Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page

Annex
Tables (FAO and GFCM questionnaires)

Summary of responses from Regional Fishery Bodies to FAO questionnaire (late 2003) on the IPOA-IUU:
Tables 1.1, 1.2, 1.3[130]

Introductory note

FAO’s 2001 International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate IUU Fishing (IPOA-IUU), elaborated under the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, has become prominently visible and the subject of ongoing high-level attention.

At the international level, FAO has undertaken a wide range of activities to support the implementation of the IPOA-IUU, and other United Nations and international agencies and fora have been similarly active in addressing the implementation of the IPOA-IUU.

At the regional level, the secretariats of many regional fishery bodies or arrangements (RFBs), including regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs), have indicated their priorities, activities, challenges, successes and needs in implementing the IPOA-IUU through responses to a questionnaire. RFBs reported implementation, to varying degrees, all of the tools provided in the IPOA-IUU. However, most RFBs have indicated that many challenges lie ahead. One significant and continuing challenge is estimating the extent and effects of IUU fishing.

Most respondents perceived the main causes of IUU fishing as the lack of effective flag state control by both members and non-members, the operation of open registries and the profit motive. Flag state control was also identified as an area where some effective measures have been taken, but mostly where improved measures are needed.

A predominant issue for most RFBs was monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS). Relevant activities were identified as major challenges in combating IUU fishing activity, and certain MCS measures were cited as "effective" by some and "needed" by others. Trade and marketing measures, a major issue for those RFBs that have already adopted such measures, were described as both effective and having a positive impact on reducing IUU fishing.

In general, RFBs indicated significant activity in implementing to certain aspects the information, institutional and policy measures in the IPOA-IUU, and in developing MCS and compliance measures. Items where moderate but increasing activity was reported tended to be IUU-specific, or have otherwise become prominent in the battle against IUU fishing, such as flag state responsibility, port state control and the development of action plans.

The items where only some respondents indicated implementation, largely focused on measures or action that may not be broadly applicable, such as those relating to marketing, trade, chartering arrangements and coordination with other RFBs on policy and enforcement.

Five RFBs indicated that their measures had a positive impact on combating species-specific IUU fishing, and trends indicate that RFBs are continuing to adopt an increasing range of measures that implement the IPOA-IUU. However, some operational problems were also signalled.
Although trends show increasing activity by RFBs in implementing the IPOA-IUU, there is still a need for continuing and intensified efforts to combat IUU fishing on a global scale, accompanied by timely monitoring and evaluation of those efforts.

Table 1.1 Significant activity reported by RFBs: 9 - 11 "yes" responses[131]

Table 1.2 Moderate activity reported by RFBs: 6 - 8 "yes" responses

Table 1.3 Some activity reported by RFBs: 5 or fewer "yes" responses

Summary of responses from GFCM Members to FAO questionnaire (late 2003) on the IPOA-IUU

Tables 2.1, 2.2: Introduction

Questionnaires were distributed by FAO to states in late 2003 to provide a basis for assessing the progress in implementation of the IPOA-IUU, in preparation for the June 2004 FAO Technical Consultation. The objective of the questionnaires was to seek information on the progress of the implementation by Members of the FAO IPOA-IUU. The following ten GFCM Members responded:

The results are presented in two parts: Table 2.1, which could be useful for identifying general trends, shows the total number of GFCM Members that responded to each question; and Table 2.2 identifies the Members and any comments they provided.

Table 2.1 GFCM Members’ responses to FAO questionnaire on IPOA-IUU for states. Part I: Summary

Comment on any item below

Yes: Your state has undertaken measures/action described
No: No measures/action have been undertaken
Plan: There are plans to undertake some or more measures/action
n/a: Question is not applicable to your circumstances

ALL STATES

Yes

No

Plan

n/a

Law and Policy

1.

Has there been a review in your state of IUU fishing activities?

7

2

2.

has a policy or strategy on IUU fishing been developed?

9

1

3.

Have national laws and regulations relating to IUU fishing been reviewed?

8

2


(a) If "Yes" - Have national laws and regulations relating to IUU fishing been adopted?

6

1

Measures/Actions in respect of your state’s nationals

4.

