December 4, 2020 — The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission will hold its regular annual session from 7 to 15 December, with the renewal of the tropical tuna measure on bigeye, skipjack, and yellowfin billed as the main topic up for discussion.
The meeting, WCPFC17, has been complicated by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has forced the commission to meet virtually, according to WCPFC Executive Director Feleti Teo.
December 12, 2019 — Pacific bigeye, yellowfin, albacore, and skipjack tuna are all reported to be in healthy condition, according to a 2018 stock assessment announced this week during the 16th Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) meeting in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea.
The Pacific Community’s (SPC) stock assessment report stated that the estimate of the total tuna catch in the WCPFC Convention Area for 2018 is 2,790,859 metric tons (MT), which represents 81 percent of the total Pacific Ocean catch of 3,443,174 MT, and 54 percent of the global tuna catch, which was 5,172,543 MT.
June 21, 2019 — The following was released by the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council:
The Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) of the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council concluded a three-day meeting today in Honolulu recommending bigeye tuna catch limits and allocation amounts for the US Participating Territories for the fishing years 2020 to 2023. This and other recommendations by the Council’s SSC will be considered by the Council at its 178th meeting in Honolulu on June 25-27. Under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976, the Council has authority over fisheries seaward of state waters in Hawaiʻi and other US Pacific Islands.
Bigeye Tuna: The SSC recommended that no catch limit be set for long-line caught bigeye tuna in the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) convention area from 2020 to 2023 for any US Pacific territory. It also recommended that each US Pacific territory be allowed to allocate up to 2,000 metric tons (mt) to federally permitted Hawai’i longline vessels.
The WCPFC is an international regional fishery management organization that develops quotas and other management measures for tuna fisheries in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO). Under WCPFC, Small Island Developing States and Participating Territories (such as the three US territories in the Pacific) do not have longline-caught bigeye quotas. However, under an amendment to the Council’s Pelagic Fishery Ecosystem Plan, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has the authority to specify annual catch and allocation limits for the US Participating Territories of American Samoa, Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). In recent years, each US territory had a 2,000 mt limit and authority to allocate up to 1,000 mt.
Prior to making its decision, the SSC reviewed stock projections through 2045, which showed that catch limit and allocation scenarios of up to 3,000 mt per Territory were not significant enough to cause the stock to go over any limit reference points adopted by the WCPFC.
Other outcomes of the SSC meeting include the following, among others:
Hawaiʻi Kona Crab: Based on updated information from a 2018 benchmark stock assessment and other reports, the SSC set the acceptable biological catch (ABC) for the main Hawaiian Islands Kona crab commercial fishery at 30,802 pounds for 2020 to 2023. This decision accounted for the scientific uncertainties with an estimated risk of overfishing of 38 percent. The Council will utilize the ABC to specify the annual catch limit for the stock.
Shifting Distributions and Changing Productivity: A NMFS Office of Science and Technology representative reported on the major challenges and potential solutions in addressing both shifts in stock distributions as well as changing stock and ecosystem productivity. The presentation identified six steps to account for and respond to climate impacts on fisheries and recommended ways to account or prepare for distribution and productivity shifts. These recommendations are intended to serve as a guide for each region in the development of fishery management actions.
Ray Hilborn, SSC member, noted, “… where you close [fisheries] now is not where the species are going to be in 20 years.” He also pointed out that non-governmental organizations strongly push for permanently closed areas rather than considering adaptive spatial management.
Spatial Management: A working group of the SSC reported on its efforts to define benefits and limitations to spatial management actions relative to pertinent regional fishery issues and management objectives. The working group discussed the development of a workshop on “Spatial Management of Blue Water Ecosystems” with a broad spectrum of participants to be held in 2019 or 2020. The SSC recommended that the Council endorse the workshop with the themes of 1) spatial management objectives and performance metrics, 2) alternative approaches to spatial management, 3) evaluation and monitoring, and 4) policy and outreach approaches to spatial management.
