III.

33. Concerning the management of fishing capacity, the Committee welcomed the results of the Consultation. It agreed that the draft should be entitled "Plan of Action" rather than "Guidelines".

34. The Committee then adopted the International Plan of Action for the Management of Fishing Capacity as presented in Annex G of document COFI/99/5 Part III, with the following clarifications with regard to timeframes:

• Paragraph 7: the bracketed words to be replaced by "preferably by 2003, but not later than 2005"
• Paragraph 9 (ii): the first bracketed figure to be replaced by "2000"; the second by "2002" and the third by "2005"
• Paragraph 13: the bracketed figures to be replaced by "2000"
• Paragraph 14: the bracketed figure to be replaced by "2001"
• Paragraph 21: the bracketed figure to be replaced by "2002".

35. The texts of the three above-mentioned Plans of Action will be published by the FAO Fisheries Department.

36. The Committee stressed the importance of holding a technical consultation on the measurement of fishing capacity as soon as possible in 1999. The need to develop simple methods that could be widely applicable in both developed and developing countries was strongly emphasized.

37. The Committee agreed that these Plans of Action are not intended to regulate trade in fish and fishery products which are governed by relative trade agreements.

38. The Committee agreed that the three Plans of Action should be submitted to the FAO Council for endorsement.

MAJOR FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE ISSUES IN SMALL ISLAND DEVELOPING STATES (SIDS)

39. The Secretariat introduced document COFI/99/7 highlighting the special characteristics of SIDS and emphasizing the importance to them of often vulnerable fishery resources for employment, food and generation of foreign exchange.

40. The Committee commended FAO for its work on responding to the special problems of SIDS and supported the FAO Programme of Fisheries Assistance for Small Island States as outlined in document COFI/99/7. However, while gratefully acknowledging the help given by a number of bilateral donors, concern was expressed that there had not been much progress in securing funding for the Programme.

41. Several delegations requested that aspects of this Programme be considered for funding under the FAO Regular Programme. The Secretariat responded that a number of relevant activities were already being pursued under the Regular Programme, in response to countries or regional organizations, e.g., stock assessment, training in stock assessment, assistance to the Organization for Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) in formulating fishery legislation, assistance on disaster preparedness, workshops on economic planning and marine resource assessment. It stressed, however, that the resources of the Regular Programme did not allow it to undertake all the activities of the Programme itself.

42. The Committee recognized that further international assistance and cooperation will be needed to develop, manage, and conserve fishery resources in order to increase food security and the standard of living of SIDS. Aims of this assistance include, inter alia, diversification of socio-economic opportunities, conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, enterprise development, capacity building, and aquaculture. A number of delegates recommended that an integrated approach addressing all aspects of the development of both capture fisheries and aquaculture in SIDS including public and other sectors should be pursued.

43. The Committee stressed the importance of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the Kyoto Plan of Action, the International Coral Reef Initiative and Chapter 17 of Agenda 21 in the development of a relevant policy framework for sustainable development of the fisheries of SIDS.

44. Some delegates pointed to the value of the participation and cooperation of SIDS in international fora such as the Indian Ocean Tuna Commision (IOTC) and the Conference on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific. Some delegations pointed out the importance of closer collaboration among UN Specialized Agencies and the international donor community to provide assistance to regional indigenous organizations to assist with the implementation of the SIDS Plan of Action. Other delegations suggested that international NGOs could make a useful contribution by collaborating with local NGOs working in SIDS.

REPORT OF THE SIXTH SESSION OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON FISH TRADE, BREMEN, GERMANY, 3-6 JUNE 1998

45. This item was introduced by the Chairman of the Sub-Committee and discussed on the basis of document COFI/99/6 and COFI/99/6 Sup.1. The Committee also had at its disposal documents COFI/99/Inf. 13 and COFI/99/Inf. 16 Part I and Part II.

46. The Committee expressed its satisfaction at the work of the Sub-Committee on Fish Trade and the important role played by FAO in the field of fish marketing information, especially through the FISH INFOnetwork, i.e., the network comprising the regional fish market information services: INFOFISH (Asia and Pacific Islands), INFOPECHE (Africa), INFOPESCA (Latin America and Caribbean), INFOSAMAK (Arab countries), INFOYU (China), EASTFISH (Central and Eastern Europe) and the global FAO network, GLOBEFISH.

47. Many developing countries underlined their concern that changes in the health measures in importing countries could become non-tariff barriers to trade. Other delegations, however, were of the opinion that these measures should be considered as provisions of product safety intended to protect consumers' health. The Committee agreed that further assistance was needed, especially from those countries implementing stringent health related import regulations, in order to build capacity of developing countries in quality control and hazard analysis.

48. The Committee endorsed the report of the consultation of the FAO Ad hoc Expert Group on Listing Criteria for Marine Species under CITES and agreed with its results. As regards the timing of its proposed work, it was indicated that it was necessary to inform in a preliminary fashion the Eleventh Session of the Conference of Parties to CITES of this work. Some delegations expressed the view that in reviewing the CITES listing criteria, FAO should take due account of the relevant provisions of UNCLOS relating to living marine resources.

49. Some delegations stated that FAO should carry out further work on collecting information on subsidies. Other delegations suggested that FAO should undertake further work on this issue beyond the compilation of information. The Committee was informed that the OECD Committee on Fisheries is also undertaking work on financial transfers to fisheries.

50. The Committee received the report of the Technical Consultation on the Feasibility of Developing Non-discriminatory Technical Guidelines for Eco-labelling of Products from Marine Capture Fisheries which was held in Rome from 21 to 23 October 1998, and expressed thanks to the Nordic Council of Ministers for providing the funding which made the Consultation possible.

51. Various delegations stressed that the Consultation did not reach an agreement regarding the practicability and feasibility of FAO drafting technical guidelines for the eco-labelling of produce from marine capture fisheries. Having noted this, most delegations identified FAO as an appropriate international organization to discuss technical criteria for eco-labelling schemes.

52. It was agreed that the issue of eco-labelling could have significant implications for the fishery sectors of member nations.

53. Most delegations endorsed the consensus expressed in paragraph 11 of the report of the Technical Consultation that if an agreement was eventually reached as to the feasibility of elaborating guidelines for eco-labelling, it should be consistent with the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, and cited the requirements of Articles 11.1, 11.2 and 11.3 of the Code of Conduct, which discuss responsible post-harvest utilization, trade and regulations concerning fishery products. The Committee noted that any eco-labelling scheme must be transparent and not be an obstacle to trade, that it must be voluntary, non-discriminatory, ensure equivalence of standards between countries and/or schemes, recognize the sovereign rights of States, and comply with all relevant international agreements.

54. Most delegations recommended that FAO should initiate further work on elaborating technical aspects of eco-labelling during the current and future biennia, subject to availability of resources. This work should include a review of what the WTO and other relevant international organizations are already doing.

55. Other delegations, however, felt that FAO should not get involved in the issue and should leave it to the other specialist bodies.

56. Some delegations also called upon FAO to convene a second open technical consultation on eco-labelling, in accordance with the rules of FAO governing such consultations and called upon the Secretariat to prepare relevant Terms of Reference in consultation with Member States.

57. The Committee approved the report of the Sixth Session of its Sub-Committee on Fish Trade and accepted the invitation to hold the Seventh Session of the Sub-Committee in conjunction with the Seafood Fair to be held in Bremen, Germany, in the year 2000.

FAO STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK (2000-2015)

58. The Committee considered Version 2.0 of the Strategic Framework to be a substantial improvement over Version 1.0, both in presentation and content. It considered nonetheless that Version 3.0 should be more concise and less descriptive, in order to focus more incisively on strategic issues and better serve its purpose as the framework for FAO's action over a 15-year time horizon. Some Members considered that an Executive Summary would be a valuable addition.

59. With regard to Part I of the document, the Committee welcomed the statements of values, mission and vision for the Organization. It was suggested that the mission statement could be more crisply formulated, perhaps including a summary statement of the major objectives. With regard to values, several delegations proposed that a clear reference to respect for human rights, and in particular the right to adequate food as a human right, should be included.

60. In considering Part II, Corporate Strategies, the Committee fully supported the emphasis given, throughout, to inter-disciplinarity and partnerships. The additional information provided in Version 2.0 on each of the proposed strategies was appreciated, in particular as it permitted a clearer identification of the contribution of fisheries programmes to the broader effort

61. The Committee's consideration of the strategies to address Members' needs focused, inter alia, on the importance of the contribution of fisheries and environmentally sound and sustainable aquaculture to the achievement of food security. Many Members referred to specific areas identified in the WFS Plan of Action which required action by the international community and in particular by FAO, in view of its clear mandate for the conservation and management of capture fisheries and aquaculture and its broad range of expertise in these areas.

