1 / 36

The Legal Framework IOTC Requirements for Fisheries Data and levels of Compliance

The Legal Framework IOTC Requirements for Fisheries Data and levels of Compliance. Mauritius, 18-20 March 2014 Compliance Workshop: Collection and reporting of Fisheries data to IOTC. Sponsored by BOBLME-IOC-SmartFish-IOTC. Summary of IOTC Resolutions.

vail
Download Presentation

The Legal Framework IOTC Requirements for Fisheries Data and levels of Compliance

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Legal FrameworkIOTC Requirements for Fisheries Data and levels of Compliance Mauritius, 18-20 March 2014 Compliance Workshop: Collection and reporting of Fisheries data to IOTC Sponsored by BOBLME-IOC-SmartFish-IOTC

  2. Summary of IOTC Resolutions • IOTC Resolutions: IOTC and main shark species • IOTC Resolution 10/02 Mandatory statistical requirements for IOTC Members and Cooperating Non-Contracting Parties (CPC’s) • Minima requirements for the reporting of statistics to the IOTC • IOTC Resolution 13/08 Procedures on a fish aggregating devices (FADs) management plan • Minima requirements for the collection and reporting of data on FADs, drifting or anchored, used by Purse seine and pole-and-line fisheries • IOTC Resolution 13/03 On the recording of catch and effort data by fishing vessels in the IOTC Area of Competence • Minima data requirements for the collection of CATCH-AND-EFFORT data • IOTC Resolution 11/04 On a Regional Observer Scheme • Minima requirements sampling of catches in land and at-sea

  3. Summary of IOTC Resolutions (cont.) • IOTC Resolutions: Main sharks and other bycatch species • IOTC Resolution 05/05 Concerning the conservation of Sharkscaught in association with fisheries managed by IOTC • Minima requirements for the reporting of data on sharks caught on IOTC fisheries • Other Resolutions on sharks: Ban on catch retention and reporting requirements for: • Oceanic whitetipshark: IOTC Resolution 13/06 • Thresher sharks: IOTC Resolution 12/09 • Whale sharks: IOTC Resolution 13/05 (purse seine fisheries) • IOTC Resolution 10/06 On reducing the incidental bycatch of Seabirdsin longlinefisheries • Minima requirements for the reporting of interactions with seabirds (longline) • IOTC Resolution 12/04 On Marine Turtles • Minima requirements for the reporting of interactions with marine turtles • IOTC Resolution 13/04 On the conservation of Cetaceans • Minima requirements for the reporting of interactions with cetaceans

  4. Data requirements at a glance Types of fisheries data for which the Commission has set [data collection] and reporting standards; and data resolution requested by the Commission:

  5. Full Compliance: Coastal Fisheries Time Coastal Fisheries Reports Fishing Sector Sampling in land Coverage ≥ 5% vessel activities (e.g. trips) At least 1 fish measured for size per ton of catch Raising & Aggregation Catch-and-effort estimation Catch-and-effort (statistical area, boat-gear, species, month) Size frequency (statistical area, boat-gear, species, month) [Raising] Raising Aggregation Fishing Craft (number boats / size category, Gear, Year) Catch-and-Effort (boat-gear, Stat Area, Month, Species) Socio-Economic (Various) Nominal Catch (Boat-gear, IOTC area, Year, Species) Size Frequency (Species, boat-gear, Stat Area, Month)

  6. Full Compliance: Surface Fisheries Time Surface Fisheries Catch reports & Logbooks (Fishing Sector) Total Enumeration Sampling at sea Coverage ≥ 5% fishing operations (e.g. sets) At least 1 fish measured for size per ton of catch Sampling in land Size Data estimation Catch-and-effort estimation Discards Estimation & Raising Catch-and-effort (1°Grid, boat-gear-fishing mode, species, month) Aggregation Size frequency (5°Grid, boat-gear-target, species, month) Raising Aggregation Raising Active Vessel List Catch-and-Effort (boat-gear-fishing mode-target, 1°Grid, Month, Species) Discards (Boat-gear-target, IOTC area, Year, Species) Socio-Econ. (Various) Trip Report (1°Grid) Nominal Catch (Boat-gear-fishing mode-target, IOTC area, Year, Species) Size Data (Species, boat-gear-target, 5°Grid, Month) FAD & Supply [PS+BB]

