Internet Guide to International Fisheries Law

Home

  

 Reporter: April 2002 No. 11

The North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission: Recent Developments 

Kjartan Hoydal*

This article reviews recent developments in the North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC), focussing on the Meeting of the Working Group on the Future of NEAFC and the Extraordinary Meeting of the Commission, both of which took place in April 2002. At these meetings various issues were discussed, including IUU fishing, the development of a dispute settlement procedure, the provision of scientific advice and management measures for blue whiting.

At the 20th Annual Meeting of NEAFC held in November 2001, management measures were  agreed for three economically important fisheries in international waters - redfish, herring and mackerel. NEAFC’s Contracting Parties also agreed to put management measures in place for Rockall haddock before the end of the year and to meet in April 2002 to seek agreement on a sustainable management system for blue whiting.   NEAFC embarked on the process of putting in place measures to conserve fish species inhabiting deep waters in the Regulatory Area. The Working Group on the Appraisal of Regulatory Measures for  Deep Sea Species will meet in Bergen, Norway in June 2002.

NEAFC REGULATORY AREA: MANAGEMENT MEASURES FOR 2002

Contracting Parties/stocks AS Herring Redfish Mackerel Blue whiting
Denmark (FI/Greenland) 15,000 24,169

*)

No measures in place
European Community 15,000 13,883
*)

 24,400

Iceland 15,000 25,008

2,000

Norway 15,000 3,596

*)

Poland 1,500 1,000 1,400
Russian Federation 15,000 26,169 38,000
Cooperative quota - 1,175 600
Total  NEAFC Regulatory Area 76,500 95,000 66,400
NEAFC Convention Area
Total TAC  2002 853,000 95,000 694,000 ?
Total Catch levels  2000 1,200,000 127,000 667,650

1,400,000

*) 24,400 tonnes  limits the total catch of mackerel fished by  Denmark (in respect of Faroe Islands and Greenland) ,the EU and Norway in the NEAFC Regulatory Area

NEAFC adopted amendments to its Scheme of Control and Enforcement and agreed on rules admitting non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to meetings of the Commission. The 20th  Annual Meeting also decided to put some questions to the Working Group on the Future of NEAFC and call an Extraordinary Meeting of the Commission to decide on management measures for blue whiting.

The Report of the Working Group on the Future of NEAFC

The Working Group had been asked to  prepare recommendations for the NEAFC Commission to consider on rules of procedure for dispute settlement, preventing and deterring Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported (IUU) fishing in accordance with the FAO  International Plan of Action, the issue of new entrants, the form of scientific advice and some internal matters.

At the Annual Meeting in November 2001 the Commission agreed in principle to put in place a system for dispute settlement.  It was also agreed that this should take the form of a change to the Convention and that the system should be applied on a provisional basis.  The Working Group made  recommendations to the Commission on the issues before it,  which were discussed at the Extraordinary Meeting of the Commission in April.

Blue whiting allocations still not agreed, but progress on other items by the coastal States

The coastal States for Blue Whiting and the Russian Federation worked very hard after the 20th  Annual Meeting of NEAFC in November 2001 to agree on all aspects of the management of blue whiting, thus making it possible for NEAFC to recommend management measures for its Regulatory Area. Negotiations continued at the Extraordinary Meeting.

At the Extraordinary Meeting, the coastal States for Blue Whiting and the Russian Federation informed the NEAFC Commission of the status of their negotiations. Agreement had been reached by the coastal States in December 2001 on a long-term management plan for the blue whiting stock, starting in 2003. This plan is based on advice from ICES and sets a minimum level for spawning stock biomass of 1.5 million tonnes, an upper limit to fishing mortality and requires action if the spawning stock biomass falls below 2.5 million tonnes. It also requires a reduction in juvenile catches of blue whiting.

However, no agreement has yet been reached on the - always difficult - question of the allocation of blue whiting catch possibilities between the parties.  The coastal States for Blue Whiting and the Russian Federation have notified NEAFC of their respective unilateral measures to limit blue whiting catches for 2002. It is estimated that these measures will reduce catch levels by around 20 per cent compared to 2001.

In the absence of agreements on a TAC for 2002 and the allocation of the TAC, the coastal States and the Russian Federation notified NEAFC of their respective unilateral measures to limit blue whiting catches for 2002.

The coastal States are, however, equally committed to reaching agreement on this issue as a matter of utmost urgency and have agreed to work towards intensifying negotiations in the coming months, with a view to a resolution of the matter before the autumn.   Unilaterally the coastal States and Russia have committed themselves to a 20 % reduction in catches in 2002 from 2001 catch levels.