62. During the discussion, Members provided specific suggestions for changes, improvements and ways of sharpening the focus of the fisheries components of individual strategies. Fisheries was seen as one of the areas of overall comparative advantage for FAO, and stress was placed on FAO's role in capacity building to enable countries and regional fishery management bodies to participate fully in the implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and other fisheries instruments.

63. The Committee noted that the cross-organizational strategies formed a set of management principles which FAO would apply to the implementation of the programme strategies, and welcomed the addition of the sixth cross-organizational strategy on Communicating FAO's Messages. Support was also expressed for the strategy devoted to Leveraging Resources for FAO and its Members, to ensure effective implementation of the Strategic Framework once adopted.

64. With regard to partnerships and alliances, the Committee welcomed the information provided both in the body of the document and in Annex III, and indicated that Version 3.0 should provide further explanation of how these partnerships were being or would be operationalized. It was suggested that the areas in which FAO would expect to play a lead role should be reviewed as part of this process, and that partnerships with specific UN organizations should be indicated. In this connection, some Members stressed the importance of FAO to engage in the current UN reform process for work being carried out at the national level, inter alia through the UN Development Assistance Frameworks (UNDAFs), and of maximum synergy between the Rome-based agencies. Other countries commended the structural reforms instituted by FAO since 1994.

65. The synergistic effect of cooperation with other actors was also considered to be an important criterion for priority-setting. The Committee appreciated the additional explanations provided in Annex II concerning such criteria, including that of comparative advantage. Some Members expressed the view that these criteria should be part of the Strategic Framework and be further developed in order for the document to serve as a basis for establishing the Medium-Term Plan and the Programme of Work and Budget.

66. The Committee stressed that addressing the effective requirements of the membership, building on the Organization's greatest strengths and taking into account an appropriate balance between normative and field activities, should continue to be the paramount consideration. In concluding, it recalled that a fundamental point of reference for considering the Strategic Framework was a World Food Summit Plan of Action, and the challenge facing countries and the international community to achieve its goals.

MEDIUM-TERM PERSPECTIVES FOR MAJOR PROGRAMME 2.3 (FISHERIES)

67. The Secretariat introduced the Medium-term Perspectives for Major Programme 2.3 (Fisheries) on the basis of documents COFI/99/8, COFI/99/5 Part IV, Inf.6, Inf.10, Inf.11, Inf.12 and Inf.15.

68. During the discussion of these documents, members provided specific suggestions for changes and improvements. The Secretariat explained that all points raised in Plenary would be properly taken into consideration when revising them.

69. The Committee endorsed the Medium-term Perspectives, but pointed out that it was difficult to formally approve them in the absence of adequate information on the budget. In response to regrets by several delegations, the Secretariat explained that the unavailability of the Programme of Work and Budget for 2000-2001 was caused by time constraints created by the preparation of the Strategic Framework. It was, however, clear that given the range and complexity of the programme described, the current level of regular budget allocation would not be sufficient. The Committee requested that, in view of the importance of fisheries and aquaculture and the ever-growing demand on its work, the Fisheries Department be allocated an increased share of the overall FAO budget.

70. The Committee agreed that there was a need to prioritize and that demands for important new work to be undertaken implied that the priority of some elements in the existing programme may have to be lowered.

71. The Committee noted the progress in the application of the Kyoto Declaration and Plan of Action and expressed the need to assess better the cultural and socio-economic aspects of fisheries in relation to food security. The Committee agreed that greater consideration should be given to the development of more appropriate ecosystem approaches to fisheries development and management, optimally in collaboration with both FAO and non-FAO regional fishery bodies, and to continue its work on the development of sustainability indicators for fisheries.

72. The Committee placed a high level of importance on the implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. The Committee was concerned about information presented indicating increases in illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, including fishing vessels flying "flags of convenience". The Committee urged, as a priority, those countries which had not yet ratified the Compliance Agreement to consider doing so as soon as possible. It was generally agreed that pending the entering into force of the Agreement, additional steps might need to be considered and that FAO should undertake work in this regard. Several delegations urged that FAO convene a meeting of experts to identify suitable measures, followed by a technical consultation that would report to the Twenty-fourth Session of the Committee. Before convening such a meeting, FAO should review the activities that had been undertaken by regional fishery management organizations to deal with these problems. It was emphasized that due account should be taken of the rights and obligations of States under international law.

73. The Committee took note that the issues related to reflagging of fishing vessels and ship registration would be one of the subjects to be discussed by the IMO Sub-Committee on Flag State Implementation. It was suggested that FAO inform IMO of the importance the Committee ascribed to the issue in time for the meeting in March 1999.

74. The Committee agreed that improvements were needed in FAO's global monitoring of fish stocks.

75. The Committee expressed its satisfaction at the information provided that the fishing capacity of some long-line and other techniques of some major fishing nations was being reduced and encouraged other States to make similar reductions in capacity as appropriate.

76. A number of priorities in relation to the Code of Conduct were agreed, including the need to carry out research and develop sustainable technologies and practices, to develop indicators of sustainability and to promote the further reduction of wastage in fisheries. FAO was also requested to sustain its assistance to enable developing countries to meet the safety requirement for fish products of importing countries.

77. Implementation of the three International Plans of Action, just adopted for the Management of Fishing Capacity, the Conservation and Management of Sharks and for Reducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries should also be pursued as high priority.

78. The Committee agreed that FAO's work on the review of CITES listing criteria for commercially harvested fish species should be continued.

79. The Committee agreed that sustainable aquaculture could have high potential in securing food availability and poverty alleviation in developing countries. There was broad support in the Committee to the proposal to establish a COFI sub-committee on aquaculture. Noting that extra-budgetary funds for such a body had not yet been identified, suggestion was made that consideration be given to funding such a sub-committee from Regular Programme resources.

80. The Committee agreed that the above priorities should be reflected in the Programme of Work and Budget 2000-2001.

PROGRESS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF FAO CONFERENCE RESOLUTION 13/97 (REVIEW OF FAO STATUTORY BODIES)

81. The Committee expressed its satisfaction with the outcome of the implementation of the FAO Conference Resolution 13/97 as documented in COFI/99/4. It noted that eight of the nine FAO regional fishery bodies (RFBs) had already considered actions to strengthen their functions and responsibilities. It urged FAO to continue the systematic analysis of these bodies, especially concerning their institutional and financial arrangements, the strategies used to implement decisions and the recommendations and measures taken to address current international fishery issues.

82. The Committee commended FAO for convening a meeting of FAO and Non-FAO Regional Fishery Bodies or Arrangements on 11 and 12 February 1999 and recommended that such meetings be held on a regular basis, preferably prior to regular sessions of COFI.

83. Furthermore, the Committee endorsed the recommendation of the Twenty-ninth Session of the FAO Conference to abolish two Sub-Committees of COFI: the Sub-Committee on Programmes to Assist Developing Coastal States in Managing and Developing Fisheries in their Economic Zones and the Sub-Committee on Fishery Education and Training. The Committee also noted the abolition of the Regional Fisheries Advisory Commission for the Southwest Atlantic (CARPAS).

84. The Committee was also informed that at a meeting of the Indian Ocean Fishery Commission (IOFC) held on 17 February 1999, the members of the Commission recommended that the IOFC be abolished.

85. One delegation informed the Committee of the decision of some interested countries to establish a regional fishery organization for the management of fish stocks in the South-east Atlantic, corresponding to FAO Statistical Division Area 47.

DATE AND PLACE OF THE TWENTY-FOURTH SESSION OF COFI

86. It was agreed that the Committee should meet in Rome in 2001. The exact date would be determined by the Director-General in consultation with the Chairman.

ANY OTHER MATTERS

87. The Committee discussed the procedure for the preparations for the Ministerial Meeting on the Implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries to be held on 10 and 11 March 1999 in Rome.

88. The Committee noted the decision of the Secretariat to set up an open-ended Contact Group consisting of representatives of each regional group, under the Chairmanship of Mr Ronald Rose, Permanent Representative of Canada to FAO, to undertake preparations for the Ministerial Meeting. Some delegations strongly expressed the view that the Contact Group should not serve as a drafting committee for the Ministerial Meeting.