Do you think your state’s nationals are generally aware of the effects of IUU fishing?

10


5.

Have your state’s nationals been made aware of the effects of IUU fishing by the government or any fisheries stakeholder group or organization?

9

1

6.

Are your state’s nationals being discouraged from doing business with those engaged in IUU fishing?

8

1

1

7.

Is it an offence for your state’s nationals to:




(a) Violate fishery laws of other states?

7

2

1

(b) Undermine conservation and management measures of RFMOs?

10


8.

Are your state’s nationals being discouraged from registering their vessels in another state which an RFMO has identified as undermining its conservation and management measures?

5

2

3

9.

Does your state subsidize or economically support activities related to IUU fishing?


10

Monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS)

10.

Have measures been taken to improve MCS?

8

2

1

Requirements for fishing vessels

11.

Is registration required for all fishing vessels?

9

1

12.

Are all vessels that fish within areas of national jurisdiction required to have express authorization to fish (e.g. by licences, authorized categories such as "subsistence fishing", permission or other)?

8

2

13.

Are all vessels that fish beyond areas of national jurisdiction required to have express authorization (including licenses for high seas fishing)?

9

1

Responsibilities of a flag state

14.

Does your state have the means to control the fishing activities of the vessels registered in your state?

10

2[168]

15.

Is there a policy or practice to avoid registering vessels with a history of IUU fishing?

7

2

1

16.

Does your state maintain a comprehensive record of fishing vessels entitled to fly your flag?

9

1

17.

Does your state coordinate the functions of registering fishing vessels and granting authorizations to fish?

8

1

18.

Where your state’s flag vessel is identified as having engaged in IUU fishing, do you take measures to prevent transshipment or other forms of assistance to it?

7

1

2

19.

Do you prohibit, or require prior authorization and reporting for transshipment of your vessels at sea?

7

1

2

High Seas Fishing Activities (Please respond only if your flag vessels fish on the high seas)

20.

Does your state have means to ensure your flag vessels do not undermine high seas fishery conservation and management measures (such as requiring licences, reporting for high seas fishing)?

5

2

2

(a) If "Yes" - Please comment on the measures




(b) If "No" - Does your state authorize other states to board and inspect your flag vessels on the high seas on your behalf?


1

21.

Does your state submit high seas fishing data to FAO?

2

2

3

COASTAL STATES

Knowledge of fishing vessel position in areas of national jurisdiction

22.

Do your officials know where most or all fishing vessels are fishing in your area of national jurisdiction?

5

3

2

(a) If "No" - Do you know where some fishing vessels are fishing in your waters?

2

1

23.

Does your state use any of the following tools that assist in identifying vessel position?




(a) mandatory radio reports on vessel position?

3

6

1

(b) mandatory logbook, including frequent vessel position reporting?

5

2

2

(c) independent observer programme?

2

7

1

(d) capacity strengthening to conduct regular patrols where vessels are known to fish?

8

1

1

1

(e) use of vessel monitoring systems (VMS)?

4

2

3

Catch determination and verification

24.

Is your state able to determine the catch of most or all vessels fishing in your waters?

8

1

1

(a) If "No" - Are you able to determine the catch of some vessels fishing in your waters?

1

1

25.

Does your state require any of the following reports to determine catch?




(a) mandatory reports by logbook?

6

2

2

(b) VMS, radio and/or fax?

5

4

1

26.

Does your state have catch verification procedures, such as port inspections and/or observers?

7

1

2

Access by foreign fishing vessels

27.

Before granting access to any foreign fishing vessel, does your state verify that the vessel has received authorization from its flag state to fish in areas beyond the flag state jurisdiction?

5

1

3

28.

Does your state, in respect of foreign fishing vessels:




(a) avoid granting access to those with a history of IUU fishing?

3

1

3

(b) grant access to those without a request from the flag state, or give an indication that it does not object?

4

3

(c) maintain a record of those authorized to fish in waters under your jurisdiction?

4

1

4

(d) require the use of vessel monitoring systems (VMS)?

3

1

1

4

(e) cooperate with other states in developing joint or common rules for fisheries access?

4

2

3

PORT STATES

Information and Inspections

29.

Does your state require foreign fishing vessels seeking port access to provide information on:




(a) reasonable advance notice of entry into port?

