CFP Reform: Good Governance issues

On October 5th 2011, CFFA organised, with some of its partners, a workshop in the European Parliament, on good governance issues in the reform of the CFP external dimension. The workshop was attended by about 60 participants, including representatives from the European Commission, members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and staff, members of the African parliamentary network APPEL, representatives from EU and ACP Member States, from EU and African fishing organisations platforms , trade unions, fish traders, and NGOs.

The summary report highlights the main points of agreement emerging from the debate, which included:

• The EU’s objectives must be to ensure all its fleets fishing outside EU waters, whether under access agreements, private licensing schemes or joint ventures, operate sustainably, from an environmental, social and economic point of view.

• The EU should also promote the establishment of a level playing field for all fishing operators from distant water fishing nations and coastal countries, whilst recognising the rights of developing countries and their coastal fishing communities to have priority access to their resources.

• The EU needs to develop stronger measures to promote transparency in the CFP, and should also take a leading role in mainstreaming transparency in fisheries, which requires supporting other governments and fisheries organisations to implement transparency measures.

• EU fisheries agreements should be reformed so that they provide a framework to control all EU fisheries-related activities in developing countries fisheries, whilst providing the necessary support to ensure all private investments made in these fisheries are transparent, and environmentally, socially and economically sustainable. The reform of the CFP external dimension must ensure that the means and mechanisms to achieve those objectives are developed and implemented.

Following the meeting, CFFA drafted a list of proposed amendments to the CFP basic regulation, related to good governance issues.

CFFA position on Pacific IEPA global sourcing derogation

Four years ago, when signing the IEPA with Papua New Guinea and Fiji, the EU agreed to a derogation to the rule of origin, in the form of ‘global sourcing’. This means that, regardless of where the fish (tuna) is caught, or the status of a vessel’s flag, registration or ownership, the fish is deemed originating, and can therefore benefit from duty free access to EU market, as long as it is transformed from being fresh or frozen into being a pre-cooked, packaged or canned product. This was a demand of the Pacific ACP group in their EPA negotiations with the European Union. This derogation raised concerns and criticisms from the EU tuna industry. Following a request based on access to information regulation, CFFA received in August a copy of a recent 2010 study commissioned by DG mare on preferential rules of origin for fisheries and aquaculture products. The study shows the importance of the global sourcing derogation for PNG local development, in particular in terms of job creation. It also demonstrates that, if the PNG processing industry was to expand its production thanks to the global sourcing derogation, this will have few direct impacts on the EU tuna industry. Moreover, the study concludes that ‘the perspective of having the EU market flooded by imports from PNG does not appear to be realistic.

CFFA’s position  that, in line with their international commitments, particularly the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, the European Union and Papua New Guinea should put at the heart of their trade relations the support of environmentally, socially and economically sustainable fisheries development in Papua New Guinea.

CFFA feels therefore that the global sourcing derogation is important to maintain in the future. Moreover, an extension of global sourcing to other fish products should be considered in the negotiation of the full EPA- so that all ACP Pacific islands can increase their benefits from offshore fisheries. However, CFFA also wants to suggest concrete improvements, in particular regarding (1) the sustainable exploitation of tuna resources and (2) the benefits of foreign investments for local populations, coastal communities in particular.

To improve the sustainable exploitation of tuna resources, CFFA requests the EU to deepen the collaboration with Pacific islands in the context of the WCPFC, and support efforts made by the Pacific Islands in the context of the Parties of Nauru Agreement (PNA), to improve the management of the regional tuna fishery through restoring stocks and implementing appropriate reference points and harvest strategies . The EU should also pay particular attention at supporting Pacific islands efforts to combat IUU fishing, and ensure full traceability of their products.

To improve benefits of foreign investments for local populations, coastal communities in particular, CFFA proposes that: • Central mechanisms should be set up for demonstrating local benefits include full compliance with national minimum wage legislation; • National labour law and rights, including on occupational health and freedom of association, should be included into PMIZ and other processing development projects, like the developments going on in Lae and Wewak, legislation ; • any tuna processing facility should employ a minimum of 60% local labour; • The partnership of local players (e.g. service providing firms) with foreign processing investments should be favored.