ADOPTION OF THE REPORT

89. The Report was adopted on 19 February 1999.

APPENDIX A

AGENDA

1. Opening of the Session

2. Adoption of the Agenda and Timetable

3. Election of the Chairperson and Vice-Chairpersons, and designation of a Drafting Committee

4. Integrated resource management for sustainable inland fish production

5. Progress in the implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries

6. Review of FAO's programmes in the fisheries sector

7. Major fisheries and aquaculture issues in small island developing States (SIDS)

8. Report of the Sixth Session of the Sub-Committee on Fish Trade, Bremen,
Germany, 3-6 June 1998

9. FAO Strategic Framework (2000-2015)

10. Medium-Term Perspectives for Major Programme 2.3 (Fisheries)

11. Progress in the implementation of FAO Conference Resolution 13/97 (Review of FAO statutory bodies)

12. Date and place of the Twenty-fourth Session of COFI

13. Any other matters

14. Adoption of the Report

APPENDIX B

LIST OF DELEGATES AND OBSERVERS

The detailed list of delegates and observers (names and addresses) is available from:

The Secretary
Committee on Fisheries
Fisheries Department
F.412; Tel: 52847

The following attended:

MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

OBSERVERS FROM FAO MEMBER NATIONS

Bolivia
Bulgaria
Croatia
Democratic People's Republic of Korea
Namibia
Slovenia
Vanuatu
Viet Nam
Yemen

OBSERVERS FROM UNITED NATIONS MEMBER STATES NOT MEMBERS OF FAO

Russian Federation

PERMANENT OBSERVERS TO FAO

Holy See

REPRESENTATIVES OF UNITED NATIONS AND SPECIALIZED AGENCIES

United Nations

World Bank

OBSERVERS FROM INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

Centre for Marketing Information and Advisory Services for Fishery Products in Latin America and the Caribbean

Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources

Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna

Commonwealth Secretariat

Council of Europe

Indian Ocean Tuna Commission

International Baltic Sea Fishery Commission

International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas

International Council for the Exploration of the Sea

International Whaling Commission

Lake Victoria Fisheries Organization

Latin American Organization for Fisheries Development

Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia and Pacific Region

North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

Permanent South Pacific Commission

Secretariat for the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora

Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Centre

OBSERVERS FROM NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

Association for the Conservation, Management and Development of Fisheries in West Africa

Birdlife International

European Bureau for Conservation and Development

Fishmeal Exporters Organization

Global Aquaculture Alliance

Greenpeace International

International Coalition of Fisheries Associations

International Collective in Support of Fishworkers

International Confederation of Free Trade Unions

International Cooperative Alliance

International Council of Women

International Development Research Centre

International Fishmeal and Oil Manufacturers Association

International Wildlife Management Consortium

World Conservation Union

World Forum of Fish-Harvesters and Fishworkers�

APPENDIX C

LIST OF DOCUMENTS

APPENDIX D

OPENING STATEMENT BY MR. DAVID A. HARCHARIK

DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL

Mr. Chairman, Distinguished Delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen, good morning.

On behalf of the Director-General, it is my pleasure to welcome you to this Twenty-third Session of the Committee on Fisheries. And let me say at the outset that we are very pleased to see such a large turnout for this meeting.

Mr. Chairman, I need not remind this audience that the World's fisheries are confronted with a number of serious and far-reaching challenges. Many of these challenges threaten not only the resource base of the sector but also the livelihoods of millions of people who depend on fisheries and aquaculture. Your Committee, thus, has a task of great importance and of considerable complexity, that of providing guidance to FAO on how we can best meet these challenges to world fisheries and aquaculture. You will, though, no doubt also identify opportunities for action by governments, other international bodies and non-governmental organizations. I am, then, pleased to note that each of these groups is represented here today, as each has a special contribution to make.

In particular, we look forward to hearing the experienced views of senior representatives of national fisheries administrations. As you are engaged daily in leading your countries towards sustainable fisheries management and responsible utilization of resources, you know, perhaps better than anyone else, the fisheries needs and aspirations of your countries, and you are, thus, especially well placed to suggest how FAO can help you achieve your objectives. Welcome.

I am also very pleased to see here a number of colleagues from other international organizations, donors and non-governmental organizations, as well as specialized bodies concerned with aquatic resource affairs. Each of you has valuable and often unique views and specialized knowledge on various aspects of fisheries and aquaculture. Your advice and your opinions are very much welcome and appreciated here.

This meeting is an important event, not only because of its substantial agenda, but also because it will be followed by a Ministerial Meeting just a few weeks from now in March. That meeting will be the first opportunity that Ministers responsible for fisheries have had to meet since the adoption of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries in 1995.

The agenda you have before you for this session of the Committee is full and wide-ranging. The framework of your discussions falls into two main parts, reflecting the Committee's twofold mandate. First, you are invited to examine a number of important issues in world fisheries and aquaculture and to offer advice on certain problems, whose resolution may call for action not only by FAO, but also by governments, other international organizations, donors and non-governmental organizations. Secondly, you will have the opportunity to review the FAO Strategic Framework 2000 -2015, and the medium-term perspectives and programme priorities for fisheries for the period 2000-2005.

As in the previous biennia, the Fisheries Department has undertaken a world wide analysis of the state of fisheries and aquaculture (SOFIA) which has been circulated to you as Document Inf.4 called SOFIA 1998. It examines developments in the sector from the perspective of sustainability in fisheries and aquaculture. Among other issues, the report aims to shed light on the need for good governance in fisheries and aquaculture, while also highlighting two closely related issues: the establishment of an enabling environment for aquaculture activity, and the integration of fisheries into coastal zone management. It is my understanding that you will start your work with a presentation on SOFIA.

At your last session, you directed the Secretariat to provide each session with a report on the progress achieved in implementing the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. We will update you on the Code but also will encourage you to exchange further experiences concerning progress achieved at global, regional and national levels. One important fact which emerges from the survey undertaken by FAO on the implementation of the Code is that, despite support from some donors, there is an insufficient flow of financial resources to developing countries for the implementation of the Code. In this regard, I would like to thank those donors and other development agencies who have generously supported activities related to the Code, while also expressing the hope that this will continue and also grow.

The Fisheries Department has elaborated a comprehensive strategy to promote further implementation of the Code in a coherent, integrated and practical manner during the period 1998 to 2002. We look forward to your comments on this Draft Strategy, which has been circulated as document Inf.6.

I would also like to draw attention to the important role of global and regional collaboration in fisheries. In this respect, I am pleased to report that this Session of your Committee was preceded by a two-day meeting of FAO and non-FAO regional fishery bodies, from which a number of important recommendations emerged for your consideration. Furthermore, as was recommended by your Committee at its last Session and endorsed by the 1997 FAO Conference, eight of nine FAO regional fishery bodies have considered measures to strengthen their functions and responsibilities. We look forward to your debate on the outcome of these reviews. In particular we seek your suggestions on how to improve these important channels of regional cooperation and on how these regional bodies can be better linked to FAO.

Under other agenda items, your Committee is invited to finalize and approve Plans of Action or Guidelines on the management of fishing capacity, shark fisheries and incidental catch of sea birds in longline fisheries. We will also share with you the report of the Sixth Session of the FAO Sub-Committee on Fish Trade held in Bremen, Germany, last June.

As all of you are aware, small island communities are inevitably dependent on the sea and its living resources for their existence. Your Committee has been provided with a summary document on the major fisheries and aquaculture issues in small islands developing states (SIDS). Your observations on this will contribute to the Plan of Action to be developed at the Ministerial Conference on Agriculture and Small Islands Developing States, to be held on 12 March.

It is within the context of these major issues concerning world fisheries that the medium-term perspectives for "Fisheries" has been elaborated. You will see that we propose to reinforce our role in the collection, analysis and dissemination of fisheries information and data. Furthermore, we propose to emphasize the development of appropriate fishery management alternatives, and FAO's role as a centre for policy advice and analysis on fisheries and aquaculture management and investment. Special attention is also placed on the inter-relationships between capture fisheries, aquaculture and agriculture; on the monitoring and prevention of environmental degradation; and on the promotion of sustainable and environmentally sound fisheries and aquaculture practices. Other areas of proposed emphasis include the promotion of technical standards and international norms for improved utilization, trade, quality and safety of fishery and aquaculture products.