  7. Full Compliance: Longline Fisheries Time Longline Fisheries Catch reports & Logbooks (Fishing Sector) Total Enumeration At least 1 fish measured for size per ton of catch Sampling at sea Coverage ≥ 5% fishing operations (e.g. sets) Size frequency (Species, boat-gear-target species, 5°Grid, Month) Size Data estimation Catch-and-effort estimation Catch-and-effort (5°Grid, boat-gear-target species, month, species) Discards Estimation & Raising Aggregation Raising Raising Aggregation Trip Report (1°Grid) Active Vessel List Catch-and-Effort (boat-gear-target, 5°Grid, Month, Species) Discards (Boat-gear-target, IOTC area, Year, Species) Socio-Econ. (Various) Nominal Catch (Boat-gear-target, IOTC area, Year, Species) Size Data (Species, boat-gear-target, 5°Grid, Month)

  8. Dissection of catch for a Fishing Trip The IOTC definitions for nominal catches, bycatch, and discards may differ from those used in other areas Catch-and-effort and size data shall be collected for IOTC species and the main species of sharks, as identified by the Commission, from both, nominal catches and discards DISCARDS • Discards commercial and other species • Tuna (-like) • Sharks • Other finfish • Marketable (Target) • Tuna (-like) • Sharks • Other finfish Retained catch Discards Total catch • Marketable (Other) • Tuna (-like) • Sharks • Other finfish • Incidental catch • Seabirds • Marine turtles • Cetaceans NOMINAL CATCH BYCATCH

  9. Importance of IOTC fisheries (2008-2012) The 19 countries invited at the Workshop have reported catches of IOTC species and sharks that represent over 75% of the total catches for all fisheries and species combined in the Indian Ocean (2008-12) Indonesia, Iran, India, and Sri Lanka caught over 50% of the total catches (2008-12)

  10. Indonesia (22%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • Indonesia reported 1254 industrial tuna longliners, 19 industrial purse seiners and 2 gillnetters fishing for IOTC species in 2012 • Indonesia has reported conflicting catch figures for its coastal fisheries over the time series (due to lack of sampling) • Data for coastal and industrial fisheries are not reported separately • Sampling in port of industrial longliners does not cover all catch components • Indonesia has implemented logbook and observer programmes but no data has been reported to date; size data has not been reported since 2010

  11. Iran, Islamic Republic (11%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • Iran reported 1229 industrial tuna gillnetters and 4 industrial purse seiners fishing for IOTC species in 2012 • Data for coastal and industrial fisheries are not reported separately • Iran has implemented a logbook programme for its industrial fisheries but no data have been reported to the IOTC to date • Purse seiners do not use FADs at present (?) • Size data are not reported by type of fishery or IOTC grid (port sampling)

  12. India (10%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • India reported 20 industrial tuna longliners fishing for IOTC species in 2012 • India has reported conflicting catch figures for its coastal fisheries over the time series, in particular as regards to species and gear breakdown • Catches and Catch-and-effort for commercial industrial longliners are as reported by the fishing sector (in logbooks, likely to be incomplete) • India reports survey data for FSI longliners

  13. Sri Lanka (9%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • Sri Lanka reported 2,482 [semi-]industrial multi-purpose vessels fishing for IOTC species in 2012 • Sri Lanka has strengthened its sampling programme for the coastal and offshore fisheries • Data for coastal and industrial fisheries are not reported separately • Statistics are not recorded by gear type (aggregated by gear) • No observer programme in place

  14. Maldives (7%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • Maldives reported 249 baitboats (multi-gear) fishing for IOTC species in 2012 • Maldives has not implemented sampling for its coastal fisheries as yet • Data for coastal and industrial fisheries are not reported separately • Catch-and-effort, and size data for industrial fisheries not reported by IOTC Grid (a logbook programme is in place though ); incomplete species breakdown (bigeye tuna); discards not available (probably minor discards) • No observer programme in place

  15. Seychelles (4%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • Seychelles reported 8 industrial purse seiners, 3 supply vessels, and 28 longliners fishing for IOTC species in 2012 • Seychelles has implemented a sampling programme for its coastal fisheries but the current system needs to be strengthened • Numbers of FADs and activities of supply vessels for purse seine fisheries not reported; No observer programme in place (to be initiated soon) • No EEZ data reported for foreign licensed vessels in Seychelles in 2012

  16. Pakistan (4%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • Pakistan did not report any industrial vessels fishing for IOTC species in 2012; however, 10 gillnet vessels were reported in 2011 • Pakistan implemented a sampling programme for its coastal fisheries with the assistance of WWF; however, no data were reported for 2012 • At present, it is not clear if Pakistan has any industrial vessels operating on the high seas; or foreign licensed vessels operating in its EEZ

  17. Yemen (3%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • At present Yemen does not have an industrial fleet for IOTC species • Yemen has no sampling programme in place • To date, Yemen has not reported data to the IOTC for its coastal fisheries • Yemen does not license foreign tuna vessels to operate within its EEZ (?)

