Back to Main Page

Français

Meeting documents

REPORT of the

TWENTY-FIFTH SESSION OF THE GENERAL FISHERIES COMMISSION FOR THE MEDITERRANEAN

Sliema, Malta, 12-15 September 2000

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS
Rome, 2000

PREPARATION OF THIS DOCUMENT

This document is the final version of the report adopted in Sliema by the twenty-fifth session of the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) on 15 September 2000. Distribution: All FAO Members Participants in the Session GFCM Mailing List FAO Regional and Sub-Regional Fisheries Officers

FAO. General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean. Report of the twenty-fifth session. Sliema, Malta, 12-15 September 2000. GFCM Report. No.25. Rome, FAO. 2000. 27 p . SUMMARY The twenty-fifth Session of the GFCM was attended by delegates from nineteen out of the twenty-two members of the Commission. The main issues discussed during the meeting were the scale of contribution to an autonomous budget, the conclusion and recommendations resulting from the second session of the Aquaculture Committee (CAQ) and the third session of the Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC). Activities carried out by the two supporting projects ADRAMED and COPEMED were also reviewed. The Commission agreed the Scale of Contribution which would be applicable to the GFCM autonomous budget once the Agreement entered into force. The Commission, while reviewing proposals on the Joint GFCM/ICCAT working groups on large pelagic fishes updated its past resolutions 95/1 and 97/3 and adopted two new resolutions 2000/1 and 2000/2 concerning the minimum size of bluefin tuna.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

OPENING OF THE SESSION

ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE SESSION

INTERSESSIONAL ACTIVITIES

(a) Activities of the Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC)

(b) Activities of the Committee on Aquaculture (CAQ)

(c) Activities of ADRIAMED

(d) Activities of COPEMED

AUTONOMOUS BUDGET, SCALE OF CONTRIBUTION FOR AN AUTONOMOUS BUDGET AND IMPLICATION FOR THE PROGRAMME OF WORK OF THE COMMISSION

SELECTED ISSUES IN FISHERIES AND CAPTURE FISHERIES OF RELEVANCE TO GFCM REGIONS

MANAGEMENT OF MEDITERRANEAN FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE

(a) Review of recommendations by the Third Session of SAC (Madrid, Spain, 2-5 May 2000)

(b) Committee on Aquaculture (CAQ)

(c) Review and update of the GFCM Resolutions on Fisheries Management

PROGRAMME OF WORK FOR THE INTERSESSIONAL PERIOD

(a) Statutory Bodies

(b) SAC Sub-Committees

(c) Working Groups of the Sub-Committees

(d) Committee on Aquaculture

ANY OTHER MATTERS

ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSONS

DATE AND PLACE OF THE TWENTY-SIXTH SESSION

ADOPTION OF THE REPORT

APPENDIXES

A      AGENDA

B      LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

C      LIST OF DOCUMENTS

D      OPENING ADDRESS BY THE MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES

E      BUDGET TABLE

 

 

OPENING OF THE SESSION

1. The General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) held its Twenty-fifth Session in Sliema, Malta, from 12 to 15 September 2000, at the kind invitation of the Government of the Republic of Malta.

2. The Session was attended by delegates from 19 Members of the Commission, and by observers from the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), Greenpeace International and the World Conservation Union. The list of participants is given in Appendix B to this report.

3. The meeting was called to order by Mr F. Montanaro Mifsud, Chairman of the Commission, who welcomed the participants to Malta and wished them a successful meeting and a pleasant stay in Malta.

4. The Chairman of GFCM then gave the floor to the Hon. Ninu Zammit, Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries of Malta who, in his opening address, welcomed the participants to Malta, highlighting the important role of such specialized meetings. He stated that the autonomy of the Commission was important and reiterated his country’s invitation to house permanently the headquarters of an autonomous Commission. The text of the opening address is given in Appendix D.

5. At the invitation of the Chairman of GFCM, Mr Z.S. Karnicki, Director of the Fishery Policy and Planning Division, then addressed the Commission on behalf of the Director-General of FAO, Dr Jacques Diouf.

6. Mr Karnicki expressed the appreciation of FAO to the Government of the Republic of Malta for hosting the meeting and for providing such excellent facilities and organization. He pointed out that the required majority of GFCM Members had not yet ratified the amendments to the Agreement of the Commission and, while realizing that this was a complex and slow moving process often requiring the approval of parliament and ministries, he hoped that before the next Session of the Commission the required majority of Members would ratify the amendments. He also indicated that despite the lack of an autonomous budget, thanks to the voluntary financial support of several Members, the programme of work of the Commission had been successfully implemented. Finally, he expressed the hope that the scale of contributions to the autonomous budget would be agreed upon at this Session.

ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE SESSION

7. After discussion, it was agreed that Agenda item 7 "Autonomous budget, scale of contribution for an autonomous budget and implication for the programme of work of the Commission", should be discussed after agenda item 3. The Agenda as amended is attached as Appendix A to this report.

8. The documents which were before the Commission are listed in Appendix C.

INTERSESSIONAL ACTIVITIES

9. The Secretariat introduced document GFCM/XXV/2000/2. Reports were made on four major activities.

(a) Activities of the Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC)

10. The intersessional activities carried out by SAC and its subsidiary bodies consisted of a first meeting of the Working Group on Small Pelagics (Fuengirola, Spain, 1-3 March 2000) and a second meeting of the Working Group on Demersal Species (Sète, France, 21-23 March 2000). The outcomes of these Working Groups were reviewed in detail by the Sub-Committee for Stock Assessment.

11. The sessions of the four SAC Sub-Committees were held concurrently in Madrid from 26 to 29 April 2000 prior to the Third Session of SAC (2-5 May 2000). The Committee reviewed the suggestions and conclusions of its Sub-Committees and formulated a number of recommendations to GFCM which were discussed under agenda item 6.

12. The Secretariat thanked those Members and the COPEMED Project which had provided financial and logistical support.

13. The Chairman of SAC, Mr J. Camiñas, informed the Commission that preliminary meetings had been organized, prior to SAC and its Sub-Committee Sessions, with the Coordinators of the Sub-Committees and the Secretariat, respectively: (i) in Rome, to prepare the Provisional Agendas of the above-mentioned meetings, and (ii) in Barcelona, to draft a definition on management and operational units. The Chairman of SAC further acknowledged the encouraging work performed by each of the SAC subsidiaries. He pointed out the high level of attendance by experts, particularly at the SAC Session where 14 delegations were present and recalled that important documents were produced, for example on socio-economic indicators, on the status of fisheries resources and on management units.

14. The Commission commended the work of SAC and its Chairman in the discussion that followed. One delegation reiterated the need to undertake studies on the Black Sea as well. All delegations also expressed the view that liaison and coordination with other organizations in the Mediterranean and better circulation of information between SAC and its subsidiary bodies are necessary.

15. An ad hoc Working Group was set up by the Chairman to propose a procedure that would improve the contacts between SAC and GFCM scientists. The Working Group proposed:

• an informal meeting to be held in October 2000 in FAO Headquarters, bringing together the Coordinators of the SAC Sub-Committees, the SAC Chairman and the GFCM Secretariat to draft agendas for SAC, its Sub-Committees and Working Groups. The agendas prepared would be dispatched by the Secretariat to members of SAC and to the Sub-Committee members.
• to urge members that had not yet designated their GFCM focal points and national experts by Sub-Committees to do so in order to facilitate the work of SAC and its subsidiary bodies and improve communication with members.