In November 1997 the FAO Conference decided that FAO should introduce an improved programming approach for Regular Programme activities. The change in approach includes the elaboration, through interactive and participatory processes, of a "Strategic Framework" with a 10 to 15 year time-horizon. The Strategic Framework will be complemented by a Medium-Term Plan, which will constitute the main programming document over a time horizon of six years. The Fisheries Department is, of course, contributing actively to the formulation of the Strategic Framework.

You should also note that, in view of the Council's decision to schedule the meetings of the Technical Committees earlier in the year, there has not been time enough to develop detailed proposals for the Programme of Work and Budget for the next biennium to present to the Committee. The new programme entities under a revised programming methodology are still being finalized. Your advice and comments on FAO's Strategic Framework, and in particular on its fisheries related aspects, as well as the Medium-Term Perspectives for fisheries will, of course, be taken into account as we prepare the full Programme of Work and Budget.

Mr. Chairman, Distinguished Delegates, I am confident that you will address the many important aspects of fisheries and aquaculture in your traditional spirit of cooperation and consensus. I am also sure that your experienced guidance will be offered with a sense of pragmatism and vision not only to the Secretariat but to all those in our Member Nations and sister organizations who are charged with responsibilities for the future advance of this very important sector of human endeavour.

Mr. Chairman, in closing, I should like to assure you and the entire Committee that your deliberations are of great importance to the Secretariat. We value your opinions and we will use your advice to guide our future work in fisheries and aquaculture. May I wish you and the Members of your Committee a successful and highly productive meeting and a most enjoyable stay in this beautiful city of Rome.

APPENDIX E

INTERNATIONAL PLAN OF ACTION FOR REDUCING INCIDENTAL

CATCH OF SEABIRDS IN LONGLINE FISHERIES

Introduction

1. Seabirds are being incidentally caught in various commercial longline fisheries in the world, and concerns are arising about the impacts of this incidental catch. Incidental catch of seabirds may also have an adverse impact on fishing productivity and profitability. Governments, non-governmental organizations, and commercial fishery associations are petitioning for measures to reduce the mortality of seabirds in longline fisheries in which seabirds are incidentally taken.

2. Key longline fisheries in which incidental catch of seabirds are known to occur are: tuna, swordfish and billfish in some particular parts of oceans; Patagonian toothfish in the Southern Ocean, and halibut, black cod, Pacific cod, Greenland halibut, cod, haddock, tusk and ling in the northern oceans (Pacific and Atlantic). The species of seabirds most frequently taken are albatrosses and petrels in the Southern Ocean, northern fulmars in the North Atlantic and albatrosses, gulls and fulmars in the North Pacific fisheries.

3. Responding to the need to reduce the incidental catch of seabirds in commercial fisheries in the Southern Ocean, the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) adopted mitigation measures in 1992 for its 23 member countries to reduce incidental catch of seabirds.

4. Under the auspices of the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT), Australia, Japan and New Zealand have studied and taken seabird mitigation measures in their southern bluefin tuna longline fishery since 1994, and in 1995 CCSBT adopted a recommendation relating to ecologically related species, including the incidental mortality of seabirds by longline fishing. The recommendation stipulates a policy on data and information collection, mitigation measures, as well as education and information dissemination. All member nations of CCSBT have made the use of bird scaring lines (tori poles) mandatory in their fisheries.

5. The United States of America also adopted, by regulation, measures for reducing incidental catch of seabirds for its groundfish longline fisheries in Seabirds are being incidentally caught in various commercial longline the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands and Gulf of Alaska in 1997, and for its halibut fishery in 1998. The United States is currently developing measures to mitigate the incidental catch of seabirds in the Hawaiian pelagic longline fisheries. Several other countries with longline fisheries have likewise adopted similar mitigation measures.

Origin

6. Noting an increased awareness about the incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries and its potential negative impacts on seabird populations, a proposal was made at the Twenty-second Session of the Committee on Fisheries (COFI) in March 1997 that FAO organize an expert consultation, using extra-budgetary funds, to develop Guidelines leading to a Plan of Action to be submitted at the next Session of COFI aiming at a reduction in such incidental catch.

7. The International Plan of Action for reducing incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries (IPOA-SEABIRDS) has been developed through the meeting of a Technical Working Group in Tokyo 25-27 March 1998¹and the Consultation on the Management of Fishing Capacity, Shark Fisheries and Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries held 26-30 October 1998 and its preparatory meeting held in Rome 22-24 July 1998².

Nature and Scope

8. IPOA-Seabirds is voluntary. It has been elaborated within the framework of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries as envisaged by Article 2 (d). The provisions of Article 3 of the Code of Conduct apply to the interpretation and application of this document and its relationship with other international instruments. All concerned States³ are encouraged to implement it.

9. The IPOA-SEABIRDS applies to States in the waters of which longline fisheries are being conducted by their own or foreign vessels and to States that conduct longline fisheries on the high seas and in the exclusive economic zones (EEZ) of other States.

Objective

10. Taking into account in particular the objectives of articles 7.6.9 and 8.5 of the Code of Conduct, the objective of the IPOA-SEABIRDS is to reduce the incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries where this occurs.

Implementation

11. In implementing the IPOA-SEABIRDS States should carry out a set of activities. This should be done as appropriate in conjunction with relevant international organizations. The exact configuration of this set of activities will be based on an assessment of the incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries.

12. States with longline fisheries should conduct an assessment of these fisheries to determine if a problem exists with respect to incidental catch of seabirds. If a problem exists, States should adopt a National Plan of Action for reducing the incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries (NPOA-SEABIRDS). (See the attached "Technical note on developing a National Plan of Action for reducing the incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries".) When developing the NPOA-SEABIRDS experience acquired in regional management organizations should be taken into account as appropriate. FAO should provide a list of experts and a mechanism of technical assistance to countries for use in connection with development of NPOA-SEABIRDS.

13. States which determine that an NPOA-SEABIRDS is not necessary should review that decision on a regular basis, particularly taking into account changes in their fisheries, such as the expansion of existing fisheries and/or the development of new longline fisheries. If, based on a subsequent assessment, States determine that a problem exists, they should follow the procedures outlined in paragraph 12, and implement an NPOA-SEABIRDS within two years.

14. The assessment should be included as a part of each relevant State's NPOA-SEABIRDS.

15. Each State is responsible for the design, implementation and monitoring of its NPOA-SEABIRDS.

16. States recognize that each longline fishery is unique and the identification of appropriate mitigation measures can only be achieved through on-the-spot assessment of the concerned fisheries. Technical and operational mitigation measures are presently in use or under development in some longline fisheries where incidental catch of seabirds occurs. Measures developed by different States are listed in a Technical Note attached to this document. This list does not prejudice the right of States to decide to use any of these or other suitable measures that may be developed. A more comprehensive description and discussion of the mitigation measures currently used or under development can be found in FAO Fisheries Circular No. 937.

17. States should start the implementation of the NPOA-SEABIRDS no later than the COFI Session in 2001.

18. In implementing their NPOA-SEABIRDS States should regularly, at least every four years, assess their implementation for the purpose of identifying cost-effective strategies for increasing the effectiveness of the NPOA-SEABIRDS.

19. States, within the framework of their respective competencies and consistent with international law, should strive to cooperate through regional and subregional fisheries organizations or arrangements, and other forms of cooperation, to reduce the incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries.

20. In implementing the IPOA-SEABIRDS States recognize that cooperation among States which have important longline fisheries is essential to reduce the incidental catch of seabirds given the global nature of the issue. States should strive to collaborate through FAO and through bilateral and multilateral arrangements in research, training and the production of information and promotional material.

21. States should report on the progress of the assessment, development and implementation of their NPOA-SEABIRDS as part of their biennial reporting to FAO on the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries.

Role of FAO

22. FAO will, as and to the extent directed by its Conference, and as part of its Regular Programme activities support States in the implementation of the IPOA-SEABIRDS.

23. FAO will, as and to the extent directed by its Conference, support development and implementation of NPOA-SEABIRDS through specific, in-country technical assistance projects with Regular Programme funds and by use of extra-budgetary funds made available to the Organization for this purpose.

24. FAO will, through COFI, report biennially on the state of progress in the implementation of the IPOA-SEABIRDS.

TECHNICAL NOTE ON DEVELOPING A NATIONAL PLAN OF ACTION FOR REDUCING THE INCIDENTAL CATCH OF SEABIRDS IN LONGLINE FISHERIES (NPOA-SEABIRDS)

This is not an exclusive or necessarily all-encompassing list but provides guidance for preparation of the NPOA-SEABIRDS.