6

4

(b) a copy of the authorization to fish?

3

1

1

3

(c) details of the fishing trip and quantities of fish on board?

5

1

3

30.

Does your state require other vessels engaged in fishing related activities to provide the information indicated in (a) to (c) above?

3

2

3

31.

Does your state only grant foreign fishing vessel access to your ports when vessel inspections can be carried out?

3

2

3

32.

Does your state require the following information from foreign fishing vessels in your port




(a) flag state of vessel and identification details?

5

2

(b) name, nationality and qualifications of the master and the fishing master?

5

2

(c) fishing gear?

4

1

2

(d) catch on board, including origin, species, form and quantity?

5

2

(e) other information required by RFMO or international agreement?

3

2

2

33.

Does your state provide the information in (a) to (e) above to the flag state and relevant RFMO?

3

2

2

Measures/Actions against IUU fishing

34.

Where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting IUU fishing, does your state:




(a) prohibit landings and transshipments from the IUU vessel in port?

5

2

(b) immediately report the matter to relevant authorities in the flag state, and, as appropriate, an RFMO or other state where IUU fishing occurred?

5

1

2

35.

Has your state taken any action against a foreign IUU vessel in your port with the consent of the flag state?

2

3

2

36.

Has your state cooperated, through RFMOs, to adopt and/or strengthen schemes to:




(a) prevent landings, transshipments of IUU caught fish?

4

1

2

(b) prohibit landings by non-members’ vessels where there is a presumption of IUU fishing, based on identification by RFMO?

4

1

2

INTERNATIONALLY AGREED MARKET RELATED MEASURES

37.

Has your state cooperated under the auspices of a regional organization to develop and implement internationally agreed market-related measures to combat IUU fishing?

6

3

1

38.

Has your state taken the following steps to prevent trade or import of IUU caught fish:




(a) encouraging individuals and companies not to do business with others who are engaged in or support IUU fishing?

5

2

1

1

(b) adopting laws that make it a violation to conduct business or trade in fish or fish products derived from IUU fishing?

4

3

1

1

(c) participating in catch certification schemes of RFMOs?

7

1

1

COOPERATION THROUGH REGIONAL FISHERY MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATIONS

39.

Does your state cooperate through RFMOs to combat IUU fishing?

9

1

40.

Have any decisions or actions taken by RFMOs to combat IUU fishing been implemented at national level?

5

2

1

NATIONAL PLAN OF ACTION (NPOA-IUU)

41.

Has your state formulated or begun formulation of an NPOA-IUU?

4

5

1

Table 2.2 GFCM Members’ responses to FAO questionnaire on IPOA-IUU for states. Part 2: Country responses.

Yes: Your state has undertaken measures/action described
No: No measures/action have been undertaken
Plan: There are plans to undertake some or more measures/action
n/a: Question is not applicable to your circumstances

QUESTION

Yes

No

Plan

N/A

Comments

ALL STATES

Law and Policy

1. Has there been a review in your state of IUU fishing activities?

Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia, EC

Algeria, Malta


2. Has a policy or strategy on IUU fishing been developed?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, EC

Lebanon

Algeria It has been considered as an infraction that may result in imprisonment.

3. Have national laws and regulations relating to IUU fishing been reviewed?

Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Turkey, EC

Algeria, Tunisia


a. If "Yes" - Have national laws and regulations relating to IUU fishing been adopted?

Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Malta, Morocco, Turkey

Lebanon

Lebanon About to adopt a national law

Measures/Actions in respect of your state’s nationals

4. Do you think your state’s nationals are generally aware of the effects of IUU fishing?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, EC



5. Have your state’s nationals been made aware of the effects of IUU fishing by the government or any fisheries stakeholder group or organization?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, EC

Lebanon

Algeria Through organization of seminars, study groups;
Cyprus Through circulars and seminars;
Egypt Through bulletins, association, seminars, conferences, TV programmes and newspapers;
Lebanon No, due to lack of funds;
Malta Publication in Maltese of Code of Conduct for Resp. Fisheries and Seminar;
Morocco Meeting with professionals, medias, awareness campaign;
Tunisia Through audio-visual means and education programmes;
EC Advisory Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture (ACFA), Report for the Parliament (White paper), Government Bulletin, Poster for the Consumers, and website of the government

(a) If "Yes" or "Plan" - Through what means?

