Is Fiji's Tuna Industry facing Extinction?

Canned Tuna. There's heaps upon heaps of it - but is it possibly too cheap?

I was frankly dismayed by this article.
No not about the fact that the Tuna Industry wants to keep exploiting Sharks - that I knew already.
I was dismayed because apparently, Fiji's Tuna Industry is facing total collapse.

If so, fishing for Sharks will not save it.
It would merely establish a second unsustainable fishery on top of an apparently nonviable one. The result would be that Shark stocks would be quickly exhausted with devastating effects for marine ecosystems including the Tuna, meaning that in only a few years we would end up with no Sharks, no Tuna and even less Fish.
That surely cannot be the solution!

But that's not really the topic here.
I've said it before, everybody here wants the Tuna Industry to survive.
This is a vital component of Fiji's economy and everybody, and this very much including government, should lend a helping hand in assuring that both the local Tuna fishing and Tuna processing sectors can survive in the long term and continue providing for employment and opportunities for many generations to come.
This obviously mandates that the Industry be sustainable but also profitable.

For that to happen, it appears that the fishery needs to be reformed.
I really ignore the details - but if it is really true that Fiji's Tuna Industry is in such dire straights like its spokesman asserts, then the likely reasons could be.

• That Tuna stocks are depleted.
  That is highly likely.
  You may want to re-read this post about the appalling shenanigans that happen within the WCPFC where outsiders like specifically Japan are stalling any efforts to curb quotas in line with the best scientific advice. This year specifically has been particularly depressing as previously reserved regions have been opened to allow the Philippines to further exploit the already ravaged stocks of Bigeyes,
  If those foreign powers continue to interfere and sabotage the attempts to safeguard those precious stocks, Fiji should do what is best for Fiji and set its own targets and rules, very much like the PNA have already done.
  In the end, there is only one long term solution, and that is to fish sustainably, and this very much also by defining the quotas in line with the precautionary principle.
  Interestingly, this is what Mr. Southwick himself appears to be advocating here!

and/or

• That there is Overcapacity.
  There are probably already too many boats fishing for too few Fish and if so, Fiji should reduce the number of fishing licenses that are being awarded and thus increase the profit margin for individual vessels.
  There, I'm principally thinking of the licenses awarded to foreign vessels.
  Their track record is unequivocal: they have already overfished their own stocks, have zero regard for our well being but will instead catch whatever they can get their hands on, and then sail on once our stocks are equally depleted, leaving Fiji to contend with the long-term consequences - or am I to believe that the price of the licenses contains a component for mitigation? I wish!
  I say, Fiji first! If the Asians want to eat Tuna caught in Fiji, let them buy Fijian Tuna caught by Fijian fishermen and exported by Fijian processing plants!
  Did I hear, and what happens to the development aid by those countries, namely Europe, Taiwan and the US to name but a few?
  If they want to assist us by paying for poverty alleviation and development, we are certainly grateful. But to link it to an unsustainable fishery that depletes our national resources and ultimately impoverishes the nation and its population cannot possibly be acceptable, not economically and not ethically - or am I missing something here?
  

and/or

• That the fishery is not profitable.
  If so and if all costs have already been slashed, then the price of Tuna must increase. Canned Tuna is probably too cheap and the time where it was viewed as some kind of junk food must come to an end.
  One smart strategy for convincing customers to pay more, is to have the fishery certified like once again the PNA have already achieved. That of course implies that the fishery is truly sustainable, meaning that bycatch and other ecological impacts will need to be reduced, as already required by, the current MSC environmental standard. Another group, the ISSF is asking its members not to work with vessels that fin Sharks
  In fact, the Fijian Albacore longline fishery is currently being assessed and my hope is that the Industry as a whole will decide to follow that route.
  I say, let's brand our Tuna.
  With Fiji Water having already paved the way and Government facilitating the process, let's establish Fiji Tuna as being Tuna that has been caught sustainably in pristine waters by happy, friendly and fairly compensated fishermen!
  

But the current unsustainable fishing for Sharks must stop.
At best, it is a short term stop-gap measure that is merely detracting from the need to urgently tackle the real issues at hand. But it is of course much more than that: if it continues unchecked, it will lead to the collapse of all fisheries - and this very much including the local fishery for Tuna!

And that's not something anybody can possibly want.
Correct?

Fiji's Tuna Industry - the Saga continues!

Foreign distant water fleets: reaping and pillaging the SoPac. Source. 

Remember?

And I cite.

The number of vessels fishing for tuna continues to increase in the Pacific, with last year’s 297 fishing boats setting an all-time high. 
But 45 more purse seiners are now under construction in Asian shipyards, which will “cause sustainability problems in the fishery,” he said and raised “serious concerns about the increasing number of vessels fishing in the region.

“What we now see from the 2012 fishing data is more boats in the fishery, higher overall catches, smaller fish sizes and the lowest ever levels of fisheries biomass for these tuna stocks.”

Marshall Islands fisheries Director Glen Joseph said as bad as it sounds, the situation is worse. “It’s not just bigeye tuna raising concern,” he said. “Swordfish catches are raising a red flag.”
And yellowfin tuna is reported by scientists to be near its maximum sustainable yield. “If distant water fishing nations support sustainability of the resource, then they need to commit to a 30 percent reduction in catches,” Joseph said. “It’s not a question of should they do it or not. They have to do it or face the consequences.”

