This paper summarizes the main regional and sub-regional activities that have been carried out by members of the General Fisheries Council for the Mediterranean (GFCM) and its Secretariat since the last session of the Council in May 1995. It excludes thus those activities which were undertaken by each member country for its own domestic purposes, except those which were reported to the Secretariat or at the meetings of GFCM.

Management of Fisheries of Large Pelagic Stocks

 1. Based on the conclusions of an ad hoc GFCM/ICCAT Working Group on Stocks of Large Pelagic Fishes in the Mediterranean Sea, GFCM adopted at its twenty-first session a binding resolution which for bluefin tuna sets size limits, effort levels and fishing seasons for the Mediterranean as a whole (Resolution No. 95/1). The Tenth Session of the Committee on Fisheries Management, held in June 1997, reviewed the conclusions of the Working Group and decided that the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) should continue to play the key role in the assessment of the large pelagic stocks in the Mediterranean and considered the role of GFCM indispensable, especially in assisting in data collection. The Committee noted that the data made available to the Working Group needed to be improved.

 2. GFCM also requested its Secretariat to consult ICCAT on the possibility of formalizing cooperation not only on technical issues but also on management. GFCM proposed that the two organizations should have a joint decision-making process as regards the management of large pelagics in the Mediterranean. This issue will be on the agenda of the next GFCM/ICCAT Working Group on large pelagic species in 1998.

 3. The European Community (EC) informed the GFCM Committee on Fisheries Management held in June 1997 that it had adopted in June 1996 a rule that introduced in Community legislation the measures adopted by GFCM covering the yearly closed season for bluefin tuna, the other measures stipulated by Resolution 95/1 having already become part of Community legislation.

 4. GFCM agreed at its last session that direct fishing effort control, as opposed to a control of landings, was a better method of limiting fishing impacts on the stocks because of the small-scale nature and diversity of Mediterranean fisheries.

 5. It agreed that the priority of Mediterranean fisheries management was the progressive establishment of an effort-based management system for the high seas fisheries. To this end, the Council agreed in its Resolution No. 95/2 to establish, for the purposes of the Compliance Agreement, a minimum length limit of 15 m for fishing vessels flying the flag of a coastal State of the Mediterranean and to request all States, without distinction, whose fishing vessels operate in the Mediterranean to provide appropriate information about these vessels to its Secretariat. Twelve countries responded to the Council request but only two of them provided the information in the appropriate format. A reminder was sent to member countries urging them to expedite the sending of the requested data before 1 October 1997, in order to allow the Secretariat to present to the Council a progress report on the issue.

 6. The Council encouraged all member States to accept the Compliance Agreement and recommended that they establish national licensing schemes and provide related information to the Secretariat. The Secretariat brought this to the attention of members during the tenth session of the Committee on Fisheries Management. Some countries expressed certain reserves on the Agreement, while the majority of delegates whose countries had not yet accepted the Agreement stated that they would bring the matter to the attention of their competent authorities. It is hoped that new developments will be reported during the present Council.

 7. GFCM agreed that emphasis should be placed on the collection of data on activities and characteristics of all vessels fishing in the Mediterranean. By its Resolution No. 95/4, the Council called on its member countries to prepare a list of fishing boats in operation from ports in the Mediterranean and provide it to the Secretariat. The responses from the countries are still awaited except for two of them which sent the requested information.

 8. The Secretariat requested all member States to report on the implementation of the Resolution No. 95/2. According to the information received, a number of States made some progress in keeping fleet capacity under control. Others encountered difficulties in having a reliable record of their small-scale fishing fleets. However, the majority of the countries that reported on this matter had taken steps to freeze the capacity of their national fleets.

 9. The urgent need to improve fishery statistics to support fisheries management has been stressed by the Council and by member countries in various fora. EC member States are engaged in a special programme financed by the Commission which involves collection of data of various aspects of the Mediterranean fishers. Other countries are engaged in the improvement of their statistical systems in order to meet the requirement from both stock assessment specialists and fishery management policy makers.