Such issues could be discussed in the context of the current review process, informed by the review report to be published, and appropriate mechanisms to address them in the future should be designed to improve the impacts of global sourcing. PNG civil society and coastal communities should be adequately informed and involved in the process.

A new basis for EU agreements with ACP countries

What will change concretely? How will the activities of the EU fleets fishing outside fisheries agreements be monitored? How will the EU develop regional strategies for European fisheries relations with third-country partners? Is the ‘raise in production standards’ not likely to become a non-tariff barrier for ACP countries? How will the promotion of good governance be concretised in future agreements? Read the interview with Stefaan Depypere, Director of International Affairs and Markets, DG Mare.

The EU is paying Morocco to fish in occupied Western Sahara

The current Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the EU and Morocco has been running since the 28th February 2007. The latest protocol annexed to the agreement ended on the 27th February 2011. This partnership has brought to Morocco a financial contribution of 36.1 million euros per year, including 13.5 million in support of the Moroccan fisheries policy "in order to promote the sustainable exploitation of its fish resources". Thanks to this agreement and to this protocol, Morocco has issued fishing licenses to vessels from eleven EU member States.

On the 25th February 2011, the parties to the protocol agreed to extend it for another year (28.2.2011-27.2.2012), but this decision is still pending for ratification. However, an issue has been raised by several European MEPs: the EU-Morocco fisheries agreement is both politically controversial and in violation of international law. The international ’Fish Elsewhere!’ campaign demands the EU to cancel its highly unethical operations, and go fishing somewhere else. No fishing in Western Sahara should take place until the conflict is solved.

Rapport Sahara Occidental

Trawlers in WS

Industrial fisheries destroy livelihood of northern and southern fishermen

At the fisheries conference of northern German states in Kiel last week, the development associations Protestant Development Service (EED) and Fair Oceans demanded from German ministers to press the EU to ensure sustainable fishing of European fishermen outside of European waters. “It is not acceptable that the recent proposals for a European fisheries reform lack solutions for the improvement of the situation for local fishermen,” says Andrea Müller-Frank from EED.

“More and more foreign trawlers are active in Senegalese waters. Licenses are attributed without consideration for environmental and social consequences. Many industrial trawlers illegally enter the zones reserved for small fisheries. This is how we small fishermen are deprived of our livelihood,” says Gaoussou Gueyse, secretary general of the West African Fisheries Federation. “Future EU fisheries agreements have to promote the development of our fisheries sector and not only deplete our fish stocks,” adds Gueye.

Since nowadays more than half of all European fisheries imports come from developing countries, Germany’s responsibility for the fisheries sector in target countries is growing. “The ministries assembled in Kiel have to push for an EU fisheries reform that reduces European dependency on imports and reestablishes fish stocks in the North Sea and Baltic Sea in an environmentally sustainable way,” says Fair Oceans’ Kai Kaschinski. Source: www.eed.de

Spanish processers don’t mind importing PNG tuna loins

Under the interim EU-Pacific EPA signed by PNG, a derogation to the rules of origin (RoO) allows tuna caught by boats from any country to be landed and processed in PNG canneries before being exported to the EU market. Since the entry into force of the new rules (initialization in 2007), the EU tuna industry has raised concerns on the ground that the derogation could open the door for massive imports into the EU of products from doubtful origin as regards SPS and IUU standards.

In January 2011, the Fisheries Committee of the European Parliament highlighted that this global-sourcing derogation “has made this country into a genuine hub for the processing of huge quantities of tuna from a variety of countries, (…) has caused considerable disruption to the canned-tuna market and constitutes totally unfair competition for a European processing sector that is already at an economic disadvantage owing to much higher labor costs and much tighter environmental and health and hygiene constraints”.