The NPOA-SEABIRDS is a plan that a State designs, implements and monitors to reduce the incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries.

I. Assessment

1. The purpose of the assessment is to determine the extent and nature of a State's incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries where it occurs.

2. The assessment may include, but is not limited to, the collection and analysis of the

� Criteria used to evaluate the need for an NPOA-SEABIRDS.
� Fishing fleet data (numbers of vessels by size).
� Fishing techniques data (demersal, pelagic, methods).
� Fishing areas.
� Fishing effort by longline fishery (seasons, species, catch, number of hooks/year/fishery).
� Status of seabird populations in the fishing areas, if known.
� Total annual catch of seabirds (numbers per 1000 hooks set/species/longline fishery).
� Existing mitigation measures in use and their effectiveness in reducing incidental catch of seabirds.
� Incidental catch of seabirds monitoring (observer program, etc.).
� Statement of conclusions and decision to develop and implement an NPOA- SEABIRDS.

II. NPOA-SEABIRDS

The NPOA-SEABIRDS may contain the following elements:

1. Prescription of mitigation measures

The NPOA-SEABIRDS should prescribe appropriate mitigation methods. These should have a proven efficiency, and be cost-effective for the fishing industry. If effectiveness of mitigation measures can be improved by combining different mitigation measures or devices, it is likely that each State will find it advantageous to implement a number of different measures that reflect the need and particular circumstances of their specific longline fishery.

2. Research and development

The NPOA-SEABIRDS should contain plans for research and development, including those aiming: (i) to develop the most practical and effective seabird deterrent device; (ii) to improve other technologies and practices which reduce the incidental capture of seabirds; and (iii) undertake specific research to evaluate the effectiveness of mitigation measures used in the longline fisheries, where this problem occurs.

3. Education, training and publicity

The NPOA-SEABIRDS should prescribe means to raise awareness among fishers, fishing associations and other relevant groups about the need to reduce the incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries where this occurs; National and International Plans of Action and other information on the incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries; and to promote the implementation of the NPOA-SEABIRDS among national industry, research and its own administration.

Provide information about technical or financial assistance for reducing the incidental catch of seabirds.

Preferably design and implementation of outreach programmes for fishers, fisheries managers, gear technologists, maritime architects, shipbuilders, and conservationists and other interested members of the public should be described in the plan. These programmes should aim at improving the understanding of the problem resulting from incidental catch of seabirds and the use of mitigation measures. The outreach programme may include educational curricula, and guidelines disseminated through videos, handbooks, brochures and posters. The programme should focus on both the conservation aspects of this issue and on the economic benefits of expected increased fishing efficiency inter alia by eliminating bait loss to seabirds.

4. Data Collection

Data collection programmes should collect reliable data to determine the incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries and the effectiveness of mitigation measures. Such programmes may make use of onboard observers.

TECHNICAL NOTE ON SOME OPTIONAL TECHNICAL AND OPERATIONAL MEASURES FOR REDUCING THE INCIDENTAL CATCH OF SEABIRDS

I. INTRODUCTION

To reduce the incidental catch of seabirds, it is essential to reduce the number of encounters between seabirds and baited hooks. It should be noted that, if used in combination, the options could improve mitigation effectiveness.

For each of the measures, the effectiveness and the cost involved for fishers are briefly presented. In this presentation, "effectiveness" is defined as to what extent the measures reduces incidental catch of seabirds; "cost" is defined as the initial cost or investment and any ongoing operational costs.

Other technical options are currently under development and fishers and researchers in the field may develop new mitigation measures, so the list of measures is likely to increase over time.

If effectiveness of mitigation measures can be improved by combining different mitigation measures or devices, each State may find it advantageous to implement different measures that are more suitable for their conditions and reflect the needs of their specific longline fisheries.

The list below should not be considered mandatory or exhaustive and FAO shall maintain a data base of measures that are in use or under development.

II. TECHNICAL MEASURES

1. Increase the sink rate of baits

a) Weighting the longline gear

Concept: Increase the sinking speed of baited hooks and reduce their exposure time to seabirds.

Effectiveness: Studies have shown that appropriate line-weighting can be highly effective in avoiding bait loss to birds.

Cost The cost is the initial purchase of the weighting material (either heavier gear or weights) and any ongoing replacement of weights lost during fishing.

b) Thawing bait

Concept: Overcome buoyancy problems in bait by thawing and/or puncturing swim bladders

Effectiveness: Rate of incidental catch of seabirds is reduced when thawed baits are used. It has also been shown that bait fish with deflated swim bladders sink more quickly than those with inflated swim bladders did.

Cost: Possible costs include bait thawing rack, or extra weight to compensate flotation resulting from the air bladder.

c) Line-setting machine

Concept: Increase line sinking rate by removing line tension during gear deployment

Effectiveness: Although no quantitative assessments have been done, this practice would result in the line sinking more rapidly thereby reducing availability of baited hooks to seabirds.

Cost: For some fisheries, initial costs may include purchase of a line-setting device.

2. Below-the-water setting chute, capsule, or funnel

Concept: Prevent access by seabirds to baited hooks by setting line under water.

Effectiveness: Underwater setting devices are still under development but could have high effectiveness.

Cost: Initial cost would include purchase of the underwater setting device.

3. Bird-scaring line positioned over or in the area where baited hooks enter the water

Concept: Prevent seabirds access to baited hooks where they enter the water. The bird scaring line is designed to discourage birds from taking baited hooks by preventing their access to baited hooks. Design specifications may vary by vessel, fishing operation, and location and are critical to its effectiveness. Streamer lines and towing buoys are examples of these techniques.

Effectiveness: A number of studies and anecdotal observations have demonstrated significant effectiveness of these devices when properly designed and used.

Cost: Low initial cost for the purchase and installation of bird scaring line.

4. Bait casting machine

Concept: Places bait in area protected by a bird scaring line and outside the turbulence caused by the propeller and the ships wake.

Effectiveness: Deployment of bait under the protection zone of the bird-scaring line reduces the availability of baited hooks to seabirds. The extent to which bait loss is reduced by the use of bait casting machines, used either without a bird-scaring line or in such a manner that baits are not protected by a bird-scaring line, is yet to be determined.

Cost: High, initial costs may include purchase of a bait-casting device.

5. Bird scaring curtain

Concept: To deter seabirds from taking baited hooks during the haul by using a bird scaring curtain.

Effectiveness: Anecdotal evidence indicates that the bird-scaring curtain can effectively discourage birds from seizing baits in the hauling area.

Cost: Low, cost for materials.

6. Artificial baits or lures

Concept: Reduce palatability or availability of baits.

Effectiveness: New baits are still under development and effectiveness has yet to be resolved.

Cost: Currently unknown

7. Hook modification

Concept: Utilize hook types that reduce the probability of birds getting caught when they attack a baited hook.

Effectiveness: Hook size might effect the species composition of incidental caught seabirds. The effect of modification of hooks is, however, poorly understood.

Cost: Unknown.

8. Acoustic deterrent

Concept: Deterring birds from the longline using acoustic signals, such as high frequency, high volume, distress call, etc

Effectiveness: Low probability of being effective as background noises are loud and habituation to noises is common among seabirds.

Cost: Unknown

9. Water cannon

Concept: Concealing baited hooks by using high pressure water.

Effectiveness: There is no definite conclusion about the effectiveness of this method.

Cost: Unknown.

10. Magnetic deterrent

Concept: Perturbing the magnetic receptors of the birds by creating magnetic fields.

Effectiveness: No indication of effect in practical experiments.

Cost: Unknown.

III OPERATIONAL MEASURES

1. Reduce visibility of bait (Night setting)

Concept: Set during hours of darkness and reduce illumination of baited hooks in the water.

Effectiveness: This method is generally recognized as being highly effective. However, effectiveness can vary between fishing grounds and also seasonally according to the seabird species. Effectiveness of this measure may be reduced around the full moon.

Cost: A restriction of line setting to the hours of darkness may affect fishing capacity, especially for smaller longliners. Small costs may be incurred to make vessel lighting appropriate.

Such restriction can also entail investing in costly technology for maximizing fishing efficiency in a shorter period of time.

