Matthew Gianni Political and Policy Advisor Deep Sea Conservation Coalition

1. Review of the implementation of the UN GA agreement to protect deep-sea ecosystems on the high seas Matthew Gianni Political and Policy Advisor Deep Sea Conservation Coalition

3. UN GA negotiations 2006 ISSUES: Biodiversity, equity, sustainability, international law Various proposals, e.g. • Moratorium on bottom trawl fishing on the high seas • No bottom fishing in high seas areas not covered by RFMOs • Reverse burden of proof • Deadlines for implementation: mid 2007; end 2007

4. UN GA resolution 61/105 • Conduct impact assessments of individual bottom fishing activities to determine whether significant adverse impacts would occur • Establish conservation measures to prevent significant adverse impacts (SAIs) or not authorize bottom fishing to proceed • Close areas where vulnerable marine ecosystems (VMEs) are known or likely occur unless SAIs can be prevented

5. UN GA resolution 61/105 • Ensure the long-term sustainability of deep-sea fish stocks • Require vessels to move out of an area where VMEs are encountered during bottom fishing operations • Adopt and Implement measures by 31 December 2008 or else don’t authorize (prohibit) bottom fishing

6. Q & A • What is a VME? • How do we identify VMEs? • What is a SAI? • How do we conduct impact assessments to determine whether SAIs would occur? • How do we prevent SAIs?

7. UN FAO Guidelines: VMEs • i. Uniqueness or rarity – e.g : • habitats that contain endemic species; • habitats of rare, threatened or endangered species that occur only in discrete areas; or • nurseries or discrete feeding, breeding, or spawning areas. • ii. Functional significance of the habitat – discrete areas or habitats that are necessary for the survival, function, spawning/reproduction or recovery of fish stocks, particular life-history stages (e.g. nursery grounds or rearing areas), or of rare, threatened or endangered marine species.

8. UN FAO Guidelines: VMEs • iii. Fragility – an ecosystem that is highly susceptible to degradation by anthropogenic activities. • iv. Life-history traits of component species that make recovery difficult – ecosystems that are characterized by populations or assemblages of species with one or more of the following characteristics: • slow growth rates; • late age of maturity; • low or unpredictable recruitment; or • long-lived. v. Structural complexity – an ecosystem that is characterized by complex physical structures created by significant concentrations of biotic and abiotic features.

9. FAO Guidelines: SAIs • 17. Significant adverse impacts are those that compromise ecosystem integrity (i.e. ecosystem structure or function) in a manner that: (i) impairs the ability of affected populations to replace themselves; (ii) degrades the long-term natural productivity of habitats; or (iii) causes, on more than a temporary basis, significant loss of species richness, habitat or community types. Impacts should be evaluated individually, in combination and cumulatively.

10. UN FAO Guidelines: SAIs • 18. When determining the scale and significance of an impact, the following six factors should be considered: i. the intensity or severity of the impact at the specific site being affected; ii. the spatial extent of the impact relative to the availability of the habitat type affected; iii. the sensitivity/vulnerability of the ecosystem to the impact; iv. the ability of an ecosystem to recover from harm, and the rate of such recovery; v. the extent to which ecosystem functions may be altered by the impact; and vi. the timing and duration of the impact relative to the period in which a species needs the habitat during one or more life-history stages.

11. UN FAO Guidelines: SAIs • 19. Temporary impacts are those that are limited in duration and that allow the particular ecosystem to recover over an acceptable time frame. Such time frames should be decided on a case-by-case basis and should be in the order of 5-20 years, taking into account the specific features of the populations and ecosystems.

12. UN FAO Guidelines: Impact Assessments • Para 47: Impact assessment should address, inter alia: • i. type(s) of fishing conducted or contemplated, including vessels and gear-types, fishing areas, target and potential bycatch species, fishing effort levels and duration of fishing (harvesting plan); • ii. best available scientific and technical information on the current state of fishery resources and baseline information on the ecosystems, habitats and communities in the fishing area, against which future changes are to be compared;

13. UN FAO Guidelines: Impact Assessments • iii. identification, description and mapping of VMEs known or likely to occur in the fishing area; • iv. data and methods used to identify, describe and assess the impacts of the activity, the identification of gaps in knowledge, and an evaluation of uncertainties in the information presented in the assessment; • v. identification, description and evaluation of the occurrence, scale and duration of likely impacts, including cumulative impacts of activities covered by the assessment on VMEs and low-productivity fishery resources in the fishing area;

14. UN FAO Guidelines: Impact Assessments • vi. risk assessment of likely impacts by the fishing operations to determine which impacts are likely to be significant adverse impacts, particularly impacts on VMEs and low productivity fishery resources; and • vii. the proposed mitigation and management measures to be used to prevent significant adverse impacts on VMEs and ensure long-term conservation and sustainable utilization of low-productivity fishery resources, and the measures to be used to monitor effects of the fishing operations.

15. FAO: Worldwide review of bottom fisheries in the high seas (2009) • Bensch, A., Gianni M., Greboval D., Sanders J.S., Hjort A. World Wide Review of Bottom Fisheries in the High Seas. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, 2009.