The Council will consider these and other SSC recommendations when it meets next week in Honolulu. Action items on the Council agenda include the US Territory bigeye tuna catch and allocation limits, catch limits and options for specifying annual catch limits for main Hawaiian Islands Kona crab, managing loggerhead and leatherback sea turtle interactions in the Hawai’i-based shallow-set longline fishery, and a Hawai’i Archipelago Fishery Ecosystem Plan amendment to precious coral essential fish habitat. The Council will also have a presentation from Global Fishing Watch, an organization that uses technology to visualize, track and share data about global fishing activity.
The Council Standing Committees meet June 24 at the Council office, 1164 Bishop St., Suite 1400, and the full Council meets June 25-27 at the YWCA Fuller Hall at 1040 Richards St. A Fishers Forum on Emerging Technologies in Fisheries will be held on June 25 from 6 to 9 p.m.at the Ala Moana Hotel’s Hibiscus Ballroom, 410 Atkinson Dr., as part of the Council meeting. The public is invited to all of these meetings. For more information on the SSC and Council meetings, go to www.wpcouncil.org; email info@wpcouncil.org or phone (808) 522-8220.
June 11, 2019 — Fisheries ministers in the Pacific said while stocks of bigeye, yellowfin, albacore, and skipjack tuna are all to be in a healthy condition in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, there should be no room for complacency on management measures as it could “lead to increased commercial pressure on those fisheries.”
The Parties to the Nauru Agreement is made up of the Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, the Marshall Islands, Kiribati, Tuvalu, Nauru, the Solomon Islands, Papua New Guinea, and Tokelau, which collectively maintain a purse-seine vessel day scheme (VDS). According to a communique signed by the ministers at the end of the annual PNA meeting in Palau on 30 May, all tuna stocks in the region are at healthy levels.
Scientists with the Pacific Community or SPC has earlier reported that Western and Central Pacific tuna stocks are healthy compared to other stocks in other oceanic regions due to the conservation measures implemented by PNA. The total annual tuna catch in PNA waters is around 1.6 million metric tons, including about 50 percent of the world’s supply of skipjack tuna. About half of the total tuna catch from PNA waters, or about 790,000 metric tons, is certified by the Marine Stewardship Council.
“Ministers welcomed the scientific advice that all major tuna stocks in PNA waters were reported as healthy and none were assessed as overfished or subject to overfishing,” the announcement stated.
However, the PNA statement said maintaining healthy tuna stocks is only possible with a continued effort to strengthen regional management of the fisheries.
February 8, 2019 — The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is looking for help in tagging tuna.
The Atlantic Ocean Tropical Tuna Tagging Program was established by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas in 2015 to study key aspects of bigeye, skipjack, and yellowfin tuna in the Atlantic Ocean.
As part of the AOTTP, Dr. Walt Golet from the University of Maine and the Gulf of Maine Research Institute will be working with colleagues at the New England Aquarium, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, University of Miami, and NOAA Fisheries to deploy 5,000 conventional tags on tuna in the western North Atlantic Ocean.
The effort will stretch from Canada to Venezuela and also includes the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean.
Those interested in participating in the AOTTP project and would like to volunteer to tag bigeye, skipjack, and yellowfin tuna, can contact Dr. Walt Golet at walter.golet@maine.edu.
NOAA says every fish tagged will give participants a chance to win one of 20 individual cash prizes, totaling more than $39,000, to be awarded at the end of the project.
November 8, 2018 — The following was released by the International Seafood Sustainability Foundation:
Of the total tuna catch, 86% came from stocks at “healthy” levels, an 8% increased share of the total catch since last reported, according to an October 2018 International Seafood Sustainability Foundation (ISSF) Status of the Stocks report. Skipjack tuna stocks — at healthy levels in all ocean regions — still comprise more than one-half of the total catch.
Though many of the broad indicators of overall global stock health remain unchanged, there were several notable changes for specific commercial tuna species:
The assessment for Western and Central Pacific bigeye was more optimistic, showing that the stock is not overfished and that recent management measures put in place by the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) appear to be working effectively.
Atlantic Ocean bigeye received a pessimistic stock assessment from the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) and remains overfished. In 2017, Atlantic bigeye catches exceeded the total allowable catch (TAC) by approximately 20%. ISSF has long advocated that ICCAT adopt stock-specific management measures to effectively control the catch of bigeye and other overfished species in the region including Atlantic yellowfin.