2. Reduce the attractiveness of the vessels to seabirds

Concept: Reducing the attractiveness of vessels to seabirds will reduce the potential for seabirds being incidentally caught. Materials (e.g. fish discards, garbage) discharged from vessels should be at a time or in a way that makes them least available to birds or least likely to cause them harm. This includes avoidance of the dumping of discarded fish, offal, fish heads, etc. with embedded hooks. If dumping offal is unavoidable, it should be done on the opposite side of the vessel to where lines are being set or in such a manner that birds are not attracted to the vessel (e.g. at night).

Effectiveness: The issue of offal discharge is a complex one, and there have been conflicting results regarding effects of various procedures in the studies done to date.

Cost: Low; in some situations costs may be associated with providing for offal containment or reconfiguration of offal discharge systems on the vessel.

3. Area and seasonal closures

Concept: Reduce incidental catch of seabirds when concentrations of breeding or foraging seabirds can be avoided.

Effectiveness: Area and seasonal closures could be effective (such as in high density foraging areas or during the period of chick care when parental duties limit the distances adults can fly from breeding sites) although displacement of fishing fleet to other seabird areas needs to be considered.

Cost: Unknown, but a restriction on fishing by area or season may effect fishing capacity.

4. Give preferential licensing to vessels that use mitigation measures that do not require compliance monitoring

Concept: Incentive provided for effective use of mitigation measures that do not require compliance monitoring.

Effectiveness: May be highly effective in stimulating the use of mitigation measures and development of fishing systems that reduce incidental catch of seabirds

Cost: Unknown.

5. Release live birds

Concept: If despite the precautions, seabirds are incidentally caught, every reasonable effort should be made to ensure that birds brought onboard alive are released alive and that when possible hooks should be removed without jeopardizing the life of the birds

Effectiveness: Depends on the number of birds brought onboard alive and this is considered small by comparison to the numbers killed in line setting.

Cost: Unknown

INTERNATIONAL PLAN OF ACTION FOR THE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF SHARKS

Introduction

1. For centuries artisanal fishermen have conducted fishing for sharks sustainably in coastal waters, and some still do. However, during recent decades modern technology in combination with access to distant markets have caused an increase in effort and yield of shark catches, as well as an expansion of the areas fished.

2. There is concern over the increase of shark catches and the consequences which this has for the populations of some shark species in several areas of the world's oceans. This is because sharks often have a close stock-recruitment relationship, long recovery times in response to over-fishing (low biological productivity because of late sexual maturity; few off-spring, albeit with low natural mortality) and complex spatial structures (size/sex segregation and seasonal migration).

3. The current state of knowledge of sharks and the practices employed in shark fisheries cause problems in the conservation and management of sharks due to lack of available catch, effort, landings and trade data, as well as limited information on the biological parameters of many species and their identification. In order to improve knowledge on the state of shark stocks and facilitate the collection of the necessary information, adequate funds are required for research and management.

4. The prevailing view is that it is necessary to better manage directed shark catches and certain multispecies fisheries in which sharks constitute a significant bycatch. In some cases the need for management may be urgent.

5. A few countries have specific management plans for their shark catches and their plans include control of access, technical measures including strategies for reduction of shark bycatches and support for full use of sharks. However, given the wide-ranging distribution of sharks, including on the high seas, and the long migration of many species, it is increasingly important to have international cooperation and coordination of shark management plans. At the present time there are few international management mechanisms effectively addressing the capture of sharks.

6. The Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission, the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization, the Sub-regional Fisheries Commission of West African States, the Latin American Organization for Fishery Development, the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission, the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna and the Oceanic Fisheries Programme of the Pacific Community have initiated efforts encouraging member countries to collect information about sharks, and in some cases developed regional databases for the purpose of stock assessment.

7. Noting the increased concern about the expanding catches of sharks and their potential negative impacts on shark populations, a proposal was made at the Twenty-second Session of the FAO Committee on Fisheries (COFI) in March 1997 that FAO organize an expert consultation, using extra-budgetary funds, to develop Guidelines leading to a Plan of Action to be submitted at the next Session of the Committee aimed at improved conservation and management of sharks.

8. This International Plan of Action for Conservation and Management of Sharks (IPOA-SHARKS) has been developed through the meeting of the Technical Working Group on the Conservation and Management of Sharks in Tokyo from 23 to 27 April 1998⁴ and the Consultation on Management of Fishing Capacity, Shark Fisheries and Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries held in Rome from 26 to 30 October 1998 and its preparatory meeting held in Rome from 22 to 24 July 1998⁵.

9. The IPOA-SHARKS consists of the nature and scope, principles, objective and procedures for implementation (including attachments) specified in this document.

Nature and Scope

10. The IPOA-SHARKS is voluntary. It has been elaborated within the framework of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries as envisaged by Article 2 (d). The provisions of Article 3 of the Code of Conduct apply to the interpretation and application of this document and its relationship with other international instruments. All concerned States⁶ are encouraged to implement it.

11. For the purposes of this document, the term "shark" is taken to include all species of sharks, skates, rays and chimaeras (Class Chondrichtyes), and the term "shark catch" is taken to include directed, bycatch, commercial, recreational and other forms of taking sharks.

12. The IPOA-SHARKS encompasses both target and non-target catches.

Guiding principles

13. Participation. States that contribute to fishing mortality on a species or stock should participate in its management.

14. Sustaining stocks. Management and conservation strategies should aim to keep total fishing mortality for each stock within sustainable levels by applying the precautionary approach.

15. Nutritional and socio-economic considerations. Management and conservation objectives and strategies should recognize that in some low-income food-deficit regions and/or countries, shark catches are a traditional and important source of food, employment and/or income. Such catches should be managed on a sustainable basis to provide a continued source of food, employment and income to local communities.

Objective

16. The objective of the IPOA-SHARKS is to ensure the conservation and management of sharks and their long-term sustainable use.

Implementation

17. The IPOA-SHARKS applies to States in the waters of which sharks are caught by their own or foreign vessels and to States the vessels of which catch sharks on the high seas.

18. States should adopt a national plan of action for conservation and management of shark stocks (Shark-plan) if their vessels conduct directed fisheries for sharks or if their vessels regularly catch sharks in non-directed fisheries. Suggested contents of the Shark-plan are found in Appendix A. When developing a Shark-plan, experience of subregional and regional fisheries management organizations should be taken into account, as appropriate.

19. Each State is responsible for developing, implementing and monitoring its Shark-plan.

20. States should strive to have a Shark-plan by the COFI Session in 2001.

21. States should carry out a regular assessment of the status of shark stocks subject to fishing so as to determine if there is a need for development of a shark plan. This assessment should be guided by article 6.13 of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. The assessment should be reported as a part of each relevant State's Shark-plan. Suggested contents of a shark assessment report are found in Appendix B. The assessment would necessitate consistent collection of data, including inter alia commercial data and data leading to improved species identification and, ultimately, the establishment of abundance indices. Data collected by States should, where appropriate, be made available to, and discussed within the framework of, relevant subregional and regional fisheries organizations and FAO. International collaboration on data collection and data sharing systems for stock assessments is particularly important in relation to transboundary, straddling, highly migratory and high seas shark stocks.

22. The Shark-plan should aim to:

� Ensure that shark catches from directed and non-directed fisheries are sustainable;
� Assess threats to shark populations, determine and protect critical habitats and implement harvesting strategies consistent with the principles of biological sustainability and rational long-term economic use;
� Identify and provide special attention, in particular to vulnerable or threatened shark stocks;
� Improve and develop frameworks for establishing and co-ordinating effective consultation involving all stakeholders in research, management and educational initiatives within and between States;
� Minimize unutilized incidental catches of sharks;
� Contribute to the protection of biodiversity and ecosystem structure and function;
� Minimize waste and discards from shark catches in accordance with article 7.2.2.(g) of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (for example, requiring the retention of sharks from which fins are removed);
� Encourage full use of dead sharks;
� Facilitate improved species-specific catch and landings data and monitoring of shark catches;
� Facilitate the identification and reporting of species-specific biological and trade data.

23. States which implement the Shark-plan should regularly, at least every four years, assess its implementation for the purpose of identifying cost-effective strategies for increasing its effectiveness.

24. States which determine that a Shark-plan is not necessary should review that decision on a regular basis taking into account changes in their fisheries, but as a minimum, data on catches, landings and trade should be collected.

25. States, within the framework of their respective competencies and consistent with international law, should strive to cooperate through regional and subregional fisheries organizations or arrangements, and other forms of cooperation, with a view to ensuring the sustainability of shark stocks, including, where appropriate, the development of subregional or regional shark plans.