 10. Recognizing the deterioration of the marine environment in the Mediterranean, GFCM has agreed to bring to the attention of relevant ministries in member countries its concern as regards the impact of human activities on the Mediterranean marine environment. Since some of the proposed recommendations did not fall within the competence of the ministries responsible for fisheries, the Council agreed that a resolution (Resolution No. 95/3) aimed at reducing run-off nutrients and at protecting sensitive Mediterranean habitats be transmitted to the Ninth Meeting of the Contracting Parties to the Convention for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea against Pollution (Barcelona Convention).

 11. The Secretariat informed the Barcelona Convention secretariat of the GFCM decision, inviting the latter to bring it to the attention of the Contracting Parties Conference to be held in June 1995. The GFCM Secretariat was informed by the Conference secretariat that the Conference "took into consideration the GFCM Resolution for the programming of its future activities".

 12. A Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis was prepared by the Secretariat for the UNEP Mediterranean Action Plan (MAP) containing an overview of all regional problems of transboundary significance relevant to the environment and natural resources. It identifies problems and also proposes action for alleviating them. Eleven issues directly related to fisheries were identified. The related project documents will be reviewed by the MAP Contracting Parties in September 1997 and presented to a donors' meeting by the end of 1997.

 13. The GFCM/ICCAT Working Group on Large Pelagic Species held its third meeting in Genoa, Italy in September 1996. The working group met with the objective of collating and processing all available data and information for stock assessment of northern bluefin tuna in the Mediterranean Sea. It also reviewed the development in fisheries and research related to large pelagic species.

 14. A major outcome of this Working Group was the significant improvement in the availability of data and other information. However, the Working Group found that there were still significant deficiencies in data, which in some cases were beyond the control of scientists. The need for future improvement in the data collection system were therefore reflected in the recommendations of the meeting.

 15. The Working Group noted a substantial increase in the annual catch of bluefin tuna, which might be due to one or a combination of the following factors: (a) a lower under-reporting rate than in the past; (b) higher fishing effort due to economic incentive; or (c) increased availability of fish. It was interesting to note that the increase coincided with setting the maximum of the annual catches in 1994 and 1995 as the reference level for the 25% reduction in catch that was recommended by ICCAT and GFCM.

 16. In addition to the continued presence of vessels flying flags of convenience, another important development highlighted by the Working Group was the appearance of many unidentified vessels fishing for bluefin in the Mediterranean Sea. The catches of vessels with flags of convenience and those without any flags were not reported in any national statistics.

 17. The GFCM Secretariat, referring to the experience gained by the work of the Working Group, informed the ICCAT secretariat that the terms of reference of such a Group should be revised to include a training component for specialists on large pelagics with a view to familiarizing them with the new assessment software and methods.

 18. The following problems were mentioned at the Working Group as causing difficulties with the implementation of GFCM Resolution No. 95/1:

(a) uncontrolled operation of vessels with flags of convenience or unidentified vessels; (b) the multi-species and multi-gear nature of fisheries; (c) generally deficient system for monitoring catches; and (d) the absence of a quota system for bluefin fisheries.

 19. The Genoa meeting further recommended that the effectiveness of the measures adopted by ICCAT, GFCM and EC should be examined in the light of the status of bluefin tuna at the following ICCAT session.

 20. The meeting recommended also that the status of implementation of the decisions of ICCAT, GFCM and EC be reported to meetings of the respective competent regional organizations. It was also recommended that realistic and practical alternatives of stock management schemes be studied and reported. Such schemes should include the suggestion made by GFCM to extend the closure of the bluefin tuna fishery to longliners over 24 m during June and to other fisheries during July.

 21. The Eighth Session of the Technical Consultation on Stock Assessment in the Western Mediterranean, held in October 1996, was attended by scientists representing Algeria, France, Spain, Italy, Morocco and Tunisia. Observers from EC, the International Commission for the Scientific Exploration of the Mediterranean Sea (CIESM) and Greenpeace International were also present.