Catches of Eastern Pacific bigeye in 2017 increased 10% from 2016 levels. The Inter-American Tropical Tuna Council (IATTC) conducted an update assessment of the stock that appears to indicate that the stock is experiencing overfishing. The results should be viewed with caution due to the high levels of uncertainty in the assessment. Nevertheless, several fishery indicators suggest that the management measures in place are insufficient to effectively control fishing.
The stock status of South Pacific albacore is confirmed as very healthy, but the stock assessment covers only the WCPFC Convention Area South of the equator, not taking into consideration part of the catches from the IATTC Convention Area (EPO).
There were no other major changes in tuna stock status since the previous February 2018 Status of the Stocks report; the updated report reflects new data made available at 2018 tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organization (RFMO) meetings held through October 2018.
Key Statistics in the Report
About the Report
There are 23 stocks of major commercial tuna species worldwide — 6 albacore, 4 bigeye, 4 bluefin, 5 skipjack, and 4 yellowfin stocks. The Status of the Stocks summarizes the results of the most recent scientific assessments of these stocks, as well as the current management measures adopted by the RFMOs. Updated several times per year, Status of the Stocks assigns color ratings (green, yellow or orange) using a consistent methodology based on three factors: Abundance, Exploitation/Management (fishing mortality) and Environmental Impact (bycatch).
ISSF produces two reports annually that seek to provide clarity about where we stand — and how much more needs to be done — to ensure the long-term sustainability of tuna stocks: the Status of the Stocks provides a comprehensive analysis of tuna stocks by species, and the Evaluation of the Sustainability of Global Tuna Stocks Relative to Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Criteria provides scores for the stocks and RFMOs based on MSC assessment criteria. The MSC-certified fisheries list (Appendix 2) in Status of the Stocks complements the Evaluation report. Together, these tools help to define the continuous improvement achieved, as well as the areas and issues that require more attention.
In addition, ISSF maintains a data-visualization tool based on its Status of the Stocks report. The “Status of the Stocks Tool” is located on the ISSF website and accessible through the Status of the Stocks overview page; users can easily toggle through tuna stock health indicators and filter by location, species and other key stock health and catch factors.
January 10, 2017 — SEAFOOD NEWS — The National Fisheries Institute, six major seafood companies, and two West Coast Associations sued the Obama Administration over the final US Rule regarding seafood import regulations in federal district court on Friday, Jan 6th.
The six company plaintiffs are Alfa International, Fortune Fish & Gourmet, Handy Seafood, Pacific Seafood Group, Trident Seafoods, and Libby Hill Seafood Restaurants. Also the Pacific Seafood Processors Association and the West Coast Seafood Processors Association joined the lawsuit.
The Final rule was announced on December 9, 2016, and was the culmination of the regulations that were developed at the urging of the Presidential Task Force on Seafood Fraud.
The suit is unusual in that NFI was the leading advocate for action against seafood fraud over the past decade. However, NFI claims that the new rule is not based on a risk assessment with data about seafood fraud, but without evidence will impose enormous and unjustified costs on the American public and the seafood industry.
In a statement, John Connelly, President of NFI, said “The National Fisheries Institute (NFI) and our members have led industry efforts to combat both Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported (IUU) fishing and seafood fraud for the last decade. NFI has supported most U.S. government efforts to eliminate illegal fishing and urged the government to do more to ensure accurate labeling.”
NFI began publicizing and working against seafood fraud more than a decade ago, focusing on the lack of any enforcement over seafood labeling regarding net weights and product integrity. At the time, US buyers were being flooded with offers for seafood with glaze (protective ice coatings) of 20% to 40% of the total weight of the product, leading to a hugely misleading price per lb.
Also NFI worked with the FDA and NOAA on better enforcement of seafood labeling, including attacking mislabeling of species in commerce. As a result of this pressure a number of states increased their enforcement of state labeling requirements on seafood.
Finally, NFI aggressively supported NOAA action against IUU fishing, including traceability requirements on species like toothfish, the signing of the UN Port State Measures Agreement, and the authority of NOAA to blacklist products from IUU vessels from entering the United States.