Spanish interests, as mentioned in a recent article in The Courier, have been especially upfront in challenging this derogation: “Although the European Parliament ratified PNG’s EPA there are still periodic vocal protests from a limited number of MEPs about PNG’s access to the EU market, notably from Spain which also has a canning industry”.

Following a request based on access to information regulation, CFFA received a copy of a recent 2010 study commissioned by DG mare on preferential rules of origin for fisheries and aquaculture products, which tends to show that this reluctance by European importers towards PNG products only concerns canned tuna. Indeed, over the same period, 2007-2009, the study shows that imports of tuna loins from PNG by European canneries have almost tripled. European canneries are highly dependent on such tuna raw material from third countries for supplying the EU market (70-80% of tuna consumption in the EU is based on imports) and for exporting tuna products.

As regards Spain, the FAO Globefish Tuna Market Report for the 1st quarter of 2011 observed a better performance of Spanish canned tuna exports, “reflected in its imports of pre-cooked tuna loins raw material, which increased by 31.8% against the previous year”. It is worth noting that over the same period (1st quarter of 2011) PNG had a setback in terms of canned tuna exports to the EU, which was countered by Spanish imports of PNG tuna loins.

The following legitimate question arises: why is the Spanish industry not concerned with PNG SPS and IUU issues when it comes to importing tuna loins for its own processing plants under the new RoO?

OCEAN2012 initial reaction to the Commission’s package on reform of the CFP

The first package on reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), published on July 13 2011, sets out the Commission’s ambitions for the reform, including a proposal for a new Basic Regulation, a proposal for a new organisation of the market and a communication on the external dimension. The package includes some significant improvements, but is not the radical reform proposal that we expected.

This reform offers a unique opportunity to recover the wellbeing of our seas and fishing-dependent communities. The CFP should end overfishing, reduce damage to ecosystems, and rebuild a European Union fishing sector that is environmentally sustainable and socially, as well as economically, viable. Only such a fisheries policy will guarantee Europe’s consumers a rich variety of responsibly and locally caught fish in the future.

Now that some of the reform proposals have been published, it will be up to the European Parliament and the Fisheries Council to ensure that the CFP achieves healthy fish stocks and contributes towards achieving good environmental status for EU waters according to the 2008 Marine Strategy Framework Directive. Only through stock recovery can the CFP deliver a secure future for fish, fishing communities, and consumers alike.

OCEAN2012 Briefing

The allocation of controversial licences put at risk Senegal’s approval to export to EU market

An EU delegation met with Senegal Fisheries Ministry and with representatives of the fisheries sector to inform them that EU was investigating the conditions under which foreign trawlers are fishing small pelagics in waters under Senegal’s jurisdiction, in the context of the EU regulation against IUU fishing. The EU delegation warned about the risk for Senegal to have its approval to export fish products on the EU market withdrawn, and to be designated as non cooperating state in regard of the IUU regulation, notably because fishing authorisations allocated to these vessels were not in conformity with the Senegalese law.

Senegalese fishing professionals reiterate that the European market is their main export market, in particular for artisanal fishing which supplies 70% of exports, and remind that they warned the authorities, since the beginning, about the risks, for the strategic small pelagics resources and for the fishing sector, to illegally give these licences to foreign trawlers.

Information sent by Gaoussou Gueye, vice président of conipas.

Impact analysis of the Poly Hondone Pelagic Fishery-Mauritania Convention

Presented as a model for promoting high value-added activities in order to take advantage of abundant, low market value pelagic resources, the investment program, included in the June 2011 Convention between the Chinese group POLY-HONDONE PELAGIC FISHERY and Mauritania, mainly targets demersal species, especially octopus, which goes against the sectoral policy, focused on the reduction of fishing effort through its development plan.