  18. Oman (2%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • Oman reported 8 industrial longliners fishing for IOTC species in 2012 • Oman has implemented a sampling programme for its coastal fisheries but catches are not reported fully by gear or species • Catch and catch-and-effort for the industrial fleet not reported for all active vessels and not fully by species • No observer programme in place

  19. Malaysia (1%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • Malaysia reported 5 industrial tuna longliners fishing for IOTC species in 2012 • Although nominal catches and catch-and-effort are reported for coastal fisheries, the species breakdown needs to be reviewed • Catches and Catch-and-effort for industrial longliners are as reported by the fishing sector (in logbooks, likely to be incomplete), and refer only to IOTC Area F51 • Malaysia has not an observer programme in place

  20. Thailand (1%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • Thailand reported 2 industrial longliners fishing for IOTC species in 2012 • Thailand has a sampling programme for its coastal fisheries but coverage is insufficient • Catches for the longline fishery not fully by species • No observer programme in place

  21. Madagascar (<1%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • Madagascar reported 8 [semi-]industrial tuna longliners fishing for IOTC species in 2012 • To date, Madagascar has not reported catches for its coastal fisheries; sampling in some provinces was implemented in 2013 (IOC-SmartFish & IOTC support) • Madagascar did not report data other than Nominal catches and some discards and trip reports for its longline fleet in 2012 (data reported for 2010-11 though) • No EEZ data reported for foreign licensed vessels in Madagascar in 2012

  22. Comoros (<1%) • Compliance refers to the year 2011 • At present Comoros does not have an industrial fleet for IOTC species • In 2011 the sampling system was strengthened with the support of the IOTC-OFCF Project; IOC-SmartFish provided further support in 2013 • Comoros licenses foreign vessels to operate within its EEZ; to date, Comoros has not reported catch-and-effort data for foreign licensed vessels

  23. Tanzania (<1%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • Tanzania reported 8 industrial longliners fishing for IOTC species in 2012 • Tanzania reported catches for its coastal fisheries aggregated by gear • To date, Tanzania has not reported data for its industrial fleet, other than information on active vessels • No EEZ data reported for foreign licensed vessels in Tanzania in 2012

  24. Bangladesh (<1%) • Bangladesh is not an IOTC CPC at present (though has applied for CNCP status) • Data availability refers to the year 2012 • At present Bangladesh does not have an industrial fleet for IOTC species • Nominal catches for Bangladesh from the FAO database; catch aggregated by species and no gear information available • It is not known if Bangladesh licenses foreign vessels to operate within its EEZ

  25. Kenya (<1%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • At present Kenya does not have an industrial fleet for IOTC species • Kenya has reported incomplete catch figures for its coastal fisheries, in particular as refers to species and gear breakdown • Kenya did not sample catches at the landing place in 2012 • A sampling programme was established in 2013 (coverage levels are unknown) • No EEZ data reported for foreign licensed vessels in Kenya in 2012

  26. Mauritius (<1%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • Mauritius reported 5 industrial longliners fishing for IOTC species in 2012 • Mauritius has implemented a sampling system for its coastal fisheries but coverage is insufficient • Size data for industrial longliners refers only to swordfish and not by IOTC grid • No observer programme in place • Mauritius reported EEZ data for foreign licensed longline vessels in Mauritius in 2012 (not for purse seiners)

  27. Djibouti (<1%) • Djibouti is not an IOTC CPC at present (though has applied for CNCP status) • Data availability refers to the year 2012 • At present Djibouti does not have an industrial fleet for IOTC species • Nominal catches for Djibouti from the FAO database; catch aggregated by species and no gear information available • Djibouti does not license foreign tuna vessels to operate within its EEZ (?)