16. These proposals were endorsed by the Commission.

(b) Activities of the Committee on Aquaculture (CAQ)

17. The Secretariat informed the Commission that, in addition to the Second Session of CAQ (Rome, Italy, 13-16 June 2000), the Consultation on the Application of Article 9 of the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries in the Mediterranean Region was held in Rome, Italy, (19-23 July 1999). The main outcome of the Consultation was the adoption of a Plan of Action that aimed at the implementation of the principles of the Code to Mediterranean aquaculture, the improvement of planning schemes, the conservation of the environment and the stabilization of trade in aquaculture products. The Chairman of CAQ, Mr S. Cataudella, emphasized the opportunity given by the Code of Conduct to adopt a holistic approach to address aquaculture and fisheries issues.

18. The Second Session of CAQ was attended by 14 Members of GFCM. The Committee reviewed the activities carried out by its Networks and endorsed the outcome of the Consultation on the Application of Article 9 of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. The need to strengthen liaison with other new organizations such as the European Aquaculture Society was underlined as well as the need to expand environment-related activities (see Agenda item 6, recommendations of CAQ).

19. The activities of the Aquaculture Networks during the intersessional period were listed by the Secretariat. For the network on aquaculture information (SIPAM) the activities included the annual meeting of national coordinators and the Steering Committee, the preparation of a new release of the data bases, the preparation of a prototype for an Internet based SIPAM, the inclusion of SIPAM as an input centre for ASFA for aquaculture and for countries of the region not belonging to ASFA, as well as the inclusion of two new countries, Lebanon and Libya. The Commission was informed that the network on technical aspects (TECAM) had organized a meeting on environmental impact assessment and aquaculture and had also launched three surveys of existing capabilities in genetics, nutrition and economics. Finally, information was given on the workshop on quality of aquaculture products, organized by the network on social and economic aspects of aquaculture (SELAM). These last two networks were jointly coordinated with the International Centre for Advanced Mediterreanean Agronomic Studies (CIHEAM). Of relevance in the intersessional activities was also the participation of representatives of the three networks at the Nice 2000 meeting which had been organized jointly by the European Aquaculture Society (EAS) and the World Aquaculture Society (WAS) in which an improvement in coordination between the various groups was sought. The Commission endorsed the Resolutions of CAQ concerning the use of four GFCM languages in the future sessions of CAQ.

(c) Activities of ADRIAMED

20. Mr Fabio Massa, the Project Manager of the ADRIAMED Regional Project (Scientific Cooperation to Support of Responsible Fisheries in the Adriatic Sea), presented the overall objectives and work programme of the Project.

21. It was underlined that most activities and project components were relevant topics for the work of SAC. It was noted that the Project Manager of ADRIAMED had attended the Third Session of SAC and the Second Session of CAQ. During these meetings, areas of cooperation were identified.

22. It was further noted that the main components and activities of the Project included: the preparation of a fishing directory; the establishment of a fisheries information system; the setting-up of working groups on shared demersal resources and on shared small pelagic resources in the Adriatic. Cooperative schemes with fisheries organizations and fisheries industries had also been launched. A working group on socio-economic aspects and a working group concerning management units were being organized in cooperation with SAC. An expert consultation in collaboration with CAQ on the relationship between aquaculture and capture fisheries was planned. A review and appraisal of existing fishery legislation, monitoring, control and surveillance capacities were being initiated.

(d) Activities of COPEMED

23. The Project Director, Mr Rafael Robles, informed the Commission that the Logical Framework Analysis (LFR), including the reporting, monitoring and evaluation system had been introduced, resulting in restructuring and harmonizing the whole previously planned work programme with some additional new activities to complement it. The Steering Committee members had directly participated in this exercise providing their inputs at national and regional levels.

24. The key points on which the project mostly concentrated its efforts are as follow:

• Attention to the southern countries in the work to be carried out.
• Clear national commitment in the execution of the activities through an increasing co-funding that would facilitate self-sustainability in the future.
• Increasing emphasis on the achievement of tangible results and to the development of on-the-job training.
• Increasing involvement of experts from the southern countries in SAC activities.

25. The Commission expressed appreciation for the achievements of the COPEMED Project, while several Members expressed the hope that the project would be extended beyond the present period. The Commission expressed the wish that COPEMED Phase II would involve in some way the Eastern Mediterranean countries at the minimum cost to COPEMED budget.

AUTONOMOUS BUDGET, SCALE OF CONTRIBUTION FOR AN AUTONOMOUS
BUDGET AND IMPLICATION FOR THE PROGRAMME OF WORK
OF THE COMMISSION

26. The Secretariat introduced this Agenda item on the basis of document GFCM/XXV/2000/6. The Commission was informed that five GFCM members (Cyprus, EC, Italy, Malta, and Turkey) had deposited their instruments of acceptance of the amendments to the Agreement of GFCM. Thus, there was still a need for ten additional members to ratify and deposit their acceptance of these amendments in order to reach the two-thirds of membership required for the entry into force of the new GFCM Agreement.

27. The status of the process of acceptance of each of the other Members was reviewed by the Commission. Most Members were well advanced in this process and likely to have the amendments approved by their relevant authorities prior to the next GFCM Session. Although all Members reiterated their support for an autonomous budget to GFCM, in some countries the ratification process was delayed pending the adoption of the scale of contributions by the Commission.

28. The Secretariat summarized the procedure (formula) to be used to determine the scale of contributions, taking into consideration the comments made at the Extraordinary Session and Twenty-fourth Session (Alicante, Spain, July 1999). It was recalled that an understanding was reached during these Sessions on the formula as well as on the three factors on which it was based: membership fee, wealth component, and extent of fish production output (catch component). It was noted that the scale of contributions could not be adopted at the Twenty-fourth Session of GFCM as there was no quorum.

29. In the course of the discussions of this item, questions of a technical nature were raised on the respective weighting of the three factors. Some delegations pointed out that the latter could always be adapted in the future if the need arose. One delegation suggested that the currency for the contributions be in Euro rather than in US dollars. Another delegation noted that, with regard to the Black Sea, not all riparian countries were GFCM Members and that for this area the small-pelagic sub-component of the catch factor should not be taken into account. One delegation suggested that the value of fish replace both wealth and fish production components.

30. Finally, with the exception of one Member (Egypt), one abstention (Israel), and the reservation of Turkey, which supported the proposed scale of contributions, subject to the exclusion from the calculations of their small pelagic catch in the Black Sea, the Commission agreed on the scale of contributions, which would be applicable to the GFCM autonomous budget once the agreement entered into force, calculated in accordance with the following formula.

Factors for calculation which should be applicable to the GFCM autonomous budget once the amended Agreement entered into force:

• membership: a fixed proportion of the budget; equally shared amongst members
• wealth component: the wealth of the Member; and,
• catch component: the total capture fishery and aquaculture production of the Member.

Weight to be given to each factor (as percentage of total autonomous budget):

• Membership: 10 percent
• Wealth component: 35 percent
• Catch component: 55 percent

Measurement of the factors:

• Membership: all Members
• Wealth component: according to per caput GDP (measured in US $ as published by the World Bank); members falling into four categories: below US$ 1 000; between US$ 1 000 and US$ 9 999; between US$ 10 000 and US$ 29 999 and US$ 30 000 and above. The first category is exempt from the wealth component. The second pays one share; the third pays 10 shares, and the fourth category pays 20 shares. Exceptions are made for countries with a total GDP below US$ 5 thousand million (1997) to which a GNP category one step below is applied. Some countries (Cyprus, Malta and Monaco) are brought down to the first category and, as a result, are exempt from the wealth component (as long as their annual GDP remains below US$ 5 thousand million).
• Catch component: The catch/production figures to be used are those published by FAO in STATLANT 37A DATABASE. A three-year average is calculated using the period ending two years prior to that for which the budget will apply. Due to different values of small pelagic and other species, the "GFCM catch" for the purpose of determining the scale of contributions is calculated by applying a factor of 4 to all fish produced by Members in the Mediterranean and in the Black Sea and its adjacent waters, except for small pelagics.