6. Are your state’s nationals being discouraged from doing business with those engaged in IUU fishing?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia, EC

Turkey

Malta

7. Is it an offence for your state’s nationals to:

a) Violate fishery laws of other states?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Lebanon, Morocco, EC

Tunisia, Malta

Turkey

b) Undermine conservation and management measures of RFMOs?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, EC



8. Are your state’s nationals being discouraged from registering their vessels in another state which an RFMO has identified as undermining its conservation and management measures?

Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Tunisia, EC

Lebanon, Malta

Algeria, Morocco, Turkey

Algeria These circumstances don’t exist in Algeria.

9. Does your state subsidize or economically support activities related to IUU fishing?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, EC


(a) If "Yes" - Has any action been taken to terminate this?


Malta

Monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS)

10. Have measures been taken to improve MCS?

Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, EC

Algeria, Lebanon

Malta

Cyprus A Fishing Vessel monitoring (surveillance) through satellite system is in progress and it will be in full operation by May 2004
Egypt Increase control and surveillance activities by assistant of coast guard (ministry of defence), current inspection for the fishing boats nets as well as the fish catches. Procedures taken against the IUU fishing are: confiscate the catches and the nets. Stop non-compliant vessels from fishing for 6 months 1st time and completely if they engage in IUU fishing 2nd time
Malta Yes- Sampling of vessels under 10 meters. Plan - Logbook for vessels over 10 meters. VMS vessels over 12 meters. Observer on board/port inspections.
Morocco Position of vessels by satellite VMS
Tunisia Plan to use VMS on a wide basis after tests
Turkey The penalties were amended and made more discouraging
EC Council Regulation (EC) No. 2371/2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy

If "Yes" or "Plan" - Please comment:

FLAG STATES

Requirements for fishing vessels

11. Is registration required for all fishing vessels?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, EC

Japan

Egypt The vessels must be inspected and registered by Ports & Lighthouses Administration before licensed by GAFRD for fishing;
Japan Non-powered fishing vessels less than 1 metric ton

(a) If "No" - Please comment on exemptions, e.g. by size, category (e.g. subsistence vessels).

12. Are all vessels that fish within areas of national jurisdiction required to have express authorization to fish (e.g. by licences, authorized categories such as "subsistence fishing", permission or other)?

Cyprus, Egypt, Malta, Morocco, Lebanon, Tunisia, Turkey, EC

Algeria, Japan

Algeria - A permit to fish is required under the law 01.11 of July 2001 relating to aquaculture

13. Are all vessels that fish beyond areas of national jurisdiction required to have express authorization (including licenses for high seas fishing)?

Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, EC

Algeria


Responsibilities of flag state

14. Does your state have the means to control the fishing activities of the vessels registered in your state?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, EC

Cyprus, Malta

Cyprus Installation of VMS. Strengthening of inspections with additional personnel. Purchase of a new patrol Boat.
Malta With limitations e.g. Limited human resources
Lebanon Yes but the means are not efficient

(a) If "Plan" - Please comment on any plans to strengthen control over those activities.

15. Is there a policy or practice to avoid registering vessels with a history of IUU fishing?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Morocco, Tunisia, EC

Turkey, Malta

Lebanon

Egypt If they are engaged IUU fishing for two times. But in the 1st time they just stop from fishing for 6 months according to the fishing law

16. Does your state maintain a comprehensive record of fishing vessels entitled to fly your flag?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, EC

Lebanon

Lebanon Starting to develop such a record

17. Does your state coordinate the functions of registering fishing vessels and granting authorizations to fish?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey

Lebanon


18. Where your state’s flag vessel is identified as having engaged in IUU fishing, do you take measures to prevent transshipment or other forms of assistance to it?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Morocco, Tunisia, EC

Turkey

Lebanon, Malta

Algeria Transshipment is prohibited under law 01.11
Malta Has never happened

19. Do you prohibit, or require prior authorization and reporting for transshipment of your vessels at sea?

Algeria, Egypt, Japan, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, EC

Cyprus

Lebanon, Turkey

Egypt Except in the emergency cases
Malta Require authorization

High Seas Fishing Activities Please respond only if your flag vessels fish on the high seas

20. Does your state have means to ensure your flag vessels do not undermine high seas fishery conservation and management measures (such as requiring licences, reporting for high seas fishing)?