  28. Mozambique (<1%) • Compliance refers to the year 2012 • Mozambique reported 1 industrial longliner fishing for IOTC species in 2012 • Mozambique has implemented catch monitoring for is coastal fisheries; however, sampling coverage is unknown • Size data for industrial longliners highly aggregated, not by month and IOTC grid • No observer programme in place • No EEZ data reported for foreign licensed vessels in Mozambique in 2012

  29. Summary of Compliance: By Country HIGHEST CATCH LOWEST CATCH Importance of Catch

  30. Summary of Compliance: By Fishery • The artisanal and semi-industrial fisheries of countries invited to the Workshop took the majority of the catches in the Indian Ocean during 2008-2012; • and around 35% of the total catches of industrial fisheries (2008-2012) • Overall levels of Compliance for countries at the Workshop: • Nominal catch: 5% artisanal; 35% semi-industrial; 50% industrial • Catch-&-Effort: Nil artisanal; Nil% semi-industrial; 45% industrial • Size frequency: Nil artisanal; Nil semi-industrial; 35% industrial • Observer Programme and discards: Nil compliance POOR QUALITY GOOD QUALITY

  31. Summary of Compliance: Annual Catch • Nominal catch: 5% artisanal; 35% semi-industrial; 50% industrial • Discards: Nil coverage • Major issues: • Artisanal and semi-industrial fisheries: Catch reports not validated through independent sampling of catch and effort, then: • Problems to allocate catches by type of fishery (catches aggregated for the artisanal and semi-industrial components) • Problems with estimates of total catch • Problems with estimates of catches by type of gear; and catches around anchored-FADs • Problems with estimates of catches by species • Industrial fisheries: Catches incomplete (no discards) and not validated due to lack of sampling at-sea, and in port (some fleets) • Problems to allocate catches by type of fishery (catches aggregated for the semi-industrial and industrial components)

  32. Summary of Compliance: Catch-and-Effort • Catch-&-Effort: Nil artisanal; Nil% semi-industrial; 45% industrial • Major issues: • Artisanal and semi-industrial fisheries: Generalized lack of catch-and-effort data due to lack of independent sampling and poor reporting • Catch and effort by month not available (seasonality of many fisheries is unknown) • Lack of logbook programmes or poor quality data recorded on logbooks for semi-industrial fleets • Industrial fisheries: Lack of logbook programmes or poor quality data recorded on logbooks and data not reported for some fleets • Purse seine: Numbers of FADs and activities of supply vessels not reported • Longline: Lack of reporting for some fleets; catches by gear and target species group (tropical tunas; swordfish and albacore; other species) not reported separately • Other fisheries: Lack of data for industrial pole-and-line and gillnet fisheries (logbook programmes not fully operational)

  33. Summary of Compliance: Size Frequency • Size frequency: Nil artisanal; Nil semi-industrial; 35% industrial • Major issues: • Artisanal fisheries: Generalized lack of size data due to lack of independent sampling and poor reporting • Semi-Industrial fisheries: Insufficient sampling, poor coverage, and poor reporting • Problems shared by Artisanal and Semi-industrial fisheries: • Size data not representative of total catches of the fishery concerned (poor coverage and/or uneven distribution of sampling) • Size data combined for fisheries operated in different areas and having different selectivities (e.g. multi-gear fisheries; lack of weighting of size data) • Industrial fisheries: Incomplete sampling of catches and insufficient time-area coverage for some fleets • Length samples not by area (the majority of the longline fleets and all gillnet vessels and baitboats) • Lack of size data for bycatch species and discards (lack of at-sea sampling)

  34. Summary of Compliance: IOTC species • The majority of the catches of neritic tunas, BLM, SFA, SKJ and, to a lesser extent, YFT come from countries attending the Workshop • Statistics for marlins, sailfish and neritic tunas are poor quality in general, due to: • Problems with species identification: Catches misreported by species • Problems with gear and species breakdown: Catches not by gear and/or species • Very little catch-and-effort and size data available for species other than tropical tunas

  35. Main Priorities • Coastal fisheries: • Implementation (or strengthening) of sampling programmes in most countries (improvement in data collection) to achieve: • Separation of coastal and industrial fleets (as defined by the Commission) • Obtain the necessary catch-and-effort and size data from the fisheries • Validation of information reported by the fishing sector or, where not available, implementation of sampling to obtain the necessary data • Improve reporting through a better understanding of the requirements and arrangements in each country to allow the timely reporting of data to the IOTC (improvement in data management) • Industrial fisheries: • Full implementation of logbook systems to achieve 100% logbook coverage, as recommended by the Commission • Full implementation of the regional observer scheme (sampling at-sea) to: • Collect/validate length frequency data for the fishery • Validate the catch-and-effort data reported in logbooks • Obtain information on discards of IOTC species and sharks and incidental catches of other species

  36. Where do we Start ? Mauritius, 18-20 March 2014 Compliance Workshop: Collection and reporting of Fisheries data to IOTC Sponsored by BOBLME-IOC-SmartFish-IOTC www.iotc.org

More Related