And here's another one.

Many blame the foreign tuna fishing fleets with their large-scale operations that buy the rights to fish in Western and Central pacific fisheries, and whose numbers are steadily increasing.
In the past decade, China's fishing fleet has ballooned with hundreds of new heavily state-subsidised boats now operating in the southern Albacore tuna fishery.
Greenpeace's Nathaniel Pelle says in return the Pacific nations are paid access fees but often their slice of the estimated $7 billion a year Pacific tuna industry is less than 10 per cent.

Rosetti Imo, a bio-economist with the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency, says the loss of the local tuna industry would be a huge economic blow for the region.
"In terms of value to the Pacific islands and how our economies rely on this resource its very, very valuable and most of our small economies rely on this resource absolutely", he said.

Fisheries management experts say one solution might be withdrawing or cutting back foreign access to their exclusive economic zones.
Greenpeace's Nathaniel Pelle agrees: “In the long term there is no benefit of having this system of reliance on selling access to foreign vessels, the economic benefit is going to come from having a stable fishing population.” 

Looks like everybody knows what needs to be done.

Leadership anybody?  

Tuna Fisheries - it's complicated!

I must confess that my head is spinning.
I recently had a conversation with one of my very smart friends about the plight of the Northern Bluefin and he said look at the European subsidies. Without those, much of the large scale fisheries would not be commercially viable and the overfishing would not be happening.

The above graphic, already posted here, appears to be confirming just that.
Same same for this recent important paper by U.R. Sumalia & al. Thankfully, the Pew has taken the time to summarize it in this fantastic synopsis that I invite everybody to read in its entirety.
This is the ingress:

Ocean Science Summary: Subsidizing Global Fisheries

Global fisheries receive billions of dollars in subsidies each year.
Although some of this money, such as that to improve fisheries management, can promote sustainable fishing practices, other funding can lead to overfishing in the world’s oceans. Capacity-enhancing subsidies, for example for fuel or boat construction, reduce costs for fishers, enabling them to increase their capacity and catch more fish. The unintended consequence of this kind of assistance is that encouraging fishers to bring in larger catches contributes to unsustainable fishing practices over the long-term.

Rashid Sumaila of the University of British Columbia and his co-authors improved upon previous estimates of global subsidies using updated data and methodology and calculated global amounts and types of fisheries subsidies for 2003.
They found global subsidies totaled roughly $27 billion, 60 percent of which went toward unsustainable capacity-enhancing subsidies. Instead of continuing to invest billions of dollars into activities that aggravate overfishing, the authors suggest directing those funds toward fishery conservation and improved management.
This Pew Ocean Science Series report is a summary of the scientists’ findings.

And there's more evidence, e.g this report by the WWF, this remarkable and shocking interactive map by Fishsubsidy and these recent statements by Maria Damanaki.

So, can we save the oceans by eliminating all subsidies?
It sure looks like a beginning - maybe. Alas, the more I try to explore the topic of global fisheries, the more I come to realize that the issue is unbelievably multifaceted and that there are no quick fixes and out of the box solutions - incidentally very much confirming my visceral unease about the strategies, or lack of, adopted in the Doha debacle!

Take the fisheries for Tuna.
It interests me insofar as it is well researched and documented and mutatis mutandis, in many ways an excellent proxy for the fisheries for Sharks. Prima vista, and like in the case of Sharks, the situation appears crystal clear: one Asian villain is enticing the fishermen to fish a species into extinction.
But then, I stumble across this remarkable (and probably accurate) in depth exposé and read with consternation that it is none other than the so much reviled Japan that is urging a reduction in world wide quotas of Tuna, demanding better management and actively combating (yes this would again be Maria!) illegal, unreported and unregulated catches! Not plausible? Independent verification here, and here is the synopsis of the whole investigative report!
So who is the villain now - maybe these people?

Long story short: it is complicated - that being a massive understatement!
If you really have the time to spare, please read this latest document by the FAO. It brims with detail and the more one reads, the more one gets a picture of the massive scope and inter-dependency (check out the graph on p. 101!) of global Tunas fisheries.
Here are the Conclusions.

Most of the RFMO conventions define MSY as the reference point for stock management. Under such definition, almost all the world’s tuna stocks are nearly fully exploited and some are overexploited. Some of the stocks which are not yet overexploited are being overfished (i.e. fishing mortality is higher than the level corresponding to MSY).
Therefore, it is a crucial time to establish proper management of the stocks and to thus decide the future of tuna resources.

The sustainable use of the stocks is crucial for the industry.
The most serious difficulty in management is the increasing fishing capacity compared to the available stocks. Therefore, in terms of proper management, global control of fishing capacity, not only that of industrial fisheries but also of small-scale coastal fisheries, is the key to success. There are many options for holding fishing mortality at a proper level, such as catch quotas, effort control, time-area closures, size limits and many others. However, all of these will be very difficult to agree upon in an international forum as long as there is an excess of fishing capacity.

Up until the end of the twentieth century, the tuna fishing industry was singly focused on how to increase efficiencies in fishing, processing and trading in order to increase profit.
Under current circumstances, consideration of ecosystems and the sustainability of both target and non-target species, as well as many other socio-economic factors (such as rising costs of fuel and labour and strict regulations on industrial waste discharges and emissions) are necessary. Sometimes these considerations result in an increase in cost and a decrease in efficiency for the industry.