Cyprus, Japan, Malta, Tunisia, EC

Cyprus, Malta

Egypt, Turkey

Egypt There is no Egyptian vessels fishing in the high seas.
Malta See 10 (a) Licence Plan
Tunisia Vessel inspections are a requirement and mandatory for vessels to be licensed.

(a) If "Yes" - Please comment on the measures

(b) If "No" - Does your state authorize other states to board and inspect your flag vessels on the high seas on your behalf?


Turkey

21. Does your state submit high seas fishing data to FAO?

Japan, Malta

Tunisia, EC

Cyprus, Egypt, Turkey

Malta Distant water fleet landing declared by New Zealand

COASTAL STATES

Knowledge of fishing vessel position in areas of national jurisdiction

22. Do your officials know where most or all fishing vessels are fishing in your area of national jurisdiction?

Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Malta, Tunisia

Algeria, Lebanon, Turkey

Malta, Morocco

Algeria Through a network of maritime stations. Along the coast, where activities have been observed relating to certain fleets operating in the coastal zone.
Egypt Each fishing vessels is licensed to fish in a certain fishing area (fishing right system)
Malta This will improve with introduction of VMS

(a) If "No" - Do you know where some fishing vessels are fishing in your waters? (Please provide comment so we may understand your situation.)

Algeria, Turkey

Lebanon


23. Does your state use any of the following tools that assist in identifying vessel position?

(a) mandatory radio reports on vessel position?

Egypt, Japan, EC

Algeria, Cyprus, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia

Turkey

Egypt By ports and lighthouses administration
Lebanon Lack of funds preclude these activities

(b) mandatory logbook, including frequent vessel position reporting?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, EC

Lebanon, Tunisia

Turkey, Malta

Egypt By ports and lighthouses administration, GAFRD and Coast guards.

(c) independent observer programme?

Morocco, EC

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Lebanon, Malta, Tunisia

Turkey

(d) capacity strengthening to conduct regular patrols where vessels are known to fish?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia, EC

Malta

Cyprus

Turkey

(e) use of vessel monitoring systems (VMS)?

Japan, Morocco, Tunisia, EC

Algeria, Lebanon

Cyprus, Malta, Turkey

Algeria An initiative to develop a project under bilateral cooperation; Tunisia In test phase at present.

Catch determination and verification

24. Is your state able to determine the catch of most or all vessels fishing in your waters?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, EC

Lebanon

Turkey

Algeria - Through a system of systematic observation of vessels.

(a) If "No" - Are you able to determine the catch of some vessels fishing in your waters? (Please provide comment so we may understand your situation.)

Egypt

Lebanon


25. Does your state require any of the following reports to determine catch?

(a) mandatory reports by logbook

Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Morocco, Tunisia, EC

Algeria, Lebanon, Malta

Turkey

Malta As from 1st May 2004
Tunisia Mandatory reports from catch logs for vessels grater than 15m.

(b) VMS, radio and/or fax

Egypt, Japan, Morocco, Turkey, EC

Algeria, Cyprus, Lebanon, Malta, Tunisia

Malta VMS as from 1st May 2004

26. Does your state have catch verification procedures, such as port inspections and/or observers?

Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia, EC

Turkey

Algeria, Malta

Malta As from 1st May 2004 (subject to availability of human resources)
Lebanon No

Access by foreign fishing vessels

27. Before granting access to any foreign fishing vessel, does your state verify that the vessel has received authorization from its flag state to fish in areas beyond the flag state’s jurisdiction?

Algeria, Egypt, Japan, Morocco, EC

Cyprus, Lebanon, Malta, Turkey

Malta Malta has recently become an EU member state and will follow EC guidelines in this regard.
Lebanon Does not grant access to any foreign fishing vessels.
Tunisia No foreign fishing vessel is granted access to ports

28. Does your state, in respect of foreign fishing vessels:

(a) avoid granting access to those with a history of IUU fishing?