 22. The Consultation reviewed reports prepared by the country representatives on the status of national fisheries and progress achieved in stock assessment studies, as well as in the implementation of management measures concerning major fish stocks. It reviewed also and agreed on the programme of work of the "Regional Fisheries Project for Advice, Technical Support and Establishment of Co-operation Networks to Facilitate Co-ordination to Support Fisheries Management in the Western and Central Mediterranean" (COPEMED) as presented by the programme coordinator. This programme o work will also be considered by the Committee on Fisheries Management at its Tenth Session.

 23. The Consultation requested the Secretariat to obtain from the CIESM/CIHEAM Working Group (DYNPOP) before the end of 1997 an analysis of the impact of mortality rates by age on population dynamics and diagnostics of exploited stocks in the Mediterranean Sea. This analysis is available to the Council for consideration.

 24. The Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries calls for the implementation of a precautionary approach to management. This new approach requires building the capacity of fisheries administrations to evaluate the risks linked to the management measures and to take into consideration the need for a scientific approach to issues related to resource management. As recommended, this matter is brought to the attention of the Council for consideration under Agenda item 8.

 25. The Consultation considered the question of discarding juveniles of commercial species and noted that discarding was exacerbated in some cases by regulations on minimum size at landing, especially where small mesh sizes were used. It thus called on the Committee on Fisheries Management to identify measures that could reduce the catch of small and juvenile fishes.

 26. The Consultation noted with satisfaction the progress achieved in stock assessment in the Western Mediterranean. It suggested that the balance between fishing effort and the availability of the resources be respected and that a significant reduction of fishing effort be carried out whenever signs of over-fishing were noted.

 27. The Consultation also noted that stock distribution in the Western Mediterranean did not always permit the identification of common management measures for straddling and highly migratory and/or shared stocks, which is a pre-condition for pooling data for the same unit stocks. The Consultation recommended the holding of an expert consultation in the near future on how to identify such unit stocks.

 28. The Tenth Session of the Committee on Fisheries Management reviewed the conclusions of the Consultation and agreed that discussion on specific proposals for effort reduction should be postponed until a new GFCM structure has been decided upon.

 29. The Consultation could not take a clear stand on the strategies and mechanisms for fisheries management in the GFCM area proposed by the Secretariat and decided to resume the debate on this issue when the GFCM will take its decision on effort management.

 30. The Technical Consultation on Stock Assessment in the Central and Eastern Mediterranean, organized in December 1996, was attended by representatives from Cyprus, Greece, Israel, Malta and Italy. Observers from EC, Greenpeace International and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) also attended.

 31. The Consultation reviewed the progress achieved at the national, bilateral and regional levels in the assessment of major fish stocks and in the implementation of national and regional fisheries management measures. It considered the resource and environment issues relevant to Mediterranean fisheries management and noted the progress achieved in the implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries.

 32. While a number of countries in the sub-region have made little progress in the assessment of their resources and hence were unable to institute scientifically-based fisheries management measures, others reported notable progress in the use of scientific assessments, including analytical methods and production modelling.

 33. The Consultation, reviewing the situation of the juvenile swordfish in the Southern region, recommended that: (1) countries adopt measures to avoid or reduce the taking of juvenile fish; (2) closed season(s) and areas for fisheries be imposed for taking juvenile swordfish at times of the year and localities where juveniles make up a large proportion of the catch; (3) a registry of vessels that take substantial numbers of swordfish be set up; (4) special efforts be made to improve the database containing data on their fishing; and (5) a working group be established for drafting appropriate measures to implement these recommendations.

 34. The Consultation, reviewing the impact of sport/recreational/part-time fishing on these resources, called on the Council to advocate among the Governments of the sub-region the need to monitor and assess possible impacts and recommended the creation of an ad hoc working group to deal with this issue.

 35. The Tenth Session of the GFCM Committee on Fisheries Management reviewed these two recommendations and decided that further thought was required as it was not prepared to take position on the resolutions on a Mediterranean-wide basis.