26. Where transboundary, straddling, highly migratory and high seas stocks of sharks are exploited by two or more States, the States concerned should strive to ensure effective conservation and management of the stocks.

27. States should strive to collaborate through FAO and through international arrangements in research, training and the production of information and educational material.

28. States should report on the progress of the assessment, development and implementation of their Shark-plans as part of their biennial reporting to FAO on the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries.

Role of FAO

29. FAO will, as and to the extent directed by its Conference, and as part of its Regular Programme activities, support States in the implementation of the IPOA-SHARKS, including the preparation of Shark-plans.

30. FAO will, as and to the extent directed by its Conference, support development and implementation of Shark-plans through specific, in-country technical assistance projects with Regular Programme funds and by use of extra-budgetary funds made available to the Organization for this purpose. FAO will provide a list of experts and a mechanism of technical assistance to countries in connection with development of Shark-plans.

31. FAO will, through COFI, report biennially on the state of progress in the implementation of the IPOA-SHARKS.

Appendix A

SUGGESTED CONTENTS OF A SHARK-PLAN

I. BACKGROUND

When managing fisheries for sharks, it is important to consider that the state of knowledge of sharks and the practices employed in shark catches may cause problems in the conservation and management of sharks, in particular:

� Taxonomic problems
� Inadequate available data on catches, effort and landings for sharks
� Difficulties in identifying species after landing
� Insufficient biological and environmental data
� Lack of funds for research and management of sharks
� Little coordination on the collection of information on transboundary, straddling, highly migratory and high seas stocks of sharks
� Difficulty in achieving shark management goals in multispecies fisheries in which sharks are caught.

II. CONTENT OF THE SHARK-PLAN

The Technical Guidelines on the Conservation and Management of Sharks, under development by FAO, provide detailed technical guidance, both on the development and the implementation of the Shark-plan. Guidance will be provided on:

� Monitoring
� Data collection and analysis
� Research
� Building of human capacity
� Implementation of management measures

The Shark-plan should contain:

A. Description of the prevailing state of :

� Shark stocks, populations;
� Associated fisheries; and,
� Management framework and its enforcement.

B. The objective of the Shark-plan.

C. Strategies for achieving objectives. The following are illustrative examples of what could be included:

� Ascertain control over access of fishing vessels to shark stocks
� Decrease fishing effort in any shark where catch is unsustainable
� Improve the utilization of sharks caught
� Improve data collection and monitoring of shark fisheries
� Train all concerned in identification of shark species
� Facilitate and encourage research on little known shark species
� Obtain utilization and trade data on shark species

Appendix B

SUGGESTED CONTENTS OF A SHARK ASSESSMENT REPORT

A shark assessment report should inter alia contain the following information:

� Past and present trends for:

� Effort: directed and non-directed fisheries; all types of fisheries;

� Yield: physical and economic

� Status of stocks

� Existing management measures:

� Control of access to fishing grounds

� Technical measures (including by-catch reduction measures, the existence of sanctuaries and closed seasons)

� Others

� Monitoring, control and surveillance

� Effectiveness of management measures

� Possible modifications of management measures.

INTERNATIONAL PLAN OF ACTION FOR THE

MANAGEMENT OF FISHING CAPACITY

Introduction

1. In the context of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and its overall objective of sustainable fisheries, the issues of excess fishing capacity in world fisheries is an increasing concern. Excessive fishing capacity is a problem that, among others, contributes substantially to overfishing, the degradation of marine fisheries resources, the decline of food production potential, and significant economic waste.

2. The Code of Conduct provides that States should take measures to prevent or eliminate excess fishing capacity and should ensure that levels of fishing effort are commensurate with sustainable use of fishery resources.

3. At its last Session in 1997, the Committee on Fisheries (COFI), requested FAO to address the issue of fishing capacity. FAO organized a Technical Working Group on the Management of Fishing Capacity in La Jolla, USA, from 15 to 18 April 1998. A subsequent FAO consultation was held in Rome from 26 to 30 October 1998, preceded by a preparatory meeting from 22 to 24 July 1998.

PART I - Nature and Scope of the International Plan of Action

4. The International Plan of Action is voluntary. It has been elaborated within the framework of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries as envisaged by Article 2 (d). The provisions of Article 3 of the Code apply to the interpretation and application of this International Plan of Action and its relationship with other international instruments.

5. This document is in furtherance of the commitment of all States⁷ to implement the Code of Conduct. States and regional⁸ fisheries organizations should apply this document consistently with international law and within the framework of the respective competencies of the organizations concerned.
6. The International Plan of Action constitutes an element of fishery conservation and sustainable management.

PART II - Objective and Principles

7. The immediate objective of the International Plan of Action is for States and regional fisheries organizations, to achieve world-wide preferably by 2003, but not later than 2005, an efficient, equitable and transparent management of fishing capacity. Inter alia, States and regional fisheries organizations confronted with an overcapacity problem, where capacity is undermining achievement of long-term sustainability outcomes, should endeavour initially to limit at present level and progressively reduce the fishing capacity applied to affected fisheries. Where long-term sustainability outcomes are being achieved, States and regional fisheries organizations nevertheless need to exercise caution to avoid growth in capacity undermining long-term sustainability objectives.

8. The above objective may be achieved through a series of actions related to four major strategies:

i.  the conduct of national, regional and global assessments of capacity and improvement of the capability for monitoring fishing capacity;
ii.  the preparation and implementation of national plans to effectively manage fishing capacity and of immediate actions for coastal fisheries requiring urgent measures;
iii.  the strengthening of regional fisheries organizations and related mechanisms for improved management of fishing capacity at regional and global levels;
iv.  immediate actions for major transboundary, straddling, highly migratory and high seas fisheries requiring urgent measures.

These strategies may be implemented through complementary mechanisms to promote implementation of this international Plan of Action: awareness building and education, technical co-operation at the international level, and co-ordination.

9. The management of fishing capacity should be based on the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and take into consideration the following major principles and approaches:

i. Participation: The International Plan of Action should be implemented by States either directly, in co-operation with other States, or through FAO in co-operation with other appropriate intergovernmental organizations, including regional fisheries organizations. States and regional fisheries organizations, as appropriate, are encouraged to give effect to it and to inform FAO of actions taken to implement it. FAO will regularly provide information about its implementation.

ii. Phased implementation: The management of fishing capacity on the basis of national and regional plans should be achieved through the following three phases: assessment and diagnosis (preliminary analysis to be completed by the end of 2000), adoption of management measures (preliminary steps to be adopted by the end of 2002) and periodic adjustment of such assessment and diagnosed measures, as appropriate. States and regional fisheries organizations should complete these steps and progressively implement by 2005 the complementary measures specified in the International Plan of Action.

iii. Holistic approach: The management of fishing capacity should consider all factors affecting capacity in both national and international waters;

iv. Conservation. The management of fishing capacity should be designed to achieve the conservation and sustainable use of fish stocks and the protection of the marine environment consistent with the precautionary approach, the need to minimize by-catch, waste and discard and ensure selective and environmentally safe fishing practices, the protection of biodiversity in the marine environment, and the protection of habitat, in particular habitats of special concern.

v. Priority: Priority should be given to managing the fishing capacity in those fisheries in which there already unequivocally exists overfishing;

vi. New technologies: The management of fishing capacity should be designed so that it takes into account the incorporation of environmentally sound and evolving technology in all areas of capture fisheries.

vii. Mobility: The management of fishing capacity should encourage efficient use of fishing capacity and discourage mobility when it negatively affects sustainability and take due account of socio-economic performances in other fisheries;

viii. Transparency: The International Plan of Action should be implemented in a transparent manner in accordance with Article 6.13 of the Code of Conduct.

10. The implementation of the International Plan of Action should be based on the Code of Conduct, particularly Article 5, in relation to enhancing the ability of developing countries, to develop their own fisheries as well as to participate in high seas fisheries, including access to such fisheries, in accordance with their legitimate rights and their obligations under international law.

PART III: URGENT ACTIONS

Section I: Assessment and monitoring of fishing capacity

Measurement of fishing capacity

11. States should support coordinated efforts and research at national, regional and global levels to better understand the fundamental aspects of issues related to the measurement and monitoring of fishing capacity.

12. States should support the organization by FAO of a technical consultation to be held as early as possible in 1999 on the definition and measurement of fishing capacity and the subsequent preparation of technical guidelines for data collection and analysis, noting that the result of this consultation should provide specific guidance for preliminary assessments of fishing capacity and excess fishing capacity at national, regional and global levels.