Algeria, Egypt, Japan

Malta

Cyprus, Lebanon, Turkey

(b) grant access to those without a request from the flag state, or give an indication that it does not object?

Algeria, Egypt, Japan, Morocco

Cyprus, Lebanon, Turkey

Egypt Except in emergencies

(c) maintain a record of those authorized to fish in waters under your jurisdiction?

Algeria, Japan, Morocco, EC

Malta

Cyprus, Egypt, Lebanon, Turkey

(d) require the use of vessel monitoring systems (VMS)?

Japan, Morocco, EC

Algeria

Malta

Cyprus, Egypt, Lebanon, Turkey

(e) cooperate with other states in developing joint or common rules for fisheries access?

Egypt, Japan, Morocco, EC

Algeria, Malta

Cyprus, Lebanon, Turkey

PORT STATES

Information and Inspections

29. Does your state require foreign fishing vessels seeking port access to provide information on:

(a) reasonable advance notice of entry into port?

Algeria, Egypt, Japan, Malta, Morocco, EC

Cyprus, Egypt, Lebanon, Turkey

Egypt If it occurs

(b) a copy of the authorization to fish?

Algeria, Egypt, Morocco

Japan

Malta

Cyprus, Lebanon, Turkey

Algeria - Yes, especially regarding quantities of fish on board; Egypt If it occurs

(c) details of the fishing trip and quantities of fish on board?

Algeria, Egypt, Japan, Malta, Morocco

Malta

Cyprus, Lebanon, Turkey

Algeria - Fishing is reserved for national vessels.
Egypt If it occurs; Malta Fish on board (at present) copy of catch logbook in the future.

30. Does your state require other vessels engaged in fishing-related activities to provide the information indicated in (a) to (c) above?

Egypt, Japan, Morocco

Algeria, Malta

Cyprus, Lebanon, Turkey

Egypt If it occurs

31. Does your state only grant foreign fishing vessel access to your ports when vessel inspections can be carried out?

Algeria, Egypt, Morocco

Japan, Malta

Cyprus, Lebanon, Turkey

32. Does your state require the following information from foreign fishing vessels in your port:

(a) flag state of vessel and identification details?

Algeria, Egypt, Japan, Malta, Morocco

Lebanon, Turkey

Japan Information on flag state only

(b) name, nationality and qualifications of the master and the fishing master?

Algeria, Egypt, Japan, Malta, Morocco

Lebanon, Turkey

Japan Information on name and nationality of the master only

(c) fishing gear?

Algeria, Egypt, Japan, Morocco

Malta

Lebanon, Turkey

(d) catch on board, including origin, species, form and quantity?

Algeria, Egypt, Japan, Malta, Morocco

Lebanon, Turkey

(e) other information required by RFMO or international agreement?

Algeria, Egypt, Malta

Japan, Morocco

Lebanon, Turkey

Malta ICCAT Certification

33. Does your state provide the information in (a) to (e) above to the flag state and relevant RFMO?

Algeria, Egypt, Malta

Japan, Morocco

Lebanon, Turkey

Algeria Only to competent regional fishery organizations; Malta If requested

Measures/Actions against IUU fishing

34. Where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting IUU fishing, does your state:

(a) prohibit landings and transshipments from the IUU vessel in port?

Algeria, Egypt, Japan, Malta, EC

Lebanon, Turkey

Algeria The vessel is arrested
Japan Direct landings and transshipments to Japan by foreign fishing vessels are prohibited.

(b) immediately report the matter to relevant authorities in the flag state, and, as appropriate, an RFMO or other state where IUU fishing occurred?

Algeria, Egypt, Japan, Morocco, EC

Malta

Lebanon, Turkey

Malta Landings almost always prohibited. Transshipment is prohibited in the case of IUU.

35. Has your state taken any action against a foreign IUU vessel in your port with the consent of the flag state?

Egypt, Japan

Algeria, Morocco, Malta

Lebanon, Turkey

Egypt If it occurs

36. Has your state cooperated, through RFMOs, to adopt and/or strengthen schemes to:

(a) prevent landings, transshipments of IUU caught fish?