16. FAO: Worldwide review of bottom fisheries in the high seas • 250,000 tonnes in 2006, representing 0.3% of the marine catch worldwide • approximate value - $450 million US dollars • Estimated 285 vessels high seas bottom fisheries in 2006, many only part-time • 80% flagged to ten States: Spain, Republic of Korea, New Zealand, Russian Federation, Australia, Japan, France, Portugal, Belize and Estonia • one-third flagged to EU countries • EU fleet took half or more of the high seas bottom catch

17. High Seas Bottom Trawl Fisheries and their Impacts on the Biodiversity of Vulnerable Deep Sea Ecosystems: Options for International Action Matthew Gianni IUCN Conservation International NRDC WWF International 2004

18. North Atlantic: NEAFC • there is a high likelihood that most upper slope areas and the associated range of species have to some extent been affected by past fisheries, and that fragile invertebrate communities occur on many hills.

19. North Atlantic: NAFO

20. SE Atlantic and Northwest Pacific

21. South Pacific: New Zealand

22. Summary of actions to date Impact Assessments: • Southern ocean/CCAMLR (five countries) South Pacific (New Zealand) North Pacific (Japan, Korea, Russia) • No impact assessments yet done in other areas

23. Summary Impact Assessments have not been able to clearly determine whether SAIs would occur • insufficient baseline information on the presence, likely occurrence and ecology of VMEs in the areas to be fished; • insufficient information on the precise locations in which bottom fishing will or is likely to take place; • insufficient information on the interaction of the bottom fishing gear with VME related species; • insufficient information on the extent, severity, duration, and likely scale of the impact of bottom fishing on VMEs known or likely to occur in areas subject to bottom fishing.

24. Summary Area closures: • Some areas where VMEs are known to occur, based on benthic surveys, in NE Atlantic, Mediterranean • To greater or lesser degrees “representative areas” where VMEs are known or likely to occur in NE and NW Atlantic, Southeast Atlantic, South Pacific • Most areas of the high seas where VMEs are likely to occur remain open to bottom fishing at fishable depths

25. Summary Move-on rules: • Thresholds levels adopted by NAFO, NEAFC, SEAFO and NW Pacific far too high to provide meaningful protection (50/100 kg corals; 1000 kg sponges – NAFO Science Council: 0.2-2kg corals) • Even where threshold levels relatively low, questions remain as to effectiveness (7-8 areas closures in CCAMLR triggered by move-on rule) • Not possible to quantify impacts on VMEs based on evidence/amount/weight of VME species in fishing gear

26. Summary Ensuring the long-term sustainability of deep-sea fish stocks: • Most high seas bottom fisheries target low productivity species (e.g. orange roughy, grenadiers, deep-sea sharks) highly vulnerable to overexploitation and depletion. • Large number of species taken as bycatch, in particular in bottom trawl fisheries • Status of target species and bycatch species considered overexploited, depleted or unknown - some endangered (gulper sharks, grenadiers)

27. Summary • Gear restrictons: • ICES 2008: Any gear that has bottom contact has the potential to damage vulnerable deep-water habitats…the greatest instantaneous physical impact on sensitive habitats is likely to be caused by towed otter trawls…” – bottom trawl fishing. • CCAMLR: prohibition on bottom trawling and bottom gillnet fishing

28. Summary • Gear restrictions: • NEAFC: prohibition on deep-sea bottom gillnet fishing • GFCM: prohibition on bottom trawling below 1000 metres • SEAFO: Scientific Committee recommended temporary prohibition on bottom trawling and bottom gillnet fishing – not (yet) agreed by SEAFO

29. Scientific developments: • deep-sea fisheries in the Northeast Atlantic are depleting populations of deep-sea fish well below the depths at which the fishing takes place, • IUCN Red List: leafscale gulper shark, Portuguese dogfish - targeted in high seas bottom fishing in the Northeast Atlantic endangered; gulper sharks critically endangered. • HERMES: coral dependent deep-sea fish species declining more rapidly than non-coral dependent species because of adverse impacts on corals

30. Other developments: • Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia 2007 - many deep-sea bottom trawl fisheries on the high seas not economically viable without state subsidies. • European Commission 2007 - many deep-sea fish stocks in the Northeast Atlantic have such low productivity that “sustainable levels of exploitation are probably too low to support an economically viable fishery.”

31. Conclusion: Summary of actions to date • Impact Assessments have not yet been conducted in most bottom fisheries; where they have been conducted - partial and inconclusive at best • Some area closures, but many high seas areas where VMEs likely to occur remain open to bottom fishing with few/no constraints • Move-on rule often only measure in place in both existing and new/unfished areas – limited value in protecting VMEs • General reluctance to close areas where high seas bottom fishing currently takes place • Insufficient information on status of most target and bycatch species impacted by bottom fisheries to ensure long-term sustainability

32. UN FSA • 5 (d) assess the impacts of fishing...on target stocks and species belonging to the same ecosystem or associated with or dependent upon the target stocks; • 5 (g) protect biodiversity in the marine environment; • 5 (h) ...ensure that levels of fishing effort do not exceed those commensurate with the sustainable use of fishery resources

33. UN FSA • 6.1. States shall apply the precautionary approach widely... • 6.2. The absence of adequate scientific information shall not be used as a reason for postponing or failing to take conservation and management measures. • 6.3 (d) States shall...develop data collection and research programmes to assess the impact of fishing on non-target and associated or dependent species and their environment, and adopt plans which are necessary to ensure the conservation of such species and to protect habitats of special concern.

34. Conclusion • UN GA 61/105 paras 83-86 far from fully implemented • Current management of most high seas bottom fisheries inconsistent with international law • Even if VMEs protected, can deep-sea fisheries on the high seas targeting low productivity species ever be sustainable and economically viable? • Nations which permit their vessels to bottom fish on the high seas/global commons have clear obligations to the international community