Over the past several decades consumers have enjoyed a constant increase in fish supply and the ready availability of low-priced products, but now they must also assume the increased production costs associated with the factors listed above.
This scenario is analogous to that of a pie that has already expanded dramatically to its maximum, but for which the number of pie consumers (i.e. fishers) has also increased and is still increasing.

At present, the most important issue is how to manage the number of potential pie consumers and how to distribute the pie among them (e.g. using fishing capacity control measures and/or catch allocations).
This problem involves many complicated aspects including allocations between developed and/or distant water fishing nations and coastal and/or developing countries, among fishing gears, and between products (e.g. fresh fish versus canned fish).

As shown in this report, the industry has shown great changes at all stages in response to a variety of socio-economic factors, while management has remained focused on the biology of individual stocks.

When the tuna industry is as complicated as it is now (interaction among species, fishing gear types, areas, products and consumers, and individual country’s economic situations), then management needs also to be realistic and practical to succeed.
For example, if the maximum biological gain is to be the goal, all tuna should be taken at the size where biomass is maximized (see Section 4.2.7) assuming that the spawner-recruitment relationship is not affected by catching fish at this critical level. However, if we try to do this, the production cost would be far more than current cost (i.e. most of the fish would have to be taken by longline and the effort would thus need to be increased by up to tenfold over the current level). Even then, the resulting products may not meet the markets’ demands (e.g. too costly or too large for canning).

The current share of catches, mix of fisheries, status of stocks, and structure of industries and market, in short, the current landscape of the industry in all its complexity has been formed through the balance of all these bio- and socio-economic conditions and factors.
There is no doubt that a slight change in one segment can alter the balance substantially. For example, as seen recently, an increase in fuel prices had a major effect on fishing grounds, target species, relative profitability among fisheries and product types and, in the end, the retail price of various products.

Understanding the entire tuna industry is critically important for proper management.
Also, it is now time to solve the allocation problem (including all types of allocations such as allocation of TAC among countries, products and fisheries), and to approach it through established principles rather than leaving it up to ad hoc balancing of bio- and socio-economic factors.

Although this report has covered many aspects of the economic and social importance of tuna fisheries, it could not go into detail on the relative importance of the industry to the many different states involved in it. This kind of research would need not only to examine the states’ economic characteristics but also their sociological characteristics including culture and eating habits. This important aspect of the allocation issue remains a rich and essential field of research for the future.

See where I'm coming from?
This is not gonna be fixed tomorrow - but having said this, there is progress!
And to the doomsayers among you: do not forget this!

It is not too late - not for the Tuna and not for the Sharks!

PS I love sparring with Patric!
His visual representation illustrates perfectly the exact opposite of where I'm coming from, ie local as opposed to global extinctions. In fact, the Northern Bluefin is already extinct in the Black Sea and Caspian Sea. But contrary to those enclosed bodies, the Atlantic is a mighty big piece of real estate. Tuna will become commercially extinct long, long before we will manage to wipe out the last stocks - especially if those subsidies get cut (and they will!) and the fight against IUU gets traction.
Again, the track record is unequivocable!

Maltese Shenanigans

Gone - probably forever .

Joe Borg sure talks the talk.

His assessment of the Achievements by the EU Fisheries Commission he heads proudly claims this.

Sustainability
Achieving sustainability in biological, economic and social fields has been an ongoing challenge. The basis of the Commission’s work has been to regain a sustainable resource base to allow EU fishermen to secure a viable future. This will also be a crucial objective for the European consumer whose expectations for healthy and sustainably-caught fish products are ever increasing.

a) Ecological sustainability
In order to put fisheries onto a firmer sustainable footing, the 2002 reform of the CFP foresaw a move from a short-term approach towards long term plans for major stocks in EU waters.
These plans include a number of provisions for conservation measures aimed at preventing fi sh stocks from being overexploited and restoring them to levels that can produce maximum sustainable yield. These measures seek to avoid that the pressures of fishing activities targeting certain stocks jeopardise the reproductive capacity of the stocks concerned or puts them at risk of collapsing. A number of such plans have already been established whilst others are expected to be adopted by the end of 2009.

Over the past five years the Commission has adopted ten long term plans for the following important stocks:
• Northern hake from the Bay of Biscay to the North Sea
• Southern hake off the Iberian Peninsula
• Nephrops off the Iberian Peninsula
• Plaice and sole in the North Sea
• Sole in the western Channel
• Sole in the Bay of Biscay
• Cod in the Kattegat, North Sea, Skagerrak eastern Channel,West of Scotland and Irish Sea
• Cod in the Baltic Sea
• Herring in the West of Scotland Sea
• Bluefin tuna

Although the Commission is still far from extending the coverage of such plans to all European fisheries, an irreversible framework for better stock management, which will form the basis of our future action, has been set. There has been a definite change in the mind-set of policy planners and stakeholders who now make the request to have such plans developed in the interest of putting both the stocks and operators that live off these stocks on a surer footing

Well well, all very impressive indeed!