Egypt, Japan, Malta, EC

Algeria

Lebanon, Turkey

Malta Landing by foreign vessels not permitted

(b) prohibit landings by non-members’ vessels where there is a presumption of IUU fishing, based on identification by RFMO?

Egypt, Japan, Malta, EC

Algeria

Lebanon, Turkey

Algeria This information does not reach us
Malta As above

INTERNATIONALLY AGREED MARKET RELATED MEASURES

37. Has your state cooperated under the auspices of a regional organization to develop and implement internationally agreed market-related measures to combat IUU fishing?

Cyprus, Japan, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, EC

Algeria, Egypt, Lebanon

Turkey

Malta Re BFT

38. Has your state taken the following steps to prevent trade or import of IUU caught fish:

(a) encouraging individuals and companies not to do business with others who are engaged in or support IUU fishing?

Cyprus, Japan, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey

Egypt, Malta

Algeria

Lebanon

(b) adopting laws that make it a violation to conduct business or trade in fish or fish products derived from IUU fishing?

Egypt, Japan, Morocco, EC

Malta, Tunisia, Turkey

Algeria

Lebanon

(c) participating in catch certification schemes of RFMOs?

Cyprus, Japan, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, EC

Algeria, Egypt

Lebanon

Malta ICCAT

COOPERATION THROUGH REGIONAL FISHERY MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATIONS

39. Does your state cooperate through RFMOs to combat IUU fishing?

Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Japan, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, EC

Lebanon

Malta ICCAT

40. Have any decisions or actions taken by RFMOs to combat IUU fishing been implemented at national level?

Egypt, Malta, Japan, Tunisia, EC

Cyprus, Lebanon

Algeria

Malta BFT for export must have an ICCAT certificta. BFT for re export must present original ICCAT Certificate and a re export certificate is reissued.
Tunisia Respect ICCAT decisions on tuna.

If "Yes - Please comment on any effective areas of cooperation.

NATIONAL PLAN OF ACTION (NPOA-IUU)

41. Has your state formulated or begun formulation of an NPOA-IUU?

Egypt, Malta, ICCAT, Morocco, EC

Algeria, Cyprus, Japan, Lebanon, Tunisia

Turkey

Egypt Review the fishing law and the management regulations according to the code of conduct and GFCM regulations
Japan has already implemented almost all the necessary measures to combat IUU fishery
Malta December 2004. Produce for publication.

If "Yes " - Please provide or comment on a realistic estimated date for completion of the plan.

GFCM Questionnaire (three parts, Tables 3 - 5) distributed to GFCM Members (2003) on IUU fishing in the Mediterranean, seeking Members’ views about effectiveness of their measures to combat IUU fishing, identifying the major types of IUU fishing in areas under their jurisdiction and identifying constraints and solutions for combating IUU fishing activities in the GFCM Region

Table 3, Part I: Effectiveness of measures

LAW AND POLICY

Low

Medium

High

N/A

Comment

1. Please indicate the effectiveness of your country’s laws in combating IUU fishing in respect of

a. control of national persons

Libyan A.J.

Turkey, EU

Algeria, Italy, Japan

b. control of national vessels

Libyan A.J.

Turkey

Algeria, Italy, Japan, EU

c. vessel information

Libyan A.J., Turkey

Algeria, Italy, Japan, EU

d. fishing information

Turkey

Algeria, Italy, Libyan A.J.

Algeria, Japan, EU

Turkey Fishing logbook is obligatory for vessels longer than 12 m

e. trade information

Italy, Libyan A.J.

Japan, EU

f. port inspections

Turkey

Italy, Libyan A.J., EU

Algeria, Japan

g. authority for high seas boarding and inspections

Algeria, Japan

Italy

Libyan A.J.

Turkey, EU

EU Member States

h. enforcement (powers of enforcement officers)

Italy, Japan, Turkey

Algeria, Libyan A.J., EU

i. enforcement (use of technologies such as VMS)

Algeria, Turkey

Italy

Japan, Libyan A.J.

EU

EU Member States

j. enforcement (offences, fines)

Italy, Japan, Turkey

Algeria, Libyan A.J.