31. Before the final implementation of the scale of contributions, the Commission requested that each Members should validate the catch figure that are considered in the calculation of its contribution.

32. An example of the scale of contributions calculated on the hypothetical autonomous budget of US$ 750,000 using the agreed formula and based on statistical data of 1995-97 is given in Appendix E.

SELECTED ISSUES IN FISHERIES AND CAPTURE FISHERIES OF RELEVANCE TO GFCM REGIONS

33. The item was introduced by the Secretariat on the basis of document GFCM/XXV/2000/3. The document addressed the issues of the management of fishing capacity and the international plans of action related to it, subsidies in fisheries, illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing (IUU), precautionary approach, sustainable development indicators, conservation and management of sharks and objective and reliable fishery status and trends reporting.

34. Several delegations commented on the document, pointing out that these were complex issues.

35. The delegate of Japan informed the Commission of reduction in Japanese fishing capacity in tuna longline fleet and invited other Members to do the same as and where appropriate. Concerning illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, he stressed the need to develop a control scheme to eliminate the operation of "flag of convenience" fishing vessels in the GFCM area. He also noted that misinformation was being diffused by several interest groups and requested FAO to address this situation by all means available. Regarding subsidies in fisheries, Japan considered FAO a neutral forum and looked forward to the outcome of the relevant FAO expert consultation, scheduled for early December 2000. Finally, he suggested that the application of the ecosystem approach to fishery management in the GFCM area should be considered.

36. The delegation of the European Community suggested that the document should be considered as an information document in which the major issues were well summarized. Opening a discussion on the major issues presented in the document is premature, as other FAO fora were more suitable to discuss these issues. It also suggested that international fisheries instruments when adopted and implemented should be considered by GFCM with the aim of assessing their relevance to the region and eventually to consider facilitating their implementation within the region.

37. The delegate from Israel declared that subsidies did not always have a negative impact. He informed the Commission that his country used subsidies to develop the fishery sector and considered that this policy had an overall positive impact on the sector. He noted the negative impact of the most recent fuel price increases on the welfare of the fisheries sector and invited the Commission to formulate a declaration that would invite governments of Members to address the problem and look for suitable ways to reduce or compensate for high fuel prices.

38. The delegate from Malta informed the Commission that his country has introduced a system of allocation of fuel on a duty free basis, whereby fishermen are give a provision of duty free fuel in proportion to their registered landings. He also announced that recent studies carried out in the Maltese Exclusive Fishing Zone have indicated that the exploitation of demersal resources has been maintained at MSY. In view of the fragile ecosystem which exists in this region, the Maltese Government has kept a strict control on fishing effort, which has reached a maximum of only 11,000 HP units for demersal species.

39. The delegate from Algeria provided information on a plan of action developed by his country which should enhance scientific and technical relations with other Members of GFCM. The Plan of Action implied the adaptation of the development targets to the socio-economic condition and the setting-up of a control scheme to monitor fishing capacity as well as the status of fisheries resources. The Plan also included the updating of the fishery legislation, the encouragement for private investment and partnership with other countries. The main goal of the plan of action was to develop a policy that should lead to the sustainable use of fisheries resources.

40. The delegate from Cyprus provided information on the activities of his country concerning the management of fishing capacity and the monitoring and control of fishing activities.

41. The delegate from Libya informed the meeting that his country offered, by law, designated subsidies to fishermen which may face catastrophic accidents at sea and to younger generations to take up fishing as a profession.

42. The delegates from Morocco and Tunisia indicated that subsidies may contribute to the development of fisheries, and particularly, to the promotion of artisanal fisheries if applied in an appropriate way.

43. The delegate from Tunisia stated that his country had always enforced international and regional resolutions and guidelines concerning the management of the fishing capacity and the IUU activities. He also provided information on the content of the Tunisian National Action Plan being implemented since 1999 and which, based on the results of the Stock Assessment National Program, aims at a sustainable and rational exploitation of the marine resources. He finally thanked the Japanese Government for its support to the Tunisian fisheries sector.

44. The International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) informed the Commission that, in the last ten years, the issue of illegal, unregulated, and unreported fishing (IUU) has been of considerable importance, particularly as concerned tuna fishing activities in the Mediterranean by vessels from open registers.

45. ICCAT has adopted a series of management measures aimed at curbing IUU activities, including a reporting/sighting scheme to detect illegal fishing and vessels; a system to monitor imports, landings and transshipments of tunas by IUU vessels; as well as identification and publication of a list of alleged IUU vessels. ICCAT measures included discouraging the purchase of IUU fish; contacts with flag states of IUU vessels, and non-discriminatory, trade restrictive measures (consistent with international agreements). These measures have proved to be very effective in reducing IUU activities (e.g. as evidenced by the reported reduction of IUU vessels in the Mediterranean). Governments of some flag States of alleged IUU vessels have started imposing stricter regulations on their fleets and have also started taking appropriate actions on these vessels.

46. The collaboration of GFCM with ICCAT to combat IUU fishing was essential. Therefore, ICCAT requested GFCM to give due consideration to the various ICCAT measures aimed at curbing IUU activities in the Mediterranean.

47. The Commission called on all Members who did not ratify the Compliance Agreement to do so at the earliest possible date.

MANAGEMENT OF MEDITERRANEAN FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE

(a) Review of recommendations by the Third Session of SAC (Madrid, Spain, 2-5 May 2000)

48. The report of the Third Session of SAC was presented by its Chairman, Mr J. Caminas. Referring to the work of the Sub-Committees, he indicated that the Sub-Committee for Stock Assessment (SCSA) had analysed all the scientific information available in the region for the period 1985-1999 covering the eight most important demersal and small pelagic species (hake, red mullet, striped red mullet, blue whiting, red shrimp, anchovy, sardine and sardinella). Up to 90 evaluations were analysed. Three species of large pelagic (bluefin tuna, swordfish and albacore) were also taken into consideration (ICCAT, 1999).

49. Most of the evaluations concerned stocks of the northern and western parts of the region and SAC was of the view that important non-published information, relevant to stock assessment already existing in some countries had not been made available to the Sub-Committee meeting.

50. Based on this analysis, SAC detected an clear growth of over-fishing of some demersal species and noted also the risk of recruitment over-fishing of anchovy. It recommended to strictly apply existing management measures and develop new ones if necessary. However, SAC also considered that any new management measure should take into consideration the weakness and uncertainty of some assessments used by SCSA to deliver the advice. Nevertheless, socio-economic impacts of these measures should be considered.

51. SAC also drew attention to the importance of the role of the relationship between the environment and resources. Additionally, SAC indicated that the definition of geographical management units to report the indicators was essential and that homogenous socio-economic indicators in each of these management units had to be developed.

52. After consideration of the recommendations made by SAC, the Commission adopted the following recommendations.

Economics and Social Sciences

• To develop a network of social scientists in order to facilitate the work of the Sub-Committee. The Network, using its own Web Page, would contribute to the inventory of social experts and studies and to the completion of the glossary.
• To develop and use homogenous socio-economic indicators in each of the GFCM management units.
• To carry out studies considering the relationship between the social, institutional and legal aspects of fisheries management.