But how about walking the walk?
Like all of the apex predators in the Atlantic, the Atlantic Bluefin Tuna is all but gone and the EU is seriously contemplating having the species listed under Appendix I of CITES.
Finally!

If backed, this would result in an effective trading ban for all CITES members.
It would also effectively remove the issue from the direct control of the EU and its increasingly controversial Fisheries Commissioner who attempts to procrastinate further by asking for the usual "more data" - a scam that even game fishermen (!) decry.
What part, exactly, of Biologically Extinct does Joe not understand???

Thing is, Borg hails from Malta and the Maltese are obviously not amused, as the ban would apparently jeopardize the livelihood of the majority of their fishermen. As always with fisheries politics, it's the Tragedy of the Commons pure and simple: never mind the the consequences - as long as you can continue to reap and pillage!
And guess who's responsible for the drastic decline in stocks in the first place!

Malta is a major operator of Tuna pens.
As Greenpeace puts it, fishers corral schools of half-grown tuna and tow them in floating pens to marine ranches where they are fed and fattened until they can be killed and shipped to Japan.
There are rules banning fishing fleets from taking undersize tuna out of the Mediterranean, but none that prevent catching immature tuna and fattening them in floating pens. Every country on the Mediterranean (except Israel) takes advantage of this loophole and maintains tuna ranches offshore. The fishers from Spain, France, Italy, Greece, Turkey, Cyprus, Croatia, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco and Malta are capturing half-grown tuna by the hundreds of thousands.
If you had to design a way to guarantee the decimation of a breeding population, this would be it: catch the fish before they are old enough to breed and keep them penned up until they are killed.

On top of that, existing fish farms have harmed the environment, polluting coastal ecosystems and putting additional pressure on wild fish populations by spreading disease and toxic chemicals. According to our friend Alex, the Maltese farms spread a diabolical stench and have already led to the pollution of several beaches and the demise of several of Malta's premier dive sites.

Borg's term is due to expire at the end of this year and Malta would have to re-nominate him.
Will he once again pander to his constituency - or will he see the light and ensure that his legacy will include having turned around the fate of the Mediterranean's most iconic predator?

Call me a defeatist - but I remain skeptical.
"Europe" being "Europe", the decision by the the Commission is yet again a compromise inasmuch as the ban will be subject to the "latest assessment" by the International Convention on the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas. So far, ICCAT's track record in terms of conservation has been nothing short of ignominious and there's no reason to assume that they will not try their very best to have the ban stalled or revoked altogether.

Believe it or not, this table dates back to 2001!

Fingers crossed that I'm wrong!

Dolphin-safe Tuna - epic Post!

Once again, huge kudos to David!

He continues to expose the smoke & mirrors that is Dolphin-safe Tuna.
Having expanded on his previous award-winning post, this is as crystal clear as it gets, and great reading on top of it. Extremely well researched and brilliantly formulated, it is also highly thought provoking as it sheds light on the complexity of conservation where nothing is just simply black or white and everything is interconnected.

There are no simple solutions here.
Like it or not, humans will continue to consume animal protein and satisfying that demand will always come at a cost, and any viable solutions will always have to be pragmatic compromises. Amid a multitude of bad alternatives, the best ones will be those focusing on long term sustainability and adequate management measures. This also implies a commitment to preserving biodiversity as a whole rather than attributing special status to selected pet species.

As David writes
A conscious choice to go back to a previously-banned fishing method that kills large numbers of charismatic animals puts a bad taste in my mouth, but the fact is that fishing for dolphin-associated schools of tuna catches primarily non-endangered dolphins and adult tuna. Dolphin-safe tuna fishing is killing dozens of species, many of whom are endangered, and threatening the integrity of entire ecosystems.
The old way may be the better of two bad choices.

Totally agree!
With one caveat: are we really unable to develop techniques allowing us to segregate among the bottom-oriented Tuna and the surface-oriented Dolphins when catching Dolphin-associated Tuna?
Really?

Almadraba!

Are those Bluefin Tuna?

What a joke - one picture truly IS worth a thousand words!

I found the one on top here, and you can read more about what's going on in this short article.
The big commercial purse seiners are fishing the Tuna to extinction, and one of the symptoms is the fact that the big Fish are gone and that the fishermen are now killing mere minnows, barely sexually mature animals that are thus removed from the breeding stock long before having made any meaningful contribution.

This is how Bluefin Tuna look like!

And this is a Spanish Almadraba, or Mattanza in Sicily, in the old days.
Just look at the size of those beasts!



Shocked by the blood?
No, this is not The Cove for the Bluefin Tuna.
Apart from being a millenarian tradition, this is fully sustainable - and if this and other artisanal fisheries were the only harvesting techniques, and if they could finally stop the poachers, and if those subsidies were to be finally cut and if they would finally shut down those horrible Tuna farms, the Atlantic Bluefin Tuna would have a real chance of rebounding, even now at this very late stage.
Yes, I know I know - but I remain hopeful.

Of course, this is merely one example.
Everywhere, we are emptying the Ocean, catching ever smaller Fish and fishing down the food web. Here's an excellent PSA by Shifting Baselines depicting the result - and no, that's a 2 foot Blue, not a Mako.



Anyway, food for thought.
Back to the Sharks!

Greenpeace - promoting sustainably caught Tuna!

Coles Tuna - after hand-caught now FAD-free!