EU

EU Exchange of information

k. other MCS (please identify where reform may be needed)




2. What is the level of the priority in your country for adopting a policy to combat IUU fishing?

Italy, Libyan A.J., Turkey

Italy, Japan, EU

MONITORING CONTROL AND SURVEILLANCE -TECHNICAL CAPACITY

3. How effective are your country’s mechanisms for inspection at sea?

Libyan A.J.

Algeria, Italy, Turkey

Japan

EU

EU Member States

4. How effective are your country’s mechanisms for inspection in port?

Turkey

Italy, Libyan A.J.

Algeria, Japan

EU

EU Member States

FLAG STATE RESPONSIBILITIES

5. To what extent does your country consider IUU fishing to be a disqualification for the registration of fishing vessels?

EU

Algeria, Japan, Turkey

Italy, Libyan A.J.

6. To what extent does your country have the means to control its registered vessels?

Libyan A.J.

Turkey

Algeria, Italy, Japan, EU

7. How comprehensive is the information maintained on your country’s register of fishing vessels?

Libyan A.J.

Algeria, Italy, Japan, Turkey, EU

8. How comprehensive is the high seas fishing data your country submits to FAO?

Algeria

Japan, EU

Italy, Libyan A.J., Turkey

9. How comprehensive is the fishing vessel data your country submits to FAO?

Algeria

Japan, Turkey, EU

Italy, Libyan A.J.

CATCH DETERMINATION AND VERIFICATION

10. How effective are your country’s mechanisms to determine the catch of your flag vessels?

Libyan A.J.

Algeria, Turkey

Italy, Japan, EU

11. How effective are your country’s catch verification procedures (e.g. port inspection, observers)?

Libyan A.J., Turkey

Algeria, Italy

Japan, EU

ACCESS BY FOREIGN FISHING VESSELS

12. Please indicate how effectively your country implements the following requirements in respect of foreign fishing vessels.



Turkey In framework of current legislation, foreign fishing vessels are not allowed to enter and fish in Turkish territorial waters.

a. authorization from flag state to fish in waters beyond its jurisdiction

Algeria, Japan

Italy, Libyan A.J., Turkey, EU

b. prohibition of access to vessels with a history of IUU fishing

Algeria, Japan

Italy, Libyan A.J., Turkey, EU

c. maintain a record of foreign vessels authorized to fish

Libyan A.J.

Algeria, Japan, EU

Italy, Turkey,


d. require VMS for foreign fishing vessels

Japan

EU

Algeria, Italy, Turkey

PORT STATE MEASURES

13. How effectively does your country implement the following information requirements for fishing vessels seeking port access?



Turkey In current legislation, there is no obligation to advance notice of entry into port or declaration on the details of fishing trip and volume of fish on board in order to entry into port.

a. reasonable advance notice of entry into port

Algeria, Japan, Libyan A.J., EU

Italy, Turkey

b. a copy of the authorization to fish

Algeria, Japan, Libyan A.J., EU

Italy, Turkey

c. details of the fishing trip and quantities of fish on board

Algeria, Japan, Libyan A.J., EU

Italy, Turkey

14. How effectively does your country take action against vessels in port where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting IUU fishing (for example by prohibiting landings and transshipments, reporting to RFMO)?

Libyan A.J.

Japan, EU

Italy, Algeria

15. How effectively has your country cooperated through RFMOs on schemes to prevent landings, transshipments of IUU caught fish?

Libyan A.J.

Algeria, Japan, EU

Italy, Turkey

INTERNATIONALLY AGREED MARKET-RELATED MEASURES

16. How effectively has your country cooperated through RFMOs on market-related measures to combat IUU fishing?

Turkey

Algeria

Japan, EU

Italy, Libyan A.J.

17. How effective are the steps that your country has taken to prevent trade or import of IUU caught fish?

Turkey

Algeria

Japan, EU

Italy, Libyan A.J.

NATIONAL PLAN OF ACTION TO COMBAT IUU FISHING

18. What is the priority in your country for formulating and adopting an NPOA-IUU?

Japan, Libyan A.J.

Italy, Turkey

Algeria, EU

Table 4, Part II: Types, extent and impact of IUU fishing in the GFCM region

Please briefly identify the following elements of IUU fishing with reference to up to three main types of IUU fishing in areas under your country’s jurisdiction, or in the GFCM Region.

Main types