So why, after a decade of work, would NFI feel compelled to sue over the implementation of the Presidential Task Force rule, through NOAA, to combat seafood fraud.
The simple answer is that the Task Force refused to recognize the major ways in which fraud was already reduced, and would not accept a data driven approach to defining risk.
Instead, the Task force defined 13 species ‘at risk’ that were the target of enforcement under the act, without any verifiable documentation that seafood fraud was a significant problem with these species.
Connelly says in the rush to publish the rule, NOAA and the Obama administration refused to disclose the data used to craft it, and grossly miscalculated compliance costs. The Office of Management and Budget made a back of the envelope calculation under the Paperwork Reduction Act that the cost to the industry would be $6.475 million, based on about 30 minutes additional work on each container.
The industry thinks costs could exceed $100 million per year, with a total economic impact on the seafood sector of as much as $1 billion.
The reason is that there is a total mismatch between the requirements in the rule and the way in which seafood is actually harvested, collected, processed and imported.
Connelly says NOAA “grossly underestimates the cost and impact of the regulation on those companies doing the right thing, and will not solve the problem. NOAA’s fundamental shift from targeted investigation of the suspected guilty to arbitrary and massive data collection from the innocent creates an enormous economic burden on American companies.”
One of the most glaring examples of the overreach is that in the Task Force, there was wide praise for the EU rule on traceability that requires exporters to the EU to certify the vessels from which the products originated. But at the same time, the EU provides a wide exemption to countries that have sufficient internal fisheries management controls. So for example, neither Norway, Iceland, the US, or New Zealand, for example, are subject to this requirement.
But NOAA’s rule makes no exemptions for the lower risk of fraud from countries where enforcement and management is at the highest standard.
The rule would apply to ten species of fish and the five species of tuna, or 15 commodities altogether. The agency has deferred rule-making on shrimp and abalone.
The ten species are: Atlantic Cod, Pacific Cod, Blue Crab, Red King Crab, Mahi Mahi, Grouper, Red Snapper, Sea Cucumber, Shark, and Swordfish.
In addition, Albacore, Bigeye, Skipjack, Yellowfin and Bluefin tuna are included.
The complaint filed by NFI says:
“According to the Government’s own studies, most mislabeling occurs after seafood has entered the United States and even though many U.S. importers subject imported seafood to DNA testing to preclude fraud at the border. The Rule would accomplish its goals by requiring that fish imported into the United States be traceable to the boat or to a single collection point, time, and place that the fish was caught, and that this information be entered into a master computer program operated by the Government.
“The Rule, were it to go into effect, would remake the way in which seafood is caught, processed and imported around the World. These changes to food processing practices in every nation would reduce exports into the United States and would dramatically increase the cost of catching, processing and importing seafood. Fishermen, many of whom are subsistence workers operating in Third World Nations, would have to keep track of each fish harvested, as would the brokers who purchase the seafood from the fisherman, and processors who handle catches from hundreds of fishermen would have to be able to trace each piece of fish to a specific vessel and specific fishing events or to a single collection point. This would require significant changes in the way fish are processed overseas. It would also affect the way in which fish are processed in the United States, because these requirements would also apply to all domestically caught or farmed seafood covered by the Rule that are shipped outside the U.S. for processing and re-imported back into the United States.”
If implemented the rule will drive up seafood prices and reduce consumption, the exact opposite of the advice to consumers from government health agencies.
Alfa Seafood says “The Rule would require processors in Ecuador and Peru, where most of Alfa’s seafood originates, to change the way in which fishermen or brokers document their catches and the way in which processors actually process these catches, so that fish imported into the United States can be traced to a particular fishing event or to a single collection point. This will add hundreds of thousands of dollars to Alfa Seafood’s cost of importing fish, assuming that the processors abroad are willing to modify the way in which they process fish.
Handy says they already use DNA testing for all their imports to ensure accuracy. “If Handy’s processors modified their processing methods to segregate product by Aggregate Harvest Report and gathered the information required by the Rule, both the price of Blue Crab to Handy, as well as at retail, would increase by approximately 28%. The price of Grouper would increase by about 8% with a similar impact at retail.