Bravo Greenpeace and Coles!

Coles Australia will only buy sustainably caught, i.e. FAD-free and pole-and-line caught Tuna by 2015. This is the latest in a series of big Australian supermarket chains to do so - good overview here.

And for you Dolphin-huggers.

FAD-free Tuna from the Western Pacific is also largely Dolphin-safe because this is about  Skipjack and South Pacific Albacore that do not associate with Dolphins - and even if it were Yellowfin, those from the Western Pacific  don't generally associate with Dolphins like in the Eastern Pacific.

Regarding the latter, if you have not already done so, I urge you to read David's epic posts on the matter - and if you have, read them again! :)

Incidentally and contrary to the Bigeye, both the Western Pacific Skipjack and SP Albacore are not currently being overfished - great overview here and more resources here.

But I'm digressing as always.

What I wanted to say is, helping to establish sustainable brands and markets is smart conservation - and as the market grows, the sustainably caught Tuna does not even have to cost more than the conventional one!

Everybody wins - the consumers, the Tuna, the bycatch species and ultimately the fishermen who can look forward to long term income!

Please do listen to this stellar interview.

Nathaniel Pelle is an oceans campaigner at Greenpeace Australia Pacific and he comes across as extremely well informed, fact-based, pragmatic and thus compelling.

Great stuff that also sheds a cold light on the appalling shenanigans happening within the WCPFC.

Now.

Is this a good thing, or what!

And if so, why is everybody so adamantly against doing the same for Sharks - for the meat and for the fins?

Please give it some thought - seriously!

Because in reality, it would be the exact same thing!

Tuna Wars in the Pacific!

Southern Bluefin - now revealed as being Critically Endangered!

I still don't quite know what happened at the WCPFC meeting.
Probably nothing to be too happy about, if this wail by Greenpeace is anything to go by.

But then again, that's just what Greenpeace do.
They have decided to take on the Tuna industry, have published at least one rather good overview and post a lot of videos, of which the following is a more moderate example whereas this one is an unmitigated messaging disaster.



The industry is not taking it laying down.
It has countered with it's own anti-Greenpeace website and with polished videos like this one.



Personally, I find all of this rather unbecoming and little goal oriented.
If one remained rational, both sides should be able to cooperate as they should be striving for the same outcome, i.e. long term sustainability. But such is the nature of those fights: fishermen over-fish and NGOs over-dramatize and I'll certainly leave it at that.

Luckily, we don't have to care all too much.
Ultimately, neither Greenpeace nor the for Tuna fishing industry have any say in this - those who take the decisions are the members of the WCPFC.
But here is the bad news: the membership is not being limited to the owners of the resource, i.e. the countries within the boundaries of the area covered by the convention but has instead been extended to the notorious resource pillagers like Europe (=Spain!!!), the US, Japan, Taiwan and China. Can somebody please explain why those countries are being allowed to arrogate themselves the right to decide about the resources that do not belong to them? Is that the dark side of development aid?
The bad news is also, that this particular convention (Art.20) mandates decisions by consensus or failing that, by a complicated 3/4 majority, meaning that positive change is painfully hard to come by and can always be blocked by one of those countries that are not members of the Pacific Islands Forum.
The good news? The member states are free to legislate further-reaching measures within their territories, and the PNA have done just that, and this very much in favor of sustainability, and are now calling the big fishing nations to task, as do the more forward thinking and pragmatic NGOs - alas probably in vain.

Long story short?
As always, it is terribly complicated and I'm sure that I'm missing the finer points. Where I am coming from in this particular debate is that I certainly advocate preserving the Pacific's vibrant and profitable commercial fishing industry as a vital contribution to the islands' economies, this however strictly under the following guidelines.

• the absolute need to focus on sustainability in order to preserve the industry for generations to come - and by this, I mean sustainability in the widest possible sense, very much taking into consideration issues like bycatch and other more general impacts on the ecosystem, etc
  
• the absolute requirement to apply the precautionary approach (Article 6) whenever there is a debate
• and like I said before, I believe that it is high time that the burden of proof be changed so that it would be the comparatively wealthy fishing industry having to invest the resources into science and monitoring and prove that what they do is sustainable, and not the cash-strapped authorities having to prove that it is not.
• And if I really, really had it my way: I would tell those foreign fleets to just fuck off and those countries, to buy their Tuna from the Pacific Islands who own them!
  

But most urgently, those destructive practices must go.
The FADs are an ecological disaster, and I strongly invite you to read David's posts here and here and educate yourselves about just how bad they are. Seriously, read them: talk about an emotional initiative by the Dolphin geeks gone horribly wrong! And the long lining industry could do much better by finally adopting the various options for bycatch mitigation as e.g. mandated by the MSC - and incidentally, catch more Tuna in the process!

And to end this on a positive note.
This is completely bycatch-free, stunningly filmed by my pal Richard Wollocombe.
Enjoy!



PS interesting article shedding some light on the negotiations here!
PS2 Pew synopsis, finally, here!
PS3 Tuna fishing ban lifted - remember?

Told you so!

Didn't I!

The Ozzies were clearly too naïvely optimistic: Trust the Europeans to eff it up at the very last minute!
The guys didn't even wait to look at the "latest assessment" by the ICCAT as originally announced but have already decided to drop the demand to have the critically endangered Northern Bluefin Tuna listed under CITES I.