Stock Assessment

• To develop and apply management measures necessary to correct the problems of overfishing.
• To define the limits of management units with precision as soon as possible.
• That active participation of member countries in providing the Working Group with all the existing information at their disposal was essential.
• That efforts should be made to increase the number of assessments carried out in the southern and eastern areas.

Statistics and Information

• That SCSI should be entrusted with the collection of capture fisheries statistics for all disciplines related to the industry. It should coordinate activities contributing to a single fisheries statistics database which would be managed by the Secretariat of a future autonomous GFCM.
• That the "STATLANT 37B" questionnaire should be abolished.
• That a regional project to improve the quality and coverage of data for the Mediterranean as a whole be prepared and submitted to potential donors, using appropriate procedures.
• That a multidisciplinary Working Group, under the responsibility of SCSI, should be brought together to design and compile an inventory of Operational Units as well as to define the data structure and fishing effort parameters. This Working Group would, in the first instance, meet under the framework of the ADRIAMED project and focus on the Adriatic region.

Marine Environment and Ecosystems

• To carry out a study on the spatial and temporal distribution on nursery areas, giving particular attention to the environmental and biotic features of such areas.
• To analyse the effects of environmental parameters on the recruitment processes for shared resources.
• To study the effect of fishing gear on non-targeted species.
• That member countries coordinate their national shark plans at the regional Mediterranean level within the framework of the FAO IPOA on sharks.

53. The delegate of Japan drew the attention of the Commission to the need for a study on the effects of fishing on the environment and the impact of the environment on the marine resources in a balanced manner and called upon SAC to give further attention to such interaction and to support a study on the effect of non-target/associated species and non-fishing activities on the fishing operations.

54. In the light of preliminary work on stock assessment and within the terms of reference of the Sub-Committees, already endorsed by the Commission in previous sessions, the Commission requests SAC to accelerate the completion of foreseen tasks focusing its attention on a critical review of existing fisheries assessment methods. Moreover, taking into account the results of this analysis, SAC is requested to define a set of most appropriate assessment methods which should result in the establishment of a harmonized assessment methodology, agreed by scientists of Members, and which is a prerequisite for rational management decisions. To this effect, Members should provide the GFCM and its subsidiaries bodies with all relevant information available.

55. For its Fourth meeting, SAC is requested:

a) On the issue of stock assessment and conservation

To conduct an up-to-date evaluation for some demersal and small pelagic species, by using the most recent data sets collected both by direct (bottom trawl surveys, eggs and larvae survey, echo-survey) and indirect methods (catch/landing monitoring). SAC is requested to explore different outputs consequent to different management scenarios. In the light of the above outputs SAC is requested to evaluate the appropriateness of present management measures and should propose new or alternative conservation measures whenever necessary. In this regard, the Commission invites SAC to take also into account the knowledge of nursery and/or reproductive areas, whenever available (List of selected species: Merluccius merluccius, Mullus barbatus, Engraulis encrasichalus, sardina picchiardus, Sardinella auratus, Merlangus merlangus, pagellus erythrinus, Aristiomorpha foliacea, Aristeus antennatus, Parapenaeus longirostris, Nephrops norvegicus, Eledone spp., Sparidae, Psetta maxima, Sprattus sprattus, Trachurus trachurus).

b) On the issue of management unit

The Commission renews the mandate to SAC to proceed in the definition of Management Units for demersal and small pelagic species, according to the work programme already agreed. However, and with a view to maintaining the necessary flexibility in any future definition of management units, the Commission invites the working group to also consider the super-imposing of a simple geographical grid (by latitudinal and longitudinal squares) on the entire Mediterranean and adjacent sea basins. This simple approach would be without prejudice to future refinements in light of available scientific data.

(b) Committee on Aquaculture (CAQ)

56. The Chairman of CAQ, Mr Cataudella, made reference to the report of the Second Session of the Committee on Aquaculture (GFCM/XXV/2000/Inf.5) and to document GFCM/XXV/2000/4 containing a summary of the recommendations of the last CAQ session. He thanked the Technical Secretary, Mr Pedini, on behalf of several delegations for the continuous support provided to the activities of the Committee.

57. He pointed out the need to move from "old fashioned" planning approaches in which aquaculture was considered in isolation to a more modern approach in which the interactions of the sector with other users of the same resources were analysed. The role of Mediterranean coastal lagoons, used for aquaculture, fisheries and at the same time important nurseries, was cited as example of the need to approach the analysis of systems in a more integrated way as shown by Article 9 of the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (CCRF).

58. After discussion, the Commission, referring to the CAQ requests, recommended that activities of high regional relevance were to be given priority over more nationally oriented ones and indicated that work on specific matters should have a more open and multidisciplinary treatment in order to follow the orientations of the CCRF.

59. It also recommended a better integration of capture fisheries and aquaculture as part of a single system, since subjects such as biodiversity or environmental conservation required a common analysis. An analysis of systems was also recommended, in which environmental quality would be considered a valuable asset to be preserved for future generations.

60. The delegate from Albania informed the Commission that in some Albanian coastal areas and fresh water bodies, the risk of extinction of the species Acipensen sturio has been noted. He also asked for the support of ADRIAMED Project for a broad action restocking that would be carried out with the help of the fishing communities concerned.

61. The delegate from Tunisia emphasized the continuing support of his country to SIPAM and thanked the Italian Government for his support to this network. He stated, however, that SIPAM would need additional external support if it has to properly carry out its activities.

62. The Commission noted that despite the scarcity of the resources made available to SIPAM, the activities carried out so far by the Network are satisfactory. The Commission recommended that additional resources be provided and that the relation to SIPAM with other similar regional grouping be improved.

63. For the TECAM and SELAM networks, coordinated with the important assistance of CIHEAM, the Commission recommended to orient the activities towards more systemic analyses. The CAQ Chairman highlighted that the Consultation on the Adoption of Article 9 of the FAO CCRF had created a new mentality and that work in this direction should be continued.

64. Interventions were made by Egypt and Algeria to highlight the complementarity of capture and culture fisheries. Other interventions by Croatia, Monaco and Israel referred to the introduction of exotics by aquaculture and other practices, a matter of serious concern in terms of impact and in relation to the necessity to develop and apply regional legislation to counter potential negative impacts. The Technical Secretary, Mr Pedini, pointed out that this matter had been discussed at the Consultation and that a specific Plan had been proposed. An improvement of the coordination with other groups in the Mediterranean dealing with introductions was recommended by Monaco and generally endorsed by the Commission.

65. The EC delegation highlighted the importance of the networks to ensure a better integration between capture and culture fisheries and indicated that they supported the CAQ recommendations. The EC delegation also highlighted the need to reconsider the funding of activities on aquaculture within the framework of the Commission.

66. The delegate of Japan supported the recommendations and indicated that recently Japan had faced problems of pollution, introduction of exotics, diseases and other problems that could lead to a possible decrease in aquaculture production. Fearing that the Mediterranean could follow a similar fate, Japan suggested that an analysis of their experiences could be useful to avoid repetition of similar situations.

67. The Commission endorsed the recommendations of the Committee on Aquaculture as presented in document GFCM/XXV/2000/4.