This Convention with a Chinese group, which has been implemented as the EU-Mauritania Fisheries Partnership Agreement negotiations were starting, only reinforces the skepticism of some as regards our fishing policy. According to them, the possible withdrawal of European cephalopod trawlers will be followed by the introduction of other foreign fishing vessels, with little regard for the sustainability of fisheries. This feeling is reinforced by recent decisions, such as to allow pair trawling, which do not seem to reflect the interest for sound management which led to the prohibition of tickler chains used by EU shrimp trawlers.

Analyse de la Convention par Pêchecops

Second Mbour Fisheries Forum

About 300 small-scale fishing professionals are due to meet on July 4th at the David Boila Centre in Mbour, for the forum on "Who owns the fish?", according to a press release of the APS.

Gathered into the Artisanal Fishing Professionals’ Coalition of Mbour (CPPAM), these actors will discuss two topics: "Food security in fisheries, in particular in the case of small pelagics" and "Participative surveillance".

Participants will come from Mbour and from various Senegalese fishing communities, including Kayar, Ngaparou, Joal, Foundiougne, Djiffer, Yène, Ndayane, Lompoul, Fass Boye, Saint-Louis, etc.

This meeting will be the second forum organized by the CPPAM, after the one of July 2010, focussed on the themes of good governance, financing issues in artisanal fisheries, and value addition of catches.

ADE/SAB

Allocution de bienvenue de Gaoussou Gueye

EU-Mauritania FPA: contribution of the Mauritanian NGO "Mer Bleue"

The Mauritanian NGO "Mer Bleue" congratulates the European Parliament for its resolution of May 14th on the new fisheries agreement. We are convinced that this resolution will be a crucial step in achieving sustainable and equitable fisheries in Mauritania and in the subregion. By this contribution, we wish to echo the MEPs’ call for FPA negotiations between the UE and Mauritania to be preceded by a broader debate allowing the participation of citizens, Civil Society organizations and national parliamentarians, in order to ensure democracy and transparency in fish resources management.

NGOs file complaint with the Commission for denying access to documents

Evaluations of fisheries agreements are kept secret. Following this refusal, TransparentSea and Client Earth sent a ‘confirmatory application’ to the Secretary General of the European Commission. NGOs consider taking the Commission to court.

Protest against IUU fishing in Liberia

Over two hundred and fifty local fishermen and women from various fishing communities in Liberia recently gathered at the Ministry of Agriculture to protest against illegal fishing activities within Liberian waters. Local fishermen said the protest was prompted by brutality allegedly inflicted on one of their colleagues by the occupants of an unlicensed Korean vessel within the Liberian territorial waters. In a statement, the protesters called on the Government of Liberia to take urgent action in enforcing the issuance of new fishery regulations and the moratorium on industrial fishing licenses. According to local fishermen of the LAFA, the Inshore Exclusive Zone (IEZ) of six nautical miles which is supposed to be reserved for them is being routinely exploited day and night by illegal fishing vessels.

Mauritania: Civil society and fishing professionals take position on fisheries agreements with the EU and with China

These last days, Mauritanian civil society and the professionals from the fishing sector took position the on-going negotiations between the European Union and Mauritania concerning the future fisheries partnership, as well as on the convention of investment in the fisheries sector just signed by Mauritania with a Chinese company, Poly-Hondone Pelagic Fishery. About thirty representatives of the civil society and fishing sector professionals met on June 12th in Nouakchott, at the invitation of the Mauritanian NGO Pêchecops, with the support of CFFA, to discuss issues arising from these agreements.

The participants first greeted the resolution taken, in May 2011, by the European Parliament, who, they emphasized, was a positive development for the North-South relations. The recommendations from the meeting echoed this resolution, demanding the reduction of the fishing effort in Mauritanian waters (in particular by limiting the exploitation of certain species like the cephalopods, to the local fleets), the effective implication of the Mauritanian civil society and the fishing sector professionals in the whole negotiation process and in the implementation of these agreements, the reinforcement of the dialogue and the co-operation between the European and Mauritanian stakeholders, etc.