Libby Hill restaurants says “The Department’s Rule would force Libby Hill to charge more for many popular seafood menu items, thus hurting its business and driving customers to less healthy fast-food options. Further, because of the very real possibility that certain species under the Rule may become less available in the U.S. market, Libby Hill may have to contend with supply interruption that will make it more difficult to attract return customers expecting to be able to rely on the same menu from visit to visit. Because return customers are essential in the fast-casual category of the restaurant industry, such uncertainty could have a debilitating impact on Libby Hill’s business.”
The rule would require the following to be entered for each seafood entry subject to the regulations:
The rule would also reach into the US domestic industry, where currently no such reporting requirements exist, because any seafood exported from the US overseas for processing and re-imported into the US would be subject to the rule. So for example, this would change the entire reporting system for cod and salmon in Alaska.
The suit is being filed now, although the actual date of implementation is January, 2018.
The arguments are there are multiple ways in which this rule has violated the administrative procedures act:
The plaintiffs ask for a ruling that enjoins the effective date of the rule until the agency remedies the deficiencies that have been cited.
The plaintiffs ask the rule be declared invalid.
The plaintiffs ask the court to declare the Agency failed to do the required analysis under the regulatory flexibility act, and to enjoin the rule until such time as that is done.
The suit was filed on Friday in the federal district court in Washington, DC.
This story originally appeared on Seafoodnews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.
June 3, 2016 — In the wake of the 20th session of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission meeting, we join our fellow stakeholders in applauding the IOTC for adopting a harvest control rule (HCR) for skipjack tuna that is consistent with scientific advice. The adoption of this initial skipjack HCR is the culmination of significant work, investment and advocacy by many parties – nations, industry, NGOs, scientists and retailers – and it paves the way for refinement as the management strategy evaluation work continues. Harvest strategies, which include HCRs and reference points, are an essential component of modern, science-based fisheries management.
Unfortunately, there was limited political will to act to similarly protect yellowfin tuna and other stocks that are currently experiencing overfishing or that are overfished. While a reduced catch of yellowfin was adopted, scientific guidance indicates that the agreed catch reductions are insufficient. The new measure amounts to a reduction in catch of about 10%, just half of the IOTC Scientific Committee’s recommended 20% reduction and insufficient to arrest the current declining trend in stock status or rebuild the stocks to sustainable levels by 2024.
There is also a significant risk that, without further action, these measures that are effective 1 January 2017, could result in the fishery breaching the fishing mortality limit and the stock declining below the biomass limit established by the Commission. Finally, with delays of up to two years on reporting of data and the high levels of non-compliance by IOTC members, the new yellowfin measure may be largely unenforceable.
Continued efforts to develop harvest strategies for yellowfin, bigeye and albacore are essential, and we support the Commission’s workplan developed and adopted at its 2015 meeting to that end. ISSF and WWF will support this critical process so that all stocks are on par with the skipjack stock’s management status.
Read the full story at the International Seafood Sustainability Foundation
July 31, 2015 — Hawaii longline vessels fishing in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean have reached its bigeye tuna catch limit of 3,502 metric tonnes.
This means Hawaii longline vessels will have to stop fishing for bigeye from August until the end of the year, with the stoppage expected to badly impact livelihoods.
The Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council says from an economic perspective, not being able to fish is like a store closing for the same amount of time, with disastrous effects on livelihoods.
HONOLULU (AP) — July 28, 2015 — Hawaii’s longline fishermen are on course to hit their annual bigeye tuna catch limit next week, which means they will have to stop catching bigeye in their most productive fishing grounds west of Hawaii on Aug. 5.
Hawaii fishermen will still be able to catch bigeye in eastern waters regulated by a different fisheries commission.
Last year fishermen continued catching bigeye after they hit their quota in November because federal authorities drafted rules allowing them to attribute some catch to U.S. territories.
But Mike Tosatto, Pacific Islands regional administrator for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s fisheries service, said officials haven’t yet had time to draft similar rules for 2015.
Read the full story from the Associated Press at The Washington Times