(c) Review and update of the GFCM Resolutions on Fisheries Management

Resolution 95/1

 

68. The Commission re-discussed the updating of the GFCM regulation in the light of the proposal made by ICCAT. Such an update was endorsed by the Twenty-fourth Session of GFCM (Alicante, Spain, July 1999) but not formally adopted as there was no quorum at that Session. The Commission accepted the update and the new Resolution 95/1 Rev. 2000 would read:

IN VIEW OF the 1998 stock assessment on bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean by the ICCAT Standing Committee on Research and Statistics (SCRS), indicating that an annual catch level equal or higher than 33,000 MT would not be sustainable, RECOGNIZING the need to reconcile the necessary conservation of the stock with the needs of coastal fishing communities which are dependent mainly on fishing for this stock, RECALLING that Croatia was undergoing a state of war during the early 1990s.
The Commission recommended: 1) That a Total Allowable Catch (TAC) of 32,000 MT for 1999 and of 29,500 MT for 2000 be established. 2) That in order to establish an allocation of fishing possibilities, the catches of years 1993 and 1994 (whichever is higher), as laid down by ICCAT/SCRS before 1998, be used as reference, except in the case of Croatia, for which a specific quota is set for 1999. 3) That according to paragraph 2 above, the following allocation scheme be established.
	1999	2000
China (People's Republic) Croatia European Community (EC) Japan Korea Libya Morocco Tunisia	82 MT 950 MT 20,165 MT 3,199 MT 672 MT 1,300 MT 820 MT 2,326 MT	76 MT 876 MT 18,590 MT 2,949 MT 619 MT 1,199 MT 756 MT 2,144 MT
4) Quantities to be deducted from the 1999 catch quota under the terms of paragraph 2 of the "Recommendation by ICCAT Regarding Compliance in the Bluefin Tuna and North Atlantic Swordfish Fisheries", shall be calculated for all Contracting Parties, with respect to the catch data referred to in paragraph 2 above, as revised by SCRS in 1998. 5) These provisions replace the 1995 "A Recommendation by ICCAT on Supplemental Management Measures for Eastern Atlantic Bluefin Tuna". 6) For those non-contracting parties, entities or fishing entities with catches of bluefin tuna in the east Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea from 1993 onwards, the catch limit for 1999 and 2000 will be calculated according to paragraph 2.
	1999	2000
	2,486	2,291

 

69. Delegates from Morocco and Libya recalled their position at previous meetings concerning the allocation of quotas for bluefin tuna capture. The Commission was informed that an ICCAT Working Group was set up and that the results of its work will be reviewed by an extraordinary meeting that will be held in Marakech, Morocco, in November 2000.

Resolution 97/3

70. The updated Resolution 97/3 Rev 2000 would read:

The Commission: CONSIDERING the need to take measures regarding the gears used during periods when their impact is most notable on juveniles as well as on spawning stock; CONSIDERING the insufficient efforts made by Contracting Parties to reduce their own catches of the bluefin tuna in accordance with different Recommendation adopted by ICCAT; CONSIDERING the highly-migratory characteristics of bluefin tunas, including juveniles, as well as the appearance of these juveniles at different times in different areas of the Mediterranean Sea; CONSIDERING and RECALLING the conclusions of the ICCAT Standing Committee on Research and Statistics (SCRS) that the existing closed season is not established on scientific data, as well as the obligation of each Contracting Party to provide data about catch composition throughout the fishing season for the Mediterranean Sea and which was provided for the Adriatic Sea; The Commission recommended: 1. prohibiting purse seine fishing in the Adriatic Sea during the period from 1 - 31 May, in order to protect juveniles; 2. prohibiting purse seine fishing in the other areas of the Mediterranean Sea during the period from 16 July - 15 August in order to protect juveniles; 3. the border line between Adriatic and other parts of the Mediterranean will be the line which connects the Albanian - Greek border line and Cape Santa Maria- Leuca 4. that each Contracting Party, Cooperating non-contracting Party, entity or fishing entity which has a purse seine bluefin tuna fishery in areas of the Mediterranean Sea prohibit any transfer of its fleets to either of the two areas during the above respective closed seasons referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 above; 5. that this recommendation replace the regulatory measure currently in effect on a closed season for the Mediterranean bluefin tuna purse seine fishing.

New Resolutions

71. The Commission also adopted the new resolutions proposed by ICCAT.

Resolution 2000/1   The Commission:   CONSIDERING the Recommendations adopted by ICCAT in 1974 and 1994 concerning bluefin tuna minimum size; IN ORDER to facilitate commercial transactions without jeopardizing the quality of information on catches and trade of bluefin tuna; The Commission recommended: FIRST: the prohibition of retaining on board, landing and sale of fish less than 3.2 kg by fishing vessels of Contracting Parties and non-Contracting Parties. SECOND: that adequate measures be taken by ICCAT in November 1997 to guarantee greater transparency and more reliability of statistics, with the aim of identifying the origin of catches. This Recommendation is supplemental to the minimum size regulations currently in effect on bluefin tuna.

 

 

Resolution 2000/2 CONSIDERING the Recommendations adopted by ICCAT in 1974, 1994, and 1996 concerning bluefin tuna minimum size; IN ORDER TO ensure adequate enforcement and monitoring of the prohibition on harvest of age zero bluefin tuna; The Commission recommended that: In addition to the prohibition on retaining on board, landing and sale of fish less than 3.2 kg by fishing vessels of Contracting Parties and non-contracting parties, entities or fishing entities, each Contracting Party and non-contracting party, entity or fishing entity shall take the necessary measures to prohibit the landing, possession, or sale in markets in nations bordering the Convention area of Atlantic bluefin tuna of fish less than 3.2 kg. This Recommendation is supplementary to the minimum size regulations currently in effect for bluefin tuna.

 

PROGRAMME OF WORK FOR THE INTERSESSIONAL PERIOD

72. The Commission took note of the schedule of meetings and activities proposed by SAC and its subsidiary bodies and by CAQ and its associated networks, and submitted for approval and possible financing by the Commission. The following list of meetings and activities were approved.

(a) Statutory Bodies

Meeting	Date	Place	Duration (Days)	Working Language	Costs (US$)	Financed by
GFCM 26th Session	Sept. 2001	Italy	4	4	55.000	Italy
SAC Annual Session	May 2001	Athens	4	4	50.000	Greece

 

(b) SAC Sub-Committees

73. All SAC Sub-Committee meetings will be held at FAO Headquarters, Rome, Italy, in April 2001 without interpretation.

(c) Working Groups of the Sub-Committees

74. Sub-Committee on Economic and Social Sciences

Name of meeting/activity	Date and Venue	Remarks	Financing Source
Training Course CIHEAM/COPEMED/ IEO on bioeconomic modeling	Fuengirola, Spain, Sep.2000	Common to all SAC SCs.	COPEMED/CIHEAM
Working Group on Socio-Economic Indicators in the Adriatic Sea	Ancona December 2000		Co-sponsored by ADRIAMED
Working Group on Socio-Economic Indicators in the Alboran Sea in the Gulf of Gabes	Tunis Date TBD	-	COPEMED Members
WG on Data Analysis	Rome, Italy, Aug.2001	-	No Cost

 

75. Sub-Committee on Fishery Statistics and Information

Name of meeting/activity	Date and Venue	Remarks	Financing Source
Ad hoc Task Force meeting for the formulation of a regional project proposal	Mazzara del Vallo, Italy, Sep.2000	To be organized by IRMA	IRMA
WG meeting to review operation units proposed by SCSA	Termoli, Italy, TBD	ADRIAMED/TBD	Co-sponsored by ADRIAMED
Guidelines on the Electronic Library	Coordinated by GFCM Secretariat	Through email correspondence	At no cost to the Commission