The recent convention of establishment between Mauritania and the Chinese company Poly-Hondone Pelagic Fishery was also discussed, and the participants oiced their opposition to this convention. The representatives of the National Fishing Federation stated that this convention will worsen the already precarious economic situation of the national sector. The allocation, through this convention, of tens of fishing licences (trawlers, potters, longliners, gillnetters and various experimental fisheries - see agreement protocol here after) will dangerously increase the pressure on the fish resources and will put in danger the Mauritanian sector. They stressed that it is for this reason that the European Parliament asked that negotiations for the renewal of the fisheries partnership agreement with the EU relate to only cover surplus stocks which cannot be caught by the local fleets.

Sources Press article, Rejoprao,13 June Press release FNP, 12 June Copy investment Convention Mauritania - Poly-Hondone Pelagic Fishery Copy protocol fisheries agreement Mauritania-Poly-Hondone Pelagic Fishery

Atelier PECHECOPS/CAPE: recommandations

Atelier PECHECOPS/CAPE: communiqué

Mauritania-POLY HONDONE PELAGIC FISHERY CO. agreement: press release of the FNP

Mauritania professional fishermen, after having acknowledged the establishment contract signed between the Minister of Economic Affairs and Development and the company POLY HONDONE PELAGIC FISHERY CO., would like to call attention to the fact that this Convention is worsening the already precarious economic situation of national operators from the industrial and artisanal fisheries sector.

Read the press release here 

No Increase in Blind Spending: NGOs and OCEAN2012 oppose an increase in de minimis aid

Selected Members of the EU Parliament are calling for an increase of possible de minimis aid to the fisheries sector, mainly to provide fuel subsidies to the fishing sector at a time of rising fuel prices. This is in strong contradiction with the EU’s commitment to eliminate environmentally harmful subsidies but, more importantly, granting more public money to the fisheries sector without a clear link to delivering public goods would send a perverse signal during the discussion on the new CFP.

NGOs and the OCEAN2012 coalition oppose an increase of the de minimisceiling for the following reasons:

 Increased Fishing Pressure: More than 70% of assessed European fish stocks are over-fished. While aid to operational costs could initially augment profits, it would also allow for a more intensive use of the vessels. This increase in fishing effort causes further depletion of fish stocks, decreasing catches and reduced profitability in the medium and long term. The aid is therefore not helping the fishing industry, but threatening the economic basis of fishermen and coastal communities.

 Distortion of Competition and Delay of Restructuring: a further increase to € 20.000 of de minimis per vessel and per year can make up as much as 48 % of a vessel’s annual operating costs. For most EU vessels, all fuel costs could already be paid under the existing rules. As a result, fleets from Member States that refuse to subsidise operating costs can find themselves unable to compete with fleets from Member States that do. In addition, providing aid to operating costs will not help the fisheries sector to become more sustainable. On the contrary, such subsidies will delay the much needed restructuring and prevent the European fishing sector from adapting to the new biological and economic realities they face: over-fished resources and higher oil prices.

 Under utilisation of existing aid: The EU fishing sector receives substantial amounts of aid, among others through the European Fisheries Fund (EFF). So far, most Member States have not fully taken advantage of the EFF. Overall, only 15 per cent of the available aid was used in more than half of the financial programming time. It is unclear why there is a need for an increase in de minimis aid if the existing instruments are not fully used.

 Lack of disclosure and evaluation of de minimis: No information about recipients of de minimis aid and the financed measures has been disclosed by DG MARE, preventing public scrutiny of this instrument. In 2007, the European Commission already increased the level of de minimis aid to the fishing sector by ten times, from € 3.000 to € 30.000. Before suggesting another increase, proper review of the use and the impact of de-minimis should be undertaken.

 Incoherence with Fisheries Policies: The CFP suggests the need for substantial reductions in fishing effort for stocks outside safe biological limits. Article 6(5) of the EFF specifically excludes financial support to operations which increase fishing effort. Also, guidelines for state aid require that aid must “serve to promote the rationalisation and efficiency of the production” while “improving the recipient’s income is, as operating aid, incompatible with the common market”.