 36. The intersessional activities in the field of aquaculture have included the first meeting of the GFCM Committee on Aquaculture which took place in Rome, Italy, from 9 to 12 September 1996, and the operation of the four aquaculture regional networks.

 37. The activities related to the network included the following:

(1) For SIPAM, the aquaculture information network placed directly under the GFCM supervision and assisted by the Tunisian Government:

• the first meeting of the SIPAM Coordinating Committee which took place in Tunis in January 1996 to review activities and to establish a plan of operations for the 1996,
• the ICRAM/SIPAM meeting in Bari, Italy,held in March 1997 which presented the new regional software and discussed the plan of operations;
• the expansion of the network to include Spain in 1995, and Italy, Malta and Morocco in 1996, including the training of the national team in the operation of the software and the organization of the national centres, and preparatory activities to link two additional countries to the network;
• the development of the new software package in Windows environment, in collaboration with the IMBC, Greece;
• the issuance of the first regional data base; and
• the preparation of a home page on the Internet as well as initial discussions to link the information system to other similar information systems such as AQUARIUS.

(2) For TECAM, the network dealing with technology and biological aspects of aquaculture in the Mediterranean, the work conducted has implied a close collaboration with CIHEAM, the institution which has been entrusted with the implementation of the operation of this network. Activities carried out in the intersessional period under TECAM included:

• two meetings of the TECAM Coordinating Committee, which took place in Zaragoza, Spain in July 1995 and July 1997;
• a workshop on Marine Aquaculture Finfish Diversification held in Cyprus in June 1996;
• a working group on the same subject held in Iraklion, Greece in July 1996 also for the preparation of the main lines of a regional project proposal to be submitted to the EC sponsored INCO programme;
• an Advanced Course on Food and Feeding of Farmed Fish and Shrimps, held in Alexandria, Egypt, in May 1996;
• a Workshop on Fish Nutrition, held in Mazarron, Spain, in June 1996;
• a short practical course on fish health management, held in Udine, Italy, in February 1997;
• a Seminar on Genetics and Breeding in Mediterranean Aquaculture Species, followed by a Workshop to determine the programme of work of the subgroup on genetics. Both meetings where held in Zaragoza, Spain, in April 1997.

(3) For SELAM the regional network dealing with social, economic and legal aspects of aquaculture in the Mediterranean, the work conducted has implied a close collaboration with CIHEAM. Activities included:

• Two Coordination Committees to define the programme of work, held in Zaragoza. Spain, in July 1995 and July 1997;
• an Advanced Course on the Establishment and Management of Aquaculture Enterprises given in Zaragoza, Spain. in November 1996;
• a Seminar on Aquaculture Production Economics, held in Montpellier, France, May 1995;
• a Seminar on Marketing of Aquaculture Products, held in Thessaloniki, Greece in October 1995; and
• establishing a linkage with the SIPAM network for the design of a specialized data base for marketing of aquaculture products.

(4) The EAM network is the regional network dealing with aquaculture and the environment in the Mediterranean. Activities are organized and coordinated through the MAP PAP/ RAC centre in Split, Croatia. The activities under this network which have been implemented in the intersessional period are:

• a Working group meeting on Lagoon Management, which has been held in Montpellier, France, in June 1995; and
• a Workshop on Selection and Protection of Sites Suitable for Aquaculture, which was held in Iraklion, Greece, in November 1995.

 38.    As a result of the above activities in the various networks several publications have been produced or are in the process of being completed.

 39. For the SIPAM network, the manual for the utilisation of the program has been prepared and is distributed together with the software, as internal files. In addition brochures on the SIPAM programme have been prepared for general distribution, and a WWW Home Page on Internet has been prepared. The reports of the Coordinating Committees have also been distributed to the countries.