 

76. Sub-Committee for Stock Assessment

Name of meeting/activity	Date and Venue	Remarks	Financing Source
Meeting to finalize definition of management units	TBD (COPEMED HQs)	Common to all Sub-Committees	COPEMED
WG on Small Pelagic Species	Greece, Mar. 2001	Scientific papers to be published	No interpretation Only local costs
WG on Demersal Species	Tunisia, Mar.2001	Scientific papers to be published	No interpretation Only local costs

 

77. Sub-Committee on Marine Environment and Ecosystems

Name of meeting/activity	Date and Venue	Remarks	Financing Source
WG to complete and implement Marine Environment forms	Palma di Mallorca, Spain 26-28 Feb. 2001		Spain
WG to review International Fisheries and Marine Environment Agreements	TBD		TBD

 

(d) Committee on Aquaculture

78. Regarding the programme of work proposed by the Second Session of the Committee on Aquaculture, the Chairman requested the countries to make proposals for financing the activities not fully covered as indicated in the list included in document GFCM/XXV/2000/5. The proposed programme was accepted in principle by the Commission. The activities are listed in the table below.

Name of meeting/activity	Date and Venue	Financing Source	Remarks
Annual meeting of SIPAM Coordinators and Steering Committee	8-12 Nov. 2000 Turkey	Italy
SIPAM platform and software development	Continuous n/a	TBD
Regional Coordination for National Network establishment	Continuous n/a	TBD	by SIPAM
Workshop on data bases on marketing of acquaculture products	Last quarter 2000 TBD	CIHEAM/ FAO/ TBD	by SELAM/SIPAM
Training Workhop for the establishment of selective breeding programme	April 2001 TBD	CIHEAM/ FAO?	by TECAM
Expert Consultation on capture and culture fisheries interaction	TBD	ADRIAMED/ TBD	Co-sponsored by ADRIAMED
Workshop on the use of vaccins and chemiotherapy in Mediterranean aquaculture	June 2001 TBD	CIHEAM/ FAO? TBD	by SELAM/TECAM
Survey for directories on fish diseases	2000 Zaragoza, Spain	CIHEAM/ FAO	by TECAM
Seminar on methodologies for seafood market studies	June 2001 Zaragoza, Spain	CIHEAM/ FAO?/TBD	by SELAM

 

79. During the Second Session of the Committee on Aquaculture (13-16 June 2000), the need to pursue the implementation of the Action Plan through the adoption of Article 9 of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries was raised and Italy expressed its willingness to consider the possibility of financing a meeting on the sustainability indicators. The delegate from Italy confirmed this offer and the delegate from France stated that his country was ready to co-finance meetings organized in this frame and particularly meetings that deal with the homogenization of the studies that concern the impacts and the consequences of species introduction.

80. The Expert Consultation on interactions between capture and culture fisheries, which was planned in collaboration with ADRIAMED, was confirmed for the second half of 2001 although no other financial support was offered in addition to a contribution to the total cost by ADRIAMED. No other offers were made to complement the funding of the other activities proposed by the Aquaculture Committee.

ANY OTHER MATTERS

81. The meeting was informed that the Secretary, Mr Habib Ben Alaya, would be retiring in October 2001 and the next Session would be the last that he would service. FAO will contact all Members in due course to proceed with nominations for a new Secretary of GFCM.

82. The meeting was also informed that Mr Mario Pedini, at present Technical Secretary of the Committee on Aquaculture, would leave his present post shortly. However, the delegates from France and Italy questioned about the continuity of the on-going work of CAQ and requested that FAO makes arrangements for Mr Pedini to continue supporting CAQ for a transitional period until a replacement for him was identified. The Commission expressed its appreciation for the excellent work carried out by Mr Pedini and wished him success in his new position.

83. The Commission reiterated the need to speed up the ratification of the amendments to the GFCM Agreement and urged all Members who have not done it to do so at the earliest possible date.

84. The Commission expressed its appreciation to the Government of Malta for hosting the Twenty-fifth Session of GFCM and for the excellent facilities provided.

ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSONS

85. The Commission, acknowledging the excellent work carried out by Mr F. Montanaro Mifsud (Malta), as Chairman of the Commission during the extension period of his mandate, decided to make his election formal for a new mandate ending in year 2001. Mr M’hamed Sedrati (Morocco) and Mr Julien Turenne (France) were elected First and Second Vice-Chairpersons respectively.

DATE AND PLACE OF THE TWENTY-SIXTH SESSION

86. The offer made by Italy to host the Twenty-sixth Session was welcomed by the Commission. The Session will be held in September 2001. The exact date and place of the meeting will be agreed in due course.

ADOPTION OF THE REPORT

87. The report was adopted on 15 September 2000.

 

APPENDIX A

AGENDA

 

 

1. Opening of the Session

2. Adoption of the Agenda and arrangements for the Session

3. Intersessional activities

• Implementation of the recommendations of the Twenty-fourth session of GFCM
• Activities by SAC and COAQ
• Report by GFCM Members on the implementation of GFCM recommendations

4. Autonomous budget, scale of contribution for an autonomous budget and implication for the programme of work of the Commission

5. Selected issues in fisheries and capture fisheries of relevance to GFCM regions

6. Management of the Mediterranean fisheries and aquaculture

• Review of the recommendations by the Third Session of the Scientific Avisory Committee (Madrid, Spain, 2-5 May 2000)
• Review of the recommendations by the Second Session of the Committee of Aquaculture
  (Rome, Italy, 13-16 June 2000)

7. Programme of work for the intersessional period

• Programme of work proposed by the Scientific Avisory Committee
• Programme of work proposed by the Committee of Aquaculture

8. Any other matters

9. Election of the Chairperson and Vice-Chairpersons

10. Date and place of the Twenty-sixth Session

11. Adoption of the report

 

 

APPENDIX B

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

 