 Other Policy Incoherencies: Increasing fisheries subsidies, including for fuel, when the EU itself highlights the need to phase out environmentally harmful subsidies is counterproductive. It will also not help meeting the objectives of the EU 2020 Strategy, the Kyoto Protocol, or the 2002 WSSD objective to phase out fisheries subsidies contributing to overcapacity. Last but not least, increasing fisheries subsidies at the time of general cutbacks in government spending, and following pledges by the G-20 leaders to phase out fuel subsidies and agreement by WTO members to bring fisheries subsidies within WTO disciplines is counter to current international thinking and likely to undermine EU’s leadership in ongoing negotiation processes.

We strongly urge the European Parliament not to support any calls for increase of the level of de minimis aid to the European fisheries sector. Taxpayers’ money should not be spent in a way that undermines the objectives of the CFP, further increases the pressure on already over-fished stocks, delays the necessary restructuring of the EU fisheries sector, distorts competition among Member States and undermines fundamental EU positions in international reform processes.

Joint position on de minimis aid

CFFA signed up to the Open Letter addressed to the WWF-led Aquaculture Dialogues

Activists from more than 40 organizations, including CFFA, around the world released an Open Letter (document available here) addressed to the committee members of the WWF-led Aquaculture Dialogues. Recently, at an event at the European Seafood Exposition in Brussels WWF’s new certification standards for tilapia, pangasius, abalone and bivalves were ceremonially given to the newly-formed Aquaculture Stewardship Council - another WWF-led body.

Calling the standards “a crude attempt (...) that perpetuated unsustainable production systems” they dismissed WWF’s claim that the standards were developed in consultation with local communities and indigenous peoples who are affected by aquaculture farms.They alleged that WWF’s plans to certify the export-oriented, industrial production of such species as shrimp, pangasius and salmon were developed specifically to promote the interests of the aquaculture industry. A petition is also available.

Historical resolution by the European Parliament on the future EU-Mauritania agreement

A resolution on the EU-Mauritania fisheries partnership agreement, jointly tabled by the five most important political groups of the European Parliament, has been adopted today in plenary, before the start of the negotiations for its renewal. This agreement is the most important agreement between the EU and an ACP country. The Parliament thus gives, for the first time since the Lisbon Treaty entered into force, a strong signal on what its priorities are for the negotiations of an FPA.

The resolution considers that "cooperation must be based on mutual interest and take the form of initiatives and measures which, whether taken jointly or separately, are complementary and ensure consistent policies". The resolution highlights that "the FPA has contributed to the overexploitation of some stocks, particularly octopus, and has therefore reduced fishing opportunities for Mauritanian fishermen and given the EU industry a competitive advantage as a result of subsidised access fees for EU vessels". The resolution therefore insists that "any and all access negotiated for EU-flagged vessels to fish in Mauritanian waters must be based on the principle of surplus stocks ... should effort reductions be necessary, those third-country (EU and other) fleets causing the most environmental damage must be the first to make reductions", and also insists "on receiving reliable data on fishing opportunities and catches by third countries in Mauritanian waters so as to be able to identify any surplus resources; believes that, in the case of those stocks shared with other West African states, levels of fishing access in Mauritania must be negotiated with due regard to fishing levels in the other states".

The resolution urges also the Commission to ensure "that fishing activities under the FPA meet the same sustainability criteria as fishing activities in EU waters, including those relating to selectivity; calls on Commission to ensure compliance with the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, especially as regards the recommendation to grant local artisanal fishers preferential access to resources in Mauritanian waters", and insists "that fisheries agreements between the EU and third countries should be preceded by a wide-ranging debate in the countries concerned, allowing participation by the public, civil society organisations and national parliaments, thereby promoting greater democracy and transparency".