 40. For the TECAM network two publications have been issued. They are included in the CIHEAM series Cahiers Options méditerranéennes, as the proceedings and papers presented at the meetings indicated above. The first one is entitled "Marine Aquaculture Finfish Species Diversification", and the second "Feeding Tomorrow�s Fish". A third publication is under preparation with the proceedings of the Seminar on Genetics and Breeding in Mediterranean Aquaculture Species.

 41. For the SELAM network two publications have been issued also in the series Cahiers Options méditerranéennes of CIHEAM, with the titles "Aquaculture Production Economics" and "Marketing of Aquaculture Products", with the proceedings and papers of the meetings held in 1995 in Montpellier and Thessaloniki.

 42. In the EAM network two documents related to Workshop on Selection and Protection of Sites Suitable for Aquaculture, have been printed. The first one is the "Rapport de l�atelier sur le choix et la protection des sites propices a l�aquaculture" and the second "Approaches for Zoning of Coastal Areas with Reference to Mediterranean Aquaculture".

 43. Work in support of the Code of Conduct on Responsible Fisheries has been also initiated. Thanks to the interest of the Italian Government on the application of the code for Aquaculture development in the Mediterranean, negotiations have been advanced for the preparation of a major meeting to be held in Rome in 1998 on the application of Article 9 of the Code (related to aquaculture development) in the region and the preparation of a regional project to facilitate the implementation of the principles contained in the code. A project proposal in support of the expansion of the activities of the four Mediterranean networks has been formally submitted to the Government of Spain. A first indication of interest from the Spanish Fisheries Administration has been received.

 44. A presentation of the SIPAM has also been made to the member countries of the Indian Ocean Fishery Commission (IOFC) at the First Meeting of the ad hoc Working Group on Aquaculture, held in Cairo in October 1996. As a results of the presentation high priority has been placed on the development of a similar system for the countries of the Gulfs which could be also linked to the operation of the SIPAM network.

 45. A Working Party on Legal and Technical Aspects of Fisheries Management in the Mediterranean was organized by EC as a follow-up to the Second Diplomatic Conference on Fisheries Management in the Mediterranean (Venice, Italy, November 1996). The meeting was attended by representatives from all Mediterranean countries and observers from Japan and the Republic of Korea. The meeting discussed the major management issues of the Mediterranean fisheries and reviewed the possibilities of strengthening GFCM in order to allow it to address these issues.

 46. At its Tenth Session, the Committee on Fisheries Management reviewed the activities of the Council during the intersessional period and recommended necessary action for the follow-up to the conclusions of the technical meetings that had been organized.

 47. The Committee reviewed the two recommendations of the Technical Consultation on Stock Assessment in the Central and Eastern Mediterranean concerning the exploitation of young swordfish in the subregion and sport fishing, and decided that further thought was required as it was not prepared to take position on the two recommendations on a Mediterranean-wide basis.

 48. The Committee noted with great concern the existence of unidentified fishing vessels operating in the Mediterranean. The Committee invited Member countries to provide the Secretariat with information that may help in the identification of these vessels. The Committee considered the recommendations of the GFCM/ICCAT Working Group on Large Pelagics Species. It noted that vessels which were operating under the flags of Belize, Honduras and Panama were not providing data on their fishing operations.

 49. The Committee noted the problems of improving data reporting and also invited Member countries to incorporate the GFCM resolutions into national legislations and to make provisions for their enforcement.

 50. Concerning the EC Working Party on Legal and Technical Aspects of Fisheries Management in the Mediterranean, the Committee noted the conclusions of the Working Party and requested the Secretariat to prepare the necessary documentation for consideration at the next session of the Council, taking into consideration the conclusions and recommendations of the last Council and other meetings organized during the intersessional period.

 51. The Committee reviewed a document on "strategies and mechanisms for fisheries management in the GFCM area", prepared by the Secretariat and considered that the phases proposed might constitute a basis for a coordination of effort control by the Council. The Committee further noted that many of the issues raised obviously required further technical analysis and refinement in the course of implementation and suggested that the document be submitted again to the present session of the Council.

