A recently approved Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) measure instituting a closure period for drifting fish-aggregating devices (dFADs) is continuing to cause tension, with the European Union recently announcing it is objecting to the decision.
The E.U. is putting forward two new proposals at the next meeting: one to replace the dFAD rule to which it has objected, and another to set new tropical tuna quotas, in place of an earlier measure to which other parties have objected.
Several IOTC members have already opted out of the conservation management measure, and the E.U. – one of the largest users of dFADs in the Indian Ocean – has called the vote an effort to expel Europeans from the region’s fishery. The divisive decision on dFADs comes in the wake of a spat over a previous IOTC measure lowering catch limits for yellowfin tuna, which was adopted by majority vote in January 2022.
The divisions over the dFAD closure period fall between coastal states that use pole-and-line gear or stationary FADs and countries that operate purse-seine fleets fishing dependent on the use of dFADs.
Any failure to reach consensus on the issue could make the IOTC's management efforts ineffective. A commission meeting scheduled for May 2023 offers a chance to forge compromises and gain unanimous approval.
At the IOTC's special meeting from 3 to 5 February, a majority of voting members approved an annual 72-day closure period for dFADs, as well as a reduction in the total number of dFADs allowed per vessel; and the establishment of a mandatory FAD registration program.
Approving a conservation management measure (CMM) by majority vote is unusual for an RFMO, as member-countries typically prefer pursuing compromises that gain unanimous consent, as IOTC rules allows any objecting nations to be exempted from any new management measures, so long as they formally object.
The next IOTC meeting will take place 8 to 12 May, 2023, in Mauritius. Several proposals to be considered at the meeting were submitted by the 8 April deadline and are available on the S27 meeting page.
The E.U. has put forward two different proposals, including one that would delay the start of the new dFAD rule and refer the issue the issue to the IOTC Scientific Committee. The E.U. has disagreed with the 72-day closure period in the current rule on the grounds that it is not scientifically based. The committee's recommendations would then be considered at the IOTC's 2024 meeting.
Under the current rule, the IOTC Scientific Committee is already studying the issue, but if it decides it does not have sufficient information, or if the commission cannot agree on a different closure period, the original 72-day closure period will automatically come into effect on 1 July, 2023.
The E.U.’s proposal would eliminate the automatic closure period. It also lowers the threshold to make the measure non-applicable from one-third of IOTC members, or 10 of the 30 members, to those representing 20 percent or more of the fishery's total catch. And the measure approved in February reduces the number of dFADs allowed per vessel from the current 300 to 250 in 2024, and to 200 in 2025, while the limits under the E.U. proposal are 260 for 2024 and 240 for 2025.
The proposal keeps requirements for dFADs to be biodegradable, but establishes a clear method to deregister dFADs from the dFAD registry. The E.U. has claimed the language in the newly passed rule is unclear as to whether a dFAD, once registered, can be deregistered when lost. Since about 40 percent of dFADs are lost or abandoned anually, the E.U. claims this would mean registered dFADs would eventually all be lost, with no way to list new ones without exceeding the limit.
In an open letter to the IOTC Secretariat, Indonesia, which was the sponsor of the measure that passed in 2022, disputed the E.U.'s claim dFADs cannot be deregistered.
In the E.U.’s second proposal, it proposes a proportional catch reduction for yellowfin, bigeye, and skipjack tuna to reduce overfishing and bring catches in line with scientific recommendations for rebuilding stocks. In a proportional reduction, each party would reduce its catch by the same percentage. The plan allows for smaller percentage reductions for developing coastal states, small island developing states, and least-developed states.
“For yellowfin tuna, the interim rebuilding plan, adopted with Resolution 21/01 and entered into force in 2022, did not achieve its conservation objectives,” the proposal says. “The objections to the rebuilding plan introduced by six [IOTC members], including some of the biggest [yellowfin] harvesters, are seriously limiting the effectiveness and fairness of the plan.”
For bigeye, the 2022 stock assessment concluded the stock is overfished and subject to overfishing, according to the proposal text, while for skipjack tuna, the total catch in 2021 was 27 percent higher than the limit calculated using the adopted harvest-control rule.
Another proposal, from South Korea, suggests IOTC members should refrain from putting matters to a vote when consensus cannot be achieved, and instead asks members to either use a mediator or discuss issues that don’t have consensus at another venue to avoid controversial votes. A separate South Korean proposal would establish a working group specializing in FADs.
Photo courtesy of Coalition for Fair Fisheries Arrangements