Concerning the financial compensation, the resolution "believes that the money paid as compensation for access to fish stocks in Mauritanian waters must be clearly uncoupled from financial support for the Mauritanian multiannual fisheries programme, in that any reduction in fishing opportunities must not lead to a reduction in EU payments under the multiannual programme... financial support for the Mauritanian multiannual fisheries programme must be in line with Mauritania’s needs for sustainable fisheries development, in particular management (research, control, stakeholder participation mechanisms, infrastructure and so on), as expressed in the EU-Mauritania cooperation and development framework". It further "believes that... the EU should support the fastest possible construction of adequate facilities for landing fish along Mauritania’s central and southern coastlines, including – but not limited to – Nouakchott, so that fish caught in Mauritanian waters can be landed at national ports rather than outside the country, as is often the case at present; believes that this will increase local fish consumption and support local employment; takes the view that these improvements, combined with the removal of wrecks and the modernisation of the major port of Nouadhibou, would enable the EU fleet to operate more effectively, facilitate investment flows and boost the FPA’s impact on the local economy".

Finally, the resolution underlines "the need for Parliament to be wholly involved in both the negotiating process and the long-term monitoring of the functioning of the new protocol, and recalls its conviction that Parliament should be represented at the Joint Committee meetings envisaged in fisheries agreements, and insists that civil society, including both EU and Mauritanian fisheries representatives, also participate in those meetings".

Source

JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the EU-Mauritania Fisheries Partnership Agreement, 10.5.2011

CAOPA’s contribution to the first NEPAD/FAO consultation meeting

The first Stakeholder Consultation Meeting jointly organised by NEPAD (The New Partnership for Africa’s Development) and the FAO in support of the implementation of the FAO Strategy for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Africa will take place on 10-12 May 2011 in Midrand, South Africa. It will bring together participants from regional fisheries organisations, regional economic communities, donors as well as civil society. The three-day event will consist of a one-day plenary session and two days of consultation in working groups.

The aim is to strengthen and accelerate the fisheries and aquaculture sector in terms of their governance, management and adaptability to climate change. By doing this, the participants will address the rising importance of fisheries in meeting the MDG objectives; and the sector’s crucial role in economic development and poverty alleviation in Africa, in line with the CAADP targets.

The CAOPA (The African Confederation of Small-scale Fisheries Professional Organizations) will participate to the event, and has drafted a series of recommendations for African governments and for international, regional and national institutions. These include that:

 Access to resources should be conditional to sustainability criteria; 
 Priority should be given to local fleets, especially small-scale fisheries; 
 Fisheries agreements should be concluded on a scientific basis while respecting the precautionary approach; 
 Priority should be given to fishing for human consumption; Effective participation of local actors in co-management plans should be promoted by policy frameworks; 
 Decision-makers should be engaged in an integrated coastal planning strategy; 
 Parties of fisheries agreements should reinforce their actions towards a real partnership in order to develop efficient management systems and to avoid overexploitation; 
 Value-adding activities should be promoted by structural actions in order to give SSF priority access to markets; 
 International fish trade should be fair and equitable; 
 Standards and regulations should be introduced in a way that allows producers to comply with them; 
 A permanent participation mechanism should be established in order to inform and involve small-scale fisheries professionals.

The CAOPA also stresses that small-scale fisheries professional organizations should be strengthened by:

 Setting up an appropriate deliberative process in order to confront ideas and interests and take coherent and legitimate decisions; 
 Defining ways to formally identify and integrate actors; 
 Establishing an appropriate information sharing system; 
 Building capacity by education and awareness raising; 
 Making fishing communities aware of climate change impacts and how to mitigate related risks.

The full document is available here in French.

Réunion FAO/NEPAD: Recommandations de la CAOPA

OCEAN2012 position on the elimination of discards in EU waters and for EU fishing activities in third countries waters

The main questionable fishing practices that result in discarding are:

 Fishing with unselective gear, in the wrong place, at the wrong time, thereby catching a high amount of unwanted by-catch; 
 Catching over quota or undersized fish, or catching protected species; and 
 High-grading (improving quality of landings by throwing out lower value catch before entering port).