 52. The Committee commended these efforts, and noted that independent progress in parallel with a coordinated effort to introduce limits to fleet capacity could only be to the benefit of improved management of the resources. The Committee recommended that countries provide their fleet data in the format given in Appendix 1 to the report of the Tenth Session, and ensure that it arrived at the Secretariat not later than 1 October 1997, so that a summary could be prepared for consideration at the present session of the Council.

 53. The Committee took note of the document prepared by the Secretariat entitled Amendments to the GFCM Agreement and an informal paper entitled Possible Scale of Contributions. The amendments provided for the admission of EC to the Council, the establishment of a scientific committee, modifications to the preamble to the Agreement to reflect recent international instruments, new dispute settlement procedures, the inclusion of aquaculture in the mandate of the Council, and the autonomous budget and scale of contributions.

 54. The Committee noted the urgency for these amendments to be discussed and adopted by the GFCM Council to enable the admission of EC. This would give GFCM greater autonomy and permit it to play a more efficient role in the management of fishery resources of the region, especially the shared and transboundary stocks.

 55. The Committee expressed the view that the scientific committee was necessary, but that the composition of membership, as well as the need for other time-bound, task-oriented structures such as working groups, would have to be discussed by the Council in October. It was also agreed that the establishment of any subsidiary bodies would depend on budgetary provisions being made to cover the cost.

 56. The Committee noted the information provided on the proposed autonomous budget and scale of contributions. It reiterated that GFCM needed to obtain the necessary financial means that would enable it to act in an efficient manner despite the budgetary restrictions in FAO. The Committee requested the Secretariat to review the draft document on the scale of contributions and align it with a proposed detailed two-year programme of work. The Secretariat was further requested to present a medium- and long-term programme of work for GFCM.

 57. Concerning the implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, there was general agreement to make the Code available through member countries in local languages to all concerned. The Committee welcomed a proposal by Italy to fund three components of the FAO Interregional Programme of Assistance to Developing Countries for implementation of the Code of Conduct relating to (1) monitoring, control and surveillance, (2) responsible fishing operations and (3) post-harvest practices and trade. The Committee welcomed this proposal and considered it desirable to integrate these components with others, funded by Norway and Netherlands, to form a single comprehensive programme.

 58. The Committee agreed that the formulation of a regional strategy for the implementation of the Code together with the elaboration of regional guidelines should be one of the priorities of GFCM.

 59. Without prejudice to the Council's deliberations on this matter, the Committee also agreed on the programme of work proposed by the Secretariat.

 60. The Governement of Spain has financed a project "Assistance, Technical Support and Establishment of Cooperation Networks for a Better Coordination concerning the Management of Fisheries in the Western and Central Mediterranean" (COPEMED) for a duration of five years, commencing in October 1996, with the total fund of US$ 5 million, and as staged in paragraph 22 of this document. The Director of COPEMED presented to the GFCM Committee on Fisheries Management a progress report on the implementation of the project and suggested a work plan for the future.⁵

 61. The Committee expressed its agreement with COPEMED project activities proposal and its programme of work for the next biennium in the following major activities:

1. continuation of the setting up of the network by identifying the items to be included in the database and developing the Web Home Page on the Internet;
2. development of cooperation with the DYNPOP Working Group;
3. organization of working group meetings to address issues such as the assessment methods of pluri-species artisanal fisheries, identification and updating of existing information on shared and/or straddling fish stocks in the area, analysis of basic fish data collection in the area with a view to possible standardization and definition of calculation methods of biological reference points as indicated in the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries.

 62. The Council is invited to review the recommendations of the Committee on Fisheries Management and of the Committee on Aquaculture, and to advise on follow-up to those recommendations.

 63. The Council is invited to take a decision on the terms of reference of the Committee on Aquaculture and to take note of the activities undertaken so far by the Committee. The Council is also invited to decide on the cancellation of the Working Group on Artificial Reefs and Mariculture as the working group is now replaced by the Committee on Aquaculture.