Diagnosis and identification of fisheries and fleets requiring urgent measures

13. States should proceed, by the end of 2000, with a preliminary assessment of the fishing capacity deployed at the national level in relation to all the fleets of principal fisheries and update this assessment periodically.

14. States should proceed, by the end of 2001, with the systematic identification of national fisheries and fleets requiring urgent measures and update this analysis periodically.

15. States should cooperate, within the same time frame, in the organization of similar preliminary assessments of fishing capacity at the regional level (within the relevant regional fisheries organizations or in collaboration with them, as appropriate) and at the global level (in collaboration with FAO) for transboundary, straddling, highly migratory and high seas fisheries, as well as in the identification of regional or global fisheries and fleets requiring urgent measures.

Establishment of records of fishing vessels

16. States should support FAO in the development of appropriate and compatible standards for records of fishing vessels.

17. States should develop and maintain appropriate and compatible national records of fishing vessels, further specifying conditions for access to information.

18. While awaiting the entry into force of the Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas (Compliance Agreement), States should support the establishment by FAO by the end of 2000 of an international record of fishing vessels operating in the high seas, following the model indicated in the Compliance Agreement.

Section II: Preparation and implementation of national plans

Development of national plans and policies

19. States should develop, implement and monitor national plans of action for managing fishing capacity, taking into account, inter alia, the effect of different resource management systems on fishing capacity.

20. States should develop the means to monitor fishing capacity systematically and accurately, and to regularly assess any imbalance with available fishery resources and management objectives.

21. States should develop, adopt and make public, by the end of 2002, national plans for the management of fishing capacity and, if required, reduce fishing capacity in order to balance fishing capacity with available resources on a sustainable basis. These should be based on an assessment of fish stocks and giving particular attention to cases requiring urgent measures and taking immediate steps to address the management of fishing capacity for stocks recognized as significantly overfished.

22. States should give due consideration, in the development of national plans, to socio-economic requirements, including the consideration of alternative sources of employment and livelihood to fishing communities which must bear the burden of reductions in fishing capacity.

23. When it has been found that a national plan to manage capacity is not necessary, States should ensure that the matter of fishing capacity is addressed in an ongoing manner in fishery management.

24. At least every four years, States should review the implementation of their national plans to manage capacity for the purpose of identifying cost effective strategies for increasing effectiveness.

Subsidies and economic incentives

25. When developing their national plans for the management of fishing capacity, States should assess the possible impact of all factors, including subsidies, contributing to overcapacity on the sustainable management of their fisheries, distinguishing between factors, including subsidies, which contribute to overcapacity and unsustainability and those which produce a positive effect or are neutral.

26. States should reduce and progressively eliminate all factors, including subsidies and economic incentives and other factors which contribute, directly or indirectly, to the build-up of excessive fishing capacity thereby undermining the sustainability of marine living resources, giving due regard to the needs of artisanal fisheries.

Regional considerations

27. States should cooperate, where appropriate, through regional fisheries organizations or arrangements and other forms of co-operation, with a view to ensuring the effective management of fishing capacity.

28. States should strive to collaborate through FAO and through international arrangements in research, training and the production of information and educational material aiming to promote effective management of fishing capacity.

Section III: International considerations

29. States should consider participating in international agreements which relate to the management of fishing capacity, and in particular, the Compliance Agreement and the Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks.

30. States should support co-operation and the exchange of information among all regional fisheries organizations in accordance with their procedures.

31. States should take steps to manage the fishing capacity of their vessels involved in high seas fisheries and cooperate, as appropriate with other States, in reducing the fishing capacity applied to overfished high seas stocks.

32. States should improve, through regional fisheries organizations where appropriate, and in collaboration with FAO, the collection of data on catches on the high seas as well as in the coastal area by their fleet.

33. States should recognize the need to deal with the problem of those States which do not fulfil their responsibilities under international law as flag States with respect to their fishing vessels, and in particular those which do not exercise effectively their jurisdiction and control over their vessels which may operate in a manner that contravenes or undermines the relevant rules of international law and international conservation and management measures. States should also support multilateral co-operation to ensure that such flag States contribute to regional efforts to manage fishing capacity.

34. States should be encouraged to become members of regional fisheries organizations or arrangements, or agree to apply the conservation and management measures established by such organizations or arrangements to their vessels.

35. States should promote, with the assistance of FAO, the exchange of information about the fishing activity of vessels which do not comply with conservation and management measures adopted by regional fisheries organizations and arrangements, consistent with Article VI of the Compliance Agreement.

36. Anticipating the entry into force of the Compliance Agreement, States should strive to apply the provisions of Article III of that Agreement.

37. States should ensure that no transfer of capacity to the jurisdiction of another State should be carried out without the express consent and formal authorization of that State.

38. States should, in compliance with their duties as flag States, avoid approving the transfer of vessels flying their flag to high seas areas where such transfers are inconsistent with responsible fishing under the Code of Conduct.

Section IV: Immediate actions for major international fisheries requiring urgent measures

39. States should take immediate steps to address the management of fishing capacity for international fisheries requiring urgent attention, with priority being given to those harvesting transboundary, straddling, highly migratory and high seas stocks which are significantly overfished.

40. Within the framework of their respective competencies, States should act individually, bilaterally and multilaterally, as appropriate, to reduce substantially⁹ the fleet capacity applied to these resources as part of management strategies to restore overfished stocks to sustainable levels considering, in addition to the other relevant provisions of the International Plan of Action:

i. the economic importance of the fleets catching overfished stocks and the need to limit these fleets to a level commensurate with stock sustainability and economic viability; and
ii. the use of appropriate measures to control the transfer of overcapacity to fully exploited or overexploited fisheries, taking into consideration the condition of the fish stocks.

PART IV: Mechanisms to promote implementation

Awareness building and education

41. States should develop information programmes at national, regional and global levels to increase awareness about the need for the management of fishing capacity, and the cost and benefits resulting from adjustments in fishing capacity.

Scientific and technical co-operation

42. States should support the exchange of scientific and technical information on issues related to the management of fishing capacity and promote its world-wide availability using existing regional and global fora.

43. States should support training and institutional strengthening and consider providing financial, technical and other assistance to developing countries on issues related to the management of fishing capacity.

Reporting

44. States should report to FAO on progress on assessment, development and implementation of their plans for the management of fishing capacity as part of their biennial reporting to FAO on the Code of Conduct.

Role of FAO

45. FAO will, as and to the extent directed by its Conference, collect all relevant information and data which might serve as a basis for further analysis aimed at identifying factors contributing to overcapacity such as, inter alia, lack of input and output control, unsustainable fishery management methods and subsidies which contribute to overcapacity.

46. FAO will, as and to the extent directed by its Conference, and as part of its Regular Programme activities, support States in the implementation of their national plans for the management of fishing capacity.

47. FAO will, as directed by its Conference, support development and implementation of national plans for the management of fishing capacity through specific, in-country technical assistance projects with Regular Programme funds and by use of extra-budgetary funds made available to the Organization for this purpose.

48. FAO will, through COFI, report biennially on the state of progress in the implementation of the International Plan of Action.

1  See "Report of the Technical Working Group on Reduction of Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries". Tokyo, Japan, 25-27 March 1998. FAO Fisheries Report No. 585.

2  See report: "Preparatory Meeting for the Consultation on the Management of Fishing Capacity, Shark Fisheries and Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries". Rome, 22-24 July, 1998. FAO Fisheries Report No. 584.

3  In this document the term "State" includes Members and non-members of FAO and applies mutatis mutandis also to "fishing entities" other than States.

4  See: "Report of the FAO Technical Working Group on the Conservation and Management of Sharks". Tokyo, Japan, 23-27 April 1998. FAO Fisheries Report No. 583.

5  See Report: "Preparatory Meeting for the Consultation on the Management of Fishing Capacity, Shark Fisheries and Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries." Rome, 22-24 July, 1998. FAO Fisheries Report No. 584.

6  In this document, the term "State" includes Members and non-members of FAO and applies mutatis mutandis also to "fishing entities" other than States.

7  In this document, the term "State" includes Members and non-members of FAO and applies mutatis mutandis also to "fishing entities" other than States.

8  In this document, the term "regional" incudes sub-regional, as appropriate.

9  The required reduction would vary from fishery to fishery; e.g. a 20 to 30% reduction was mentioned for large-scale tuna long line fleet (Technical Working Group on the Management of Fishing Capacity, 15-18 April 1998, FAO Fisheries Report No. 586).