MEMBERS OF GFCM	ALBANIA
	Roland KRISTO Director of Fisheries a.i. Directorate of Fisheries Ministry of Agriculture and Food Tirana Email: [email protected]
	Mevlan BALILAJ MoAF Fishery Development Project Ministry of Agriculture and Food Rr. Muhamet joliesha Nr. 54 Tirana Tel/Fax: +355 4 23 54 94 Email: [email protected]
ALGERIA	Zine El Abidine MEZACHE Inspecteur chargé des activités scientifiques et techniques Ministère de la pêche et des ressources halieutiques Rue des Quatre Canons Alger Tel: 02 72 6170/5559 Fax: 02 72 5373
BULGARIA
CROATIA	Ante DUJMUSIC Counsellor for Fisheries Ministry of Agriculture and Foresry Ul. Grada Vukovara 78 10000 Zagreb Tel: +385 1 61 06 689 Fax: +385 1 61 09 209 Email: [email protected]
CYPRUS	Gabriel P. GABRIELIDES Director Department of Fisheries and Marine Research Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources and the Environment Eolou 13 1416 Nicosia Tel: +357 2 807 867 Fax: +357 2 775 955 Email: [email protected]
EGYPT	Mohamed KHALIFA Agricultural Counselor Representative of Egypt to UN Organizations Embassy of the Arab Republic of Egypt Via Salaria 267 (Villa Savoia) 00199 Rome Tel: +39 06 854 89 56 Fax: +39 06 854 2603 Email: [email protected]
EUROPEAN COMMUNITY – MEMBER ORGANIZATION	John SPENCER Head of Unit Directorate General for Fisheries DG FISH/B4 200 Rue de la Loi 1049 Brussels, Belgium Tel: (+32-2) 2956858 Fax: (+32-2) 2955700
	Franco BIAGI Principal Administrator European Commission Directorate General for Fisheries – C1 Rue Joseph II, 99 1049 Brussels Belgium Tel: +32 2 29 94 104 Fax: +32 2 29 55 621 Email: [email protected]
	Roberto CESARI Administrator European Commission Directorate General for Fisheries DG FISH/B4 Rue Joseph II, 99 1049 Brussels, Belgium Tel: (+32-2) 2994276 Fax: (+32-2) 2955700 Email: [email protected]
	Luc LAPERE Head of Division DG B III – Fisheries Council of the European Union 175 Rue de la Loi 1048 Brussels Belgium Tel: (+32-2) 285 66 40 Fax: (+32-2) 285 68 25 Email: [email protected]
	Magnus BERGSTROM Adviser Swedish National Fishery Administration PO Box 423 SE 40126 Goteborg Sweden Tel: +46 31 74 303 00 Fax: +46 31 74 30 444 Email: [email protected]
FRANCE	Julien TURENNE Chargé de mission Ministère de l´agriculture et de la pêche 3 Place de Fontenoy 75007 Paris Tel: (+33-1) 49558236 Fax: (+33-1) 49558200 Email: [email protected]
GREECE	Olga AGIOVLASSITI (Ms) Vice-directrice de la Direction des pêches Ministry of Agriculture 381 Aharnon Street 11143 Athens Tel: +30 01 2111175 Fax: +30 01 2022086 Email: [email protected]
ISRAEL	Shmuel PISANTY Director Fisheries Division Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development PO Box 1213 K. Haiimi 26106 Tel: +972 48 41 8853 Fax: +972 48 41 88 54 Email: [email protected]
ITALY	Stefano CATAUDELLA Prof. University of Rome Tor Vergata Ministry of Agriculture Via Passo Lombaardi 430 Roma
	Giovanni DELLA SETA Direzione Generale della Pesca Ministero per la Politiche Agricole Viale dell' Arte 16 00144 Roma Tel: (+39 06) 59084785 Fax: (+39 06) 59084176 E-mail: [email protected]
	Rosanna FRONZUTO (Ms) Direzione Generale della Pesca e dell'Acquacoltura Ministero per le Politiche Agricole Viale dell' Arte 16 00144 Roma Tel: (+39 06) 59084496 Fax: (+39 06) 59084176
	C. PICCINETTI Laboratorio di Biologia Marina Pesca Viale Adriatico 1/N 61032 Fano Email: [email protected]
	Dino LEVI Professor CNR IRMA V. Vaccara 61 91026 Mazara del Vallo
	Giovanni BASCIANO Observer, AGCI Pesca Via Bargoni 78 Rome Tel: +39 06 58 32 81 Fax: +39 06 58328350
	Massimo RUSSIELLO Observer, UNCIPESCA Biologist Via Gregorio VII, 80 00165 Rome Tel: +39 06 631280/83270 Fax: +39 06 39379052 Email: [email protected]
	Nazzareno LUCANTONI Oberver, Lega Pesca Ministero per le Politiche Agricole Via Nazionale 243 Roma Tel: +39 06 46204713 Fax: +39 06 46204723
	Leonardo POFFERI Oberver, FEDERCAOPESCA Via del Gigu d’ oro 20 00100 Rome
JAPAN	Takanori OHASHI Programme Coordinator Fisheries Policy Planning Department International Affairs Division Fisheries Agency 1-2-1 Kasumigaseki Chiyoda-ku Tokyo Tel: +81 3 3591 1086 Fax: +81 3 3502 0571
LEBANON
LIBYA	Atig HUNI Director Marine Biology Research Centre Scientific Research Foundation PO Box 3083 Tajura Tel: +218 21 36 90001/2/3 Fax: +218 21 36 90002 Email: [email protected]
MALTA	Francis MONTANARO MIFSUD Ambassador to FAO Permanent Representation of the Republic of Malta to FAO Lungotevere Marzio 12 00186 Rome Italy Tel: (+39 06) 6879990/6879947 Fax: (+39 06) 6892687
	Edward GAUCI BORDA Permanent Secretary Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Barriera Wharf Valletta Tel: (+356) 225236/240899 Fax: (+356) 248602
	Anthony GRUPPETTA Director of Fisheries and Aquaculture Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Torri San Lucjan M’xlokk Tel: (+356) 655525/651898 Fax: (+356) 659330
	Matthew CAMILLERI Fisheries Biologist Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Barriera Wharf Valletta Tel: (+356) 650 934 Fax: (+356) 650 932 Email: [email protected]
	Charles BUSUTTIL Principal Fisheries Officer Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Barriera Wharf Valletta
	Ivan PORTANIER Public Relations Officer National Fisheries Cooperative Triqil-kajjik, Marsaxlokk
MONACO	Patrick VAN KLAVEREN Conseiller technique Direction des relations extérieures Coopération internationale 16 Bd de Suisse MC 98000 Monaco Tel: (+377) 93158148 Fax: (+377) 93154208 Email: [email protected]
MOROCCO	Youssef OUATI Chef de la division de la coopération Ministère des pêches maritimes Nouvelle cité administrative Agdal, Rabat Tel: +212 7 688162 Fax: +212 7 688194 Email: [email protected]
	M'Hamed SEDRATI Directeur Institut national de recherche halieutique 2, rue de Tiznit Casablanca Fax: (+212 2) 26 69 67 Email: [email protected]
ROMANIA	Dumitru BUDESCU Directeur Direction de la pêche, pisciculture et de l'inspection Ministère de l'agriculture et de l'alimentation Rue Carol I No.24 - Sector 3 70033 Bucharest
	Cornelia MAXIM (Mme) Direction de la pêche, pisciculture et de l'inspection Rue Carol I No.24 - Sector 3 70033 Bucharest Email: [email protected]
SPAIN	Maria Carmen CADENAS DE LLANO (Mme) Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación Ortega y Gasset 57 Madrid Tel: (+34) 914025000 Fax: (+34) 913093967 Email: [email protected]
	Juan A. CAMIÑAS Director Centro Oceanografíco de Málaga (IEO) Ministerio de Ciencias y Tecnología Apto. 285; 29640 Fuengirola Tel: (+34 95) 247 81 48 Fax: (+34 952) 246 38 08 E-mail: [email protected]
	Pilar PEREDA (Mme) Investigador Jefe de Programa Centro Oceanografíco de Málaga (IEO) C. Varadero 1 3740 San Pedro del Pinatas Murcia Tel: (+34) 96 81 50 500 Fax: (+34) 96 81 84 441 E-mail: [email protected]
SYRIA
TUNISIA	Taoufik CHERIAA Directeur général de la pêche et de l'aquaculture Ministère de l’Agriculture 32 Rue Alain Savary Tunis Tel: +216 1 892253 Fax: +216 1 799401
	Amor EL ABED Directeur Général Institut National des sciences et technologies de la mer 28 Rue 2 Mars 1934 2025 Salammbo Tel: +216 1 730548 Fax: +216 1 732622 Email: [email protected]
TURKEY	Kamuran PATRONA (Ms) Head of the Protection and Control Department Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs Akay Cad No.3 Bahanliklar Ankara
	Selçuk ERBAS Head of Aquaculture Department a.i. The General Directorate of Agricultural Production and Development Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs Milli Mudafaa Cad 20 Kizilay 06100 Ankara Tel: 41 832 78 Email: [email protected]
OBSERVERS
OBSERVERS FROM INTER-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS	INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION FOR THE CONSERVATION OF ATLANTIC TUNAS (ICCAT)
	Peter M. MIYAKE Assistant Executive Secretary, (ICCAT) C. Corazon de María 8 – 6 Planta 28002 Madrid Tel: (+34 91) 4165600 Fax: (+34 91) 4152612 E-mail: [email protected]
OBSERVERS FROM NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS	GREENPEACE INTERNATIONAL
	Helene BOURS (Ms) EU Oceans Campaigner Route d’Amonines 15 B-6987 Rendeux Belgium Email: [email protected]
	WORLD CONSERVATION UNION (IUCN)
	Despina PIROVOLIDOV SYMONS (Ms) EBCD Rue de la Science 10 Bruxelles 1000 Tel: +32 2 2303072 Fax: +32 2 2308272 Email: [email protected]
FAO Viale delle Terme di Caracalla 00100 Rome	Zbigniew KARNICKI Director Fishery Policy and Planning Division Tel: (+39 06) 57054138 Fax: (+39 06) 57056500 Email: [email protected]
GFCM Secretariat	Fisheries Department
	H. BEN ALAYA Secretary Senior Fishery Liaison International Institutions and Liaison Service Fishery Policy and Planning Division Tel: (+39 06) 57056435 Fax: (+39 06) 57056500 Email: [email protected]
	M. PEDINI Technical Secretary Senior Adviser (Aquaculture) Inland Water Resources and Aquaculture Service Fishery Resources Division Tel: (+39 06) 57056279 Fax: (+39 06) 57053020 Email: [email protected]
	P. OLIVER Senior Fishery Resources Officer Marine Resources Service Fishery Resources Division Tel: (+39 06) 57056354 Fax: (+39 06) 57053020 Email: [email protected]
	A. BONZON Fishery Planning Officer Development Planning Service Fishery Policy and Planning Division Tel: (+39 06) 57056441 Fax: (+39 06) 57056500 Email: [email protected]
	S. COPPOLA Fishery Resources Officer Marine Resources Service Fishery Resources Division Tel: (+39 06) 57053034 Fax: (+39 06) 57053020 Email: [email protected]
	F. FERAL Visiting Scientist Development Planning Service Fishery Policy and Planning Division Email: [email protected]
	J. WEBB Meetings Officer International Institutions and Liaison Service Fishery Policy and Planning Division Tel: (+39 06) 57056721 Fax: (+39 06) 57056500 Email: [email protected]
	M. GUYONNET Secretary International Institutions and Liaison Service Fishery Policy and Planning Division Tel: (+39 06) 57053951 Fax: (+39 06) 57056500 Email: [email protected]
Projects	ADRIAMED
	Fabio Massa FAO-ADRIAMED Project Coordinator Corso Umberto I 86039 Termoli (LB) Italy Tel: +39 0875708252 Email: [email protected]
	COPEMED
	Rafael ROBLES Director Universidad de Alicante Ramón y Cajal 4 03001 Alicante Spain Tel: +34 965 145979 Fax: +34 965 145978 Email: [email protected]
	SIPAM
	Mohamed HAJALI SALEM SIPAM Regional Coordinator 32 Rue Alain Savary 1002 Tunis