The instigators of this turn-about: Malta and Spain!
And who's surprised!

Remember the Turbot War?
Having contributed to the demise of the Canadian Cod Fisheries and cleaned out the Atlantic (shocking study here!) in general and the Mediterranean in particular, the Spanish Fisheries are now poaching Tuna in the South Pacific. And in case you wondered why a Shark conservation blog would bother to rant about the plight of the Tuna, read this: yes Spain is now one of the principal suppliers of Shark fins! Sharks may have been mere bycatch once - but now, Spanish fishing boats are specifically targeting them and finning them "clandestinely", meaning that everybody knows but nobody does anything about it!

As to Malta, what can I say.
Meet George Pullicino (standing next to Maltese European Fisheries Commissioner Borg in this pic), the big (!) honcho in charge of Fisheries - and apparently, as pro-Fish-killing and anti-Conservation as they get!
On his "watch", Malta's fishing industry is progressing from fishy to fishier to outright brazen.

Talking of which, the latest scandalous development is George's blatant ignoring (as in deleting of e-mails, unopened) of the pleas by our friend Alex to stop the indiscriminate slaughter of the Med's last Angel Sharks, a genus which is protected under European Law.
Fortunately, the matter is likely to be resolved, as Alex now disposes of a letter by the European Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries stating that
...angel sharks are to be released whenever caught in all EU waters and may not be retained on board. This is clearly stated in Annex III (point 19) of our Fishing opportunities Regulation for 2009 (EC No 43/2009). The pictures you show are clearly an evidence of non compliance on this provision.
and signed by César Deben, Director - in the name of Borg!
It couldn't be more unequivocal than that!
Kudos to Alex! And shame on George!
We shall be watching!

But back to the Tuna.
The proposal by the Commission was defeated by an unholy alliance of Mediterranean Countries comprising the two ring leaders and Greece and Cyprus. And France, another one of the notorious quota violators who came back on their word! And Italy, equally guilty!
Yes that would be a paltry six nations, many of which culpable of multiple violations of current Law, blocking a proposal that is supported by a overwhelming majority of twenty-one!
Don't we just love Federalism!

I read that apparently, Monday's move postpones a decision on whether to place bluefin tuna on an endangered species list. EU environment ministers are now expected to reach a final position by the end of the year.

Promises promises.
We shall be watching!

WCPFC - fail!

Dirty business. Source. Click for detail.

Nothing good to report from the WCPFC meeting in Apia.

Once again, it has been business as usual.

The depleted Tuna are getting no reprieve despite of reasonable recommendations by Pew and the WWF.  And the dirty politics have continue unabated, with the distant water fleet nations Europe, China, the United States, South Korea, Japan and Taiwan once again refusing to enter into meaningful dialogue and effectively stalling any progress.

And  the Sharks?

There, the outcome has simply been ridiculous. 

Instead of tackling the huge problem of Shark bycatch on Tuna longlines by finally banning both those Shark lines and the use of wire leaders, it is now only forbidden to use them simultaneously.

WTF!

And now?

The leveraging of their development aid by those distant water fleet nations continues to be a huge problem - but slowly slowly, the Pacific nations are recognizing that they need to take matters in their own hands if they don't want to end up losing their most precious resource. The PNA continues to be at the forefront of Tuna management, and their Vessel Day Scheme is reputed to be highly efficient whilst also being highly lucrative. And to my great satisfaction, Fiji has signed the Tokelau Arrangement that will hopefully put the management of the more Southerly Tuna fisheries back into the hands of the real resource owners - and I may add, not a minute too late, read this very interesting report!

So, here's to progress.

Yes it is frustratingly slow - and whilst the parties continue to dither, Tuna stocks continue to decline. But at least there's the hope that one day, things will really start improving.

Fingers crossed!

November!

Graphic by Pew - click for detail.

It's that time of the year again!
ICCAT is meeting in Istanbul, the economy is still fucked, actually probably more than ever, and consequently, my hopes remain dim, at least when it comes to the Tuna (read this!).
The good people at Pew have produced an excellent report (do download and read the PdF!) that illustrates how widespread IUU in the Mediterranean (under- and non reporting, poaching, fraud and the illegal use of drift nets by the Italians, etc) has led to total catches of at least double the official quotas.

Not into reading?
Here's what I'm talking about - and remember this post?
Watch out for the puny tuna coming out of the hold - shocking!



And what about the Sharks?
In comparison to the Tuna, they are not really of any economic importance and consequently, I remain hopeful that ICCAT will decide something positive, be it only to distract from what I fear will be another fiasco for the Tuna - or do you really believe that in this economy and amid those political upheavals, Berlusconi is going to direct the police to go and arrest those poaching fishermen!

Take a look at the recommendations by Pew.
As always, they are totally well researched and make total sense - and as always, I fear, they will not be heeded. I however remain hopeful for Shark protection, tho fully protecting the Porbeagle that is a food fish is probably going to be ambitious. A moratorium and then, strictly monitored and enforced (I know I know...) science based quotas like suggested for the Mako would certainly be a good step in the right direction. And the fin removal ban clause would be really nice and does not look impossible at all.
There's of course much more to do - see the recommendations by the Shark Alliance!

And what about ending the overfishing of the Tuna and Billfishes?
Hmmmmmmmm - but hope, as they say, springs eternal.

Best of luck to Pew - I know they're gonna try their best!

Whithout a Lobby

Back to the serious side of life and a timely post alerts me to the plight of the Bluefin Tuna.
It's a great piece and I invite you to go check it out and to follow the links.

Thing is, they are not alone.
Across all Oceans, all Apex Predators are on the verge of extinction and contrary to the Sharks that have finally attracted some advocacy, nobody seems to care much about the other species. Or is there really a grassroots Movement that lobbies against the extermination of the various Tuna and Marlin, the Broadbill and the like? Dunno, really, but I fear that the principal Organizations dealing with this topic are more likely concerning themselves with how to kill them in the most efficient, and just maybe, in the most "sustainable" way (often, not even that).

Am I boring you?
Is that maybe because contrary to the case of Sharks, our Western "Civilizations" are among the principal consumers, along with being some of the worst perpetrators?

We boast about having established "Dolphin-free" Tuna nets - but what about the Tuna?
Does their life carry less value, I mean ethically, than that of another very similar animal , the only difference being that we have chosen to eat one and not the other?

Do I hear "Sentient", maybe even "Extraterrestrial" , "Ambassadors" or "Matrix Energetics"?
Yeah right...

Sure, agree, one has to choose one's fights and mine is Saving Sharks.
Still, we need to keep an eye on this. Not only because of the problem with the bycatch but also, because all is interconnected anyway and the slaughter will impact oceanic Sharks in ways we may not yet know. Species Protection always equals Habitat Protection and the other Oceanic Predators are undoubtedly an integral part of the equation.

You may want to keep that in mind next time you decide to indulge in Maguro Sushi or vitello tonnato. Or Sharkfin Soup - because ethically, it's the exact same thing.

Hungry Oceans!

Quick-quick whilst I'm waiting for this and before the lights go out!

Do I hear a chuckle from Florida?
Yup it's only a Cat1, but here in the Friendly Islands, every power pole and inch of wiring has to be imported, so all according damages become public catastrophes.

And lengthy ones too: never forget the infamous Tonga Time!

But back to the actual topic.
Turns out that we're not only directly obliterating the Ocean's Apex Predators, we're starving them, too!
Read the following and download the Report!
No more Pizza Napoli!

New Oceana Report Shows Depletion of Prey Fish may be Starving the Oceans
03 March 2009

Rome - Scientists are finding evidence of widespread malnutrition in commercial and recreational fish, marine mammals, and seabirds because of the global depletion of the small fish they need to survive, according to Oceana's new report, "Hungry Oceans: What Happens When the Prey is Gone?" These "prey fish" underpin marine food webs and are being steadily exhausted by heavy fishing, increasing demand for aquaculture feed, and climate change.

"We have caught all the big fish and now we are going after their food," said Margot Stiles, marine scientist at Oceana. "Until recently it has been widely believed that prey fish are impossible to overexploit because their populations grow so quickly. We are now proving that untrue as the demands of commercial fisheries and aquaculture outpace the ocean's ability to provide food for us and itself."

Hungry Oceans finds that 7 of the top 10 fisheries in the world target prey fish.
These fisheries have emerged as populations of bigger fish have become overexploited and depleted. The report concludes that the impacts of fishing activity over the past decades has been so great that the nearly all prey fisheries now cannot withstand increased fishing pressure. Hungry Oceans also finds that aquaculture is increasingly the driver behind overfishing of prey fish, as salmon, tuna and other carnivorous farmed fish become the fastest growing seafood products in the world. Changing ocean temperatures and currents caused by climate change also make prey fish populations more vulnerable.

Hungry Oceans coincides with the release today of the biennial State of the World Fisheries and Aquaculture report by the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The FAO concludes that 80% of all marine fish stocks are currently fully exploited, overexploited, depleted, or recovering from depletion; including stocks of the 7 largest prey fisheries. Very few marine fish populations remain with the potential to sustain production increases, and more have now reached their limit than ever before.

Impacts

The future of valuable commercial and recreational fisheries is threatened by the loss of prey fish, especially those that are currently rebuilding from historic depletion. Hungry Oceans identifies bluefin tuna, striped bass, Pacific salmon, and Pacific halibut as key species dependent on prey fish.

"We're constantly making life difficult for endangered species from seabirds to whales, and going hungry is not going to help. Valuable fish like bluefin tuna are struggling, and we can't expect the fishery to recover when we are stealing their food supply. By taking food from the tuna we could end up hungry ourselves" said Stiles.

Marine mammals and seabirds also depend on access to prey fish for their daily survival and for their young, including blue whales, humpback whales, penguins, and terns. Even species protected under national and international laws are experiencing food shortages.

Solutions

More responsible management is needed to prevent predators from going hungry.
Hungry Oceans proposes a series of measures including a moratorium on new fisheries targeting prey species, conservative catch limits for existing fisheries, first priority for the needs of ocean predators, and stopping fishing for prey in predator breeding hotspots.

"Fisheries managers simply take prey for granted despite their critical role in the ecosystem," said Stiles. "We need to act responsibly when taking prey from natural predators, with our eyes open to the consequences for the ocean and for our own supply of seafood."

Conservation Conundrums

Two apparently different topics dominate the headlines.

One one side you have the battle to protect the Whales.
Much loved and even glorified, they are at the center of a bitter feud that has led to the collapse of the latest Whaling Conference. Once nearly extinct, some species have miraculously come back from the brink, to the point that some Countries want to resume hunting them - and actually do, often in very unethical ways. The anti-whaling activists are dead set against it and the fight is turning increasingly violent.



On the other side you have the ongoing decline of the Tuna.
Everybody wants to eat them and stocks have been depleted to the point where many species are severely threatened and the Northern Bluefin Tuna is all but extinct. Once romanticized as some kind of heroic feat by intrepid fishermen, the killing is increasingly depicted as what it really is, the extermination of a species.



Whereas the Fisheries Agencies are finally trying to limit the catches, the fishermen have started to fight back as their existence is being threatened. Once again, violence is on the rise.

But really, these are just two examples of the same conundrum.
I've blogged about it a while ago when talking about the Shark fin industry: in order to protect the animals we love, we will have to accept that some of them are killed.

What I'm talking about is sustainable fishing.
Provided that the stocks are sufficiently plentiful (or after a moratorium, once we have allowed them to recover), we will have to accept a compromise: in exchange for agreeing to preserve the species, fishermen will have to be allowed to harvest sustainable quotas.

If that is true - and assuming that ethically speaking, all life has the same value regardless of personal preferences (and assumed cognitive faculties, etc.)

• some species of Tuna can probably be harvested sustainably. Other species, like the Northern Bluefin should be fully protected until stocks replenish (tho from what I hear, it may already be too late)
• some species of Shark can probably be harvested sustainably. Other species like the Hammerheads (please read the link) should be fully protected.
• most probably, the same applies to the Cetaceans where the populations of some Dolphins and e.g. Minke Whales appear quite robust, whilst other species warrant full protection.

Do I like it? Hell, No!

But pragmatically speaking, it's probably the only way forward - as long as we cannot curb the demand . And when it comes to Sharks and Tuna, chances for that are very slim indeed.

The sooner we accept that, the sooner we will work towards achieving tangible and hopefully, long lasting results - which is ultimately the only thing that counts.

Gone

I've followed my own advice and browsed the Website of The End of the Line.
Kudos to the authors for having followed up by posting a lot of pertinent information.

There's a really interesting News section and that's where I learned that the Atlantic , or Northern Bluefin Tuna is all but gone. Roberto Mielgo Bregazzi has researched the topic and I invite everybody to read this shocking synopsis of his findings. Nothing new really, but what had been depicted as imminent in 2006, 2007 and 2008 has apparently eventuated - basically, it's over.

Barring a miracle that is - but alas, I'm not hopeful.
The very much not aptly named International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT) has only one track record - and that is, to continue applying unsustainable quotas despite all evidence pointing to the imminent catastrophe. It's the bloody same farce every time they meet: politicians and functionaries trying to "negotiate" against scientific facts - last time in November where they didn't adopt the recommendations by their own scientists and then managed to congratulate themselves for the fiasco!

Want to know the full extent of the debacle - involving mismanagement, fraud and piracy?
Read this!

Like in the case of Sharks, we are faced with a supply limited fisheries with zero price elasticity where the Tragedy of the Commons is preventing any useful consensus about applying sustainable quotas, let alone a fishing moratorium where stocks would be allowed to replenish. Contrary to Sharks which are extremely slow breeders, Tuna reach sexual maturity between 3 and 5 years and such a strategy could really lead to positive results within a comparatively short period of time.

Alas, it's not likely to happen.
The policy makers will continue to drag their feet and Bluefin Tuna will become a prized delicacy for the rich, then the very rich and finally, only the select few.
And then, it'll be gone for good. Forever.

Oh well.
Back to the Sharks.

Dolphin-safe Tuna - Video!

Talking about David.

Two of his most memorable posts are his award-winning The ecological disaster that is dolphin safe tuna and Dolphin-safe tuna: conservation success story or ecological disaster?.
Please do read them.

Enter Greenpeace.
They are tackling unsustainable practices within the Tuna industry, and FADs are one of them. Now, they have released this whistle-blower video showing the revolting prectice of purse seining around FADs.

Required viewing!

Fishing for Tuna

Photo: Jonathan Clay

I don't like preaching to the choir.
So, no I'm not about to bore you with yet another larmoyant piece about the decline of global Tuna stocks. Anybody interested in Marine Conservation knows that anyway.

But if you should be the exception, you can read about the status of the various Tuna fisheries here.
As you should know, CITES is meeting in Doha and, among other things, deciding about the fate of the Northern Bluefin. The situation is unequivocal (pdf here!) but alas, I'm not holding my breath that the news will be good as the Japanese are already engaging in the usual shenanigans and the Europeans are still not playing their role despite the fact that it is very much their own fisheries which are at risk of disappearing forever.

But enough pontificating.
Why I'm writing this post is because I want to showcase another one of Jon's stellar video clips, this time about pole & line fishing for Skipjack.
This is one of the more selective and thus, more sustainable techniques, very much unlike the widespread usage of the devastating method of purse seining.

So, without further ado: unbelievable images and fantastic messaging!
Enjoy!

Pole & line Tuna Fishing from Jonathan Clay on Vimeo.