Dispute Settlement 

Procedures for objections and dispute settlement have been discussed for some time in NEAFC. At the 20th Annual Meeting in November 2001 the NEAFC Commission had a detailed and thorough discussion  resulting in agreement to proceed on this important matter.

On 17 December 2001 the European Union, in line with this agreement, made a formal proposal to amend the NEAFC Convention so procedures for dispute settlement become an integral part of the Convention. Changes in the Convention take some considerable time and ratification procedures are also lengthy. The European Union, therefore, proposed that Contracting Parties should apply the amendments provisionally until they enter into force.

The Extraordinary Meeting agreed on  a proposal for rules of procedures for ad hoc panels in dispute settlements. This offers the opportunity to act speedily on disputes hindering sound management. These will be introduced if and when NEAFC goes ahead with changes to its Convention with respect to dispute settlement, which will be on the agenda for final decision at the 21st Annual Meeting in November 2002.

IUU  Fishing 

The NEAFC Commission discussed  the International Plan of Action (IPOA) on how to prevent and deter  Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated  Fishing agreed by FAO in 2001. An analysis undertaken by Norway  comparing NEAFC rules and the IPOA gave the following list of  items upon which NEAFC has to act.

  1. Port State Control: This matter has been mandated to NEAFC’s Permanent Committee on Control and Enforcement, PECCOE.
  2. The exchange of information on IUU fishing between regional Fisheries Management Organisations in the North Atlantic - NARFMOs (ICCAT, ISBFC, NAFO, NAMMCO, NASCO and NEAFC).
  3. New entrants: Discussion centred especially on Article 20 of the NEAFC Convention and whether it is in line with more recent developments in international law and real interest. In this context, the Commission also discussed indications to interested non-Contracting Parties of what they could expect if they join NEAFC. At present, Estonia and Lithuania have expressed such interest.

These issues will be on the agenda of  NEAFC’s Annual Meeting in November 2002.

Scientific advice

NEAFC receives scientific advice from ICES. A Memorandum of Understanding with ICES on these matters was reviewed and is due for  renewal in 2003. The Meeting stressed the need for providing timely, well researched, peer-reviewed and independent scientific advice. It also noted the increasing call for sustainable fisheries and application of the precautionary and ecosystem approach.

A point of recurrent discussion is the form of advice NEAFC receives and the division of labour between scientists and managers. In a note prepared by the NEAFC Secretariat the situation is described as follows:

“Ideally, the stages in making decisions on management measures would be:

Responsibility of scientists

  1. Acquiring data to undertake assessments of the fisheries to be managed
  2. Scientific assessment of the status of the stocks and fisheries involved and calculations of consequences of various management measures
  3. Peer review of the assessments ensuring scientific quality

Responsibility of management

  1. Stakeholder review of the assessments
  2. Interpretation and formulation of possible management options
  3. Decisions on management measures by appropriate authorities.

ICES at present supplies:

  1. basic stock status assessments made by the numerous Working
  2. ACFM scrutiny   of the assessments
  3. ACFM interpretation and formulation of possible management options,  based on specific requests from the managing authorities. ICES also is in the process of developing discussions on assessments with the fishing industry.

Over the last 20-25 years, scientists and managers have debated whether the advice given by scientists should be normative or explorative. Should scientists give definite advice or should they only give the stock status and consequences?  This also has a bearing on who actually formulates the requests for advice - managers or scientists.  These questions are especially important in information-heavy management systems, deriving TACs from on annual point estimates of fishing mortality and stock biomass.

The pendulum at the moment seems to have swung towards normative advice, although options are still generally requested.” 

The MoU with ICES will be on the agenda at the 21st  Annual Meeting in November 2002, but completion is not expected before April 2003.

Kjartan Hoydal
Secretary, North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission

Links

NEAFC website

Recent developments in regional fisheries organizations  
[2001] International Fisheries Bulletin, Focus, No. 23

NEAFC: First meeting of the Permanent Committee on Control and Enforcement (PECCOE)
[2001] International Fisheries Bulletin, Focus, No. 8

 

Internet Guide to International Fisheries Law


HOME ¦ TREATIES ¦ CASES ¦ ORGANIZATIONS ¦ DOCUMENTS ¦ REVIEW 
IFLPR JOURNAL ¦ NEWSLINK ¦ UPDATER ¦ PATHFINDER ¦ ANNOUNCEMENTS

Internet Guide to International Fisheries Law
Created by Christopher Hedley

Disclaimer, Copyright and Terms of Use
© OceanLaw and C. Hedley