 

APPENDIX C

LIST OF DOCUMENTS

 

 

GFCM/XXV/2000/1 Rev.1	Agenda
GFCM/XXV/2000/2	Intersessional activities
GFCM/XXV/2000/3	Selected global issues in fisheries of relevance to GFCM
GFCM/XXV/2000/4 Rev.1	Management of fisheries and aquaculture Recommendations by SAC Recommendations by CAQ
GFCM/XXV/2000/5	Programme of work for the intersessional period Programme of work proposed by SAC Programme of work proposed by CAQ
GFCM/XXV/2000/6	The scale of contributions for the GFCM autonomous budget
GFCM/XXV/2000/Inf.1 Rev.1	List of Documents
GFCM/XXV/2000/Inf.2	List of Participants
GFCM/XXV/2000/Inf.3	Report of the Twenty-fourth Session of the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM), Alicante, Spain, 12-15 July 1999.
GFCM/XXV/2000/Inf.4	Report of the Third Session of the GFCM Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC), Madrid, Spain, 2-5 May 2000
GFCM/XXV/2000/Inf.5	Report of the Second Session of the GFCM Committee on Aquaculture (CAQ), Rome, Italy, 13-16 June 2000

 

APPENDIX D

OPENING ADDRESS
by

Hon. Ninu Zammit
Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries,on the Occasion of the 25^th Meeting of the General Fisheries Commission of the Mediterranean

Malta 12^th September – 15^th September 2000

 

Mr Chairman, Distinguished Delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen,

 

It is with great pleasure that I welcome all participants to this, the 25^th Meeting of the General Fisheries Commission of the Mediterranean, as well as to the working group of the Joint International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas.

We are meeting here, in the heart of the Mediterranean, in order to discuss further the particular matters that fisheries and aquaculture are faced with in this historical sea. It is worth highlighting the important role that meetings of such a specialised and specific nature have with regard to the international situation. This importance is further accentuated by the presence here of representatives from organisations and countries from outside of the Mediterranean region, reinforcing the idea that this sea is a vital, albeit geographically smaller, link in the chain of global fish populations.

Our aim is to identify and ultimately arrive at the precise balance at which fisheries can be sustainable both in the economic terms of ensuring proper livelihoods for fishermen and in the environmental terms of protecting fish-stocks and ecological systems. The Mediterranean Sea is a system within a larger system, and actions taken both here and in the other larger seas will have a mutual impact on each other. Realisation of this means that the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean must maintain its policies of coordinating all activity within the larger international framework in order to protect the Mediterranean from outside and inside influences that could negatively affect the achievement of the aim that we have identified. This coordination must also bear in mind the responsibility of ensuring that the contribution by the Mediterranean Sea to the global oceanic network is also sustainably maintained.

I therefore cannot but recommend to this meeting to continue and finalise the work that was commenced in the Spain meeting of 1999. The autonomy of this Commission within the proper context of communication, cooperation and interaction is extremely desirable. It is only in this way that the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean, as the sum total of its Member States and cognisant and receptive to the views of its observer members, can function in the best interests of the global fisheries cycle, always keeping at the forefront the balance between economic and environmental considerations.

A particular case that illustrates the active implementation of this principle is the working group meeting of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas being held concurrently with this meeting. The monitoring of the capture fisheries of large pelagic species of fish, namely the Bluefin Tuna, Swordfish and Albacore, all fish that are of a highly migratory nature, is yielding a positive result. The recommendations presented by ICCAT and adopted by GFCM, for the restrictions on the use of certain types of fishing gear such as drift nets and purse-seining, are showing the desirable effect in the form of indications of the presence of larger numbers of more mature specimens.

I take the opportunity to renew my country’s invitation to permanently house the headquarters of an autonomous Commission. This would make for an ideal siting of such a nerve centre right at the heart of its "main" concern, the Mediterranean Sea.

In conclusion, allow me once again to welcome you to our country. I trust you will find Malta warm, both in climate and in spirit. I wish you all success in your discussions and decisions and reiterate our commitment to having the importance of our Sea recognised through the creation of an autonomous General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean.

 

Thank you.

APPENDIX E

BUDGET TABLE