You Are Here:
Dawn breaks over the Pacific Ocean, seen from Korean longliner, Shin Yung 51. Yellowfin and big eye tuna stocks will be critically overfished by 2009 if overfishing continues unabated.
Enlarge image
The situation in the Pacific is different to what we'd been expecting.
There are no rusting unlicensed vessels packed with demoralised crews. Each of the vessels we’ve inspected has been
in good condition, the crew well fed and in good spirits.
Nonetheless they are pirates, operating in a grey area between the legal loopholes and lax governance.
Effective fisheries management requires:
Only then can scientists model the fish population accurately and have a chance of estimating how many target fish can be caught.
Establishing the Tuna Commission (WCPFC), in 2004, was the first step in effective Pacific tuna fisheries management. Tuna are highly migratory. They don't restrict themselves to the territorial waters of any one country. The Tuna Commission manages tuna as one fish stock even though it ranges over the territorial waters of multiple countries and the high seas (the parts of the ocean not under the jurisdiction of any country).
But it is impossible for the Tuna Commission to manage the fishery until it has accurate data on the size and health of each tuna species' population.
In the meantime:
Fishing regulation faces another problem - transhipping. When fish are transferred to a larger factory vessel (reefer) in port or in a country’s waters, it requires a licence. The transhipping is monitored so the Commission can record the catch numbers.
To reduce costs, many vessels tranship on the high seas. Currently, for longliners, this is not illegal.
Fixing these governance and legal loopholes is not rocket science. All that’s needed is agreement from all members of the Tuna Commission and some money to set up and enforce the system.
The near empty hold of the Korean longliner Dong Won 117. The vessel has been at sea for 13 months without making any port calls, calling into doubt the captains claims that the vessel has not made any transhipments since it left its home port of Busan, Republic of Korea.
Transhipment in the high seas is made easier by lax regulations around refuelling and resupplying (bunkering) at sea. Most Pacific Island countries allow vessels to bunker in their territorial waters. Others bunker on the high seas. If bunkering at sea is banned, vessels would need to go to port every month, where authorities could monitor their catches. This would also provide revenue for the host Pacific Island country with port fees and resupply contracts.
Distant fishing nations licence fees need to reflect the market value of the fish and the cost of protecting the fishery. Right now, they don't. When this happens, Pacific Island countries (most relying heavily on fishing licenses for revenue) can collectively demand fair licence fees.
In the Pacific, up to $528 million worth of fish is stolen by pirate fishing each year, more than four times what the region earns in licences. This reflects the low cost of licences rather than the extent of pirate fishing in the region.
With these loopholes closed, catch figures and population sizes could be more accurately recorded. Then the Tuna Commission could set realistic catch quotas for tuna. To save Pacific tuna from commercial extinction, this step must be taken.
In December, 2006, Greenpeace will taking the findings from our Pacific expedition to the Tuna Commission’s annual meeting.
We will recommend measures that ensure:
Nonetheless they are pirates, operating in a grey area between the legal loopholes and lax governance.
Listen to the Pirates in the Pacific documentary (5 mins duration)
Saving the Pacific fisheries
Effective fisheries management requires:
- accurate estimates of the size of the target fish population
- knowledge of fish biology and history of the fish stock
- detailed knowledge of the technology used to find the fish.
Only then can scientists model the fish population accurately and have a chance of estimating how many target fish can be caught.
Establishing the Tuna Commission (WCPFC), in 2004, was the first step in effective Pacific tuna fisheries management. Tuna are highly migratory. They don't restrict themselves to the territorial waters of any one country. The Tuna Commission manages tuna as one fish stock even though it ranges over the territorial waters of multiple countries and the high seas (the parts of the ocean not under the jurisdiction of any country).
But it is impossible for the Tuna Commission to manage the fishery until it has accurate data on the size and health of each tuna species' population.
In the meantime:
- all fishing licences should be based on tonnage of fish caught, not time spent at sea, which was the case with vessels we boarded.
- licences need to be strictly enforced. During our Pacific expedition, we encountered vessels with lapsed licences that were renewed without penalty via a phone call.
Listen to the Catching the Pirates documentary (5 mins duration)
Bait and switch
Fishing regulation faces another problem - transhipping. When fish are transferred to a larger factory vessel (reefer) in port or in a country’s waters, it requires a licence. The transhipping is monitored so the Commission can record the catch numbers.
To reduce costs, many vessels tranship on the high seas. Currently, for longliners, this is not illegal.
Fixing these governance and legal loopholes is not rocket science. All that’s needed is agreement from all members of the Tuna Commission and some money to set up and enforce the system.
The near empty hold of the Korean longliner Dong Won 117. The vessel has been at sea for 13 months without making any port calls, calling into doubt the captains claims that the vessel has not made any transhipments since it left its home port of Busan, Republic of Korea.
Transhipment in the high seas is made easier by lax regulations around refuelling and resupplying (bunkering) at sea. Most Pacific Island countries allow vessels to bunker in their territorial waters. Others bunker on the high seas. If bunkering at sea is banned, vessels would need to go to port every month, where authorities could monitor their catches. This would also provide revenue for the host Pacific Island country with port fees and resupply contracts.
The cost of a pirate
Distant fishing nations licence fees need to reflect the market value of the fish and the cost of protecting the fishery. Right now, they don't. When this happens, Pacific Island countries (most relying heavily on fishing licenses for revenue) can collectively demand fair licence fees.
In the Pacific, up to $528 million worth of fish is stolen by pirate fishing each year, more than four times what the region earns in licences. This reflects the low cost of licences rather than the extent of pirate fishing in the region.
With these loopholes closed, catch figures and population sizes could be more accurately recorded. Then the Tuna Commission could set realistic catch quotas for tuna. To save Pacific tuna from commercial extinction, this step must be taken.
What next?
In December, 2006, Greenpeace will taking the findings from our Pacific expedition to the Tuna Commission’s annual meeting.
We will recommend measures that ensure:
- all catch figures are reported
- loopholes in the VMS are closed
- all transhipments and bunkering at sea are outlawed
Summary of Greenpeace joint surveillance in the Pacific Ocean
Read the report: Making sure our tuna will be there (full report)