A number of policy approaches have been listed by the fishing sector as encouraging the wasteful practice of discarding:

 The setting of landing quota in a mixed fishery without the allocation of bycatch quota; 
 The bycatch rules (limiting bycatch to a certain percentage of the catch of your target species); 
 Minimum landing sizes; 
 Effort (days at sea) management.

The CFP reform offers an excellent opportunity to establish new policies that will address the discard problem. What follows are policy recommendations of OCEAN2012 for the elimination of discards under a reformed CFP:

1. It is vital that unwanted catches are avoided in the first place. OCEAN2012 insists that EU policy needs to effectively respond to the range of by-catch problems, including juveniles, endangered and protected species, as well as addressing the two main reasons for discarding: high-grading and the dumping of unwanted (over quota, illegal and uneconomic) catches.

2. OCEAN2012 supports the principle of a discard ban, as it would move the focus of management measures from landings to catches and thereby to overall fishing mortality. By making "no discards" the norm, any discarding then requires adequate justification (e.g. high survival potential).

3. The purpose of a discard ban is to avoid the unnecessary wastage of throwing marketable fish overboard due to lack of quota; not to provide opportunities for new markets that utilize discards of unwanted or unsustainable catches (e.g. undersized fish). Operators should receive compensation, equal to a small percentage of the value of the unmarketable landed catch, as is the case in Norway and New Zealand.

4. In order to ensure that biomass is removed from the sea in a quality and quantity that ensures sustainable exploitation and good environmental status of the marine environment in the long term, fishing mortality rates have to be set according scientific advice, following the precautionary approach as defined by the UN Fish Stocks agreement, and the ecosystem-based approach.

5. To avoid unsustainable biomass removal from the seas, quota management under a discard ban needs to transition from landing quotas to true catch quotas. All caught fish needs to be counted against quota. By-catch quota needs to be set according to biological parameters, in the same way as catch quota, and mixed fisheries management must be on the basis of protecting the weakest stock.

6. To avoid unnecessary biomass removal, fishing should be regulated at the appropriate (e.g. regional) level, in line with fishing seasons, promoting the use of multiple gears during the year, restricting gears that impact both species biodiversity and habitat integrity and diversity, and applying zoning measures that address both inter-gear/inter-sector conflicts and overfishing (be it recruitment, non-target species, or growth overfishing).

7. Under a discard ban, Minimum Landing Sizes (MLS) need to be replaced by Minimum Marketing Sizes (MMS). MMS need to be at least the same size as current MLS. However, any revision should respect biological constraints to avoid opening up new markets for undersized fish and should still provide a disincentive for the capture of small immature fish.

8. Incentives should be provided to ensure compliance with a discard ban. These could be in the form of providing preferential access to fish resources to those fishing in the most sustainable way, i.e. those meeting certain environmental and social criteria.

9. Enforcement will be equally crucial in the implementation of a discard ban. Onboard observer programmes will play an important role in the success of the policy. In cases where observer coverage may be impractical (i.e. small-scale vessels), the possibility to implement other observer techniques (such as cameras) to achieve fully documented fisheries should be fully investigated. Monitoring and enforcement measures must be imposed consistently across all Member States and fleets.

10. Special attention should be given to how measures to counter by-catch can be "translated" to apply to EU fleets fishing in the waters of third countries. As a priority, the emphasis should be on the need to promote selective fishing and to ban destructive fishing practices. This is particularly important in the coastal zone of tropical countries, where wasteful and destructive practices directly affect local coastal communities, who depend on fishing for their livelihoods.

11. In the case of the EU distant water fleet, OCEAN2012 advocates that the use of the most selective fishing gears should be a pre-requisite condition for participation in fishing under Fisheries Partnership Agreements (FPAs). The EU should initiate the inclusion of the issue of discarding in the negotiations for FPAs. Third countries also need to be convinced of the necessity to introduce measures to stop the waste of their resources.

OCEAN2012 position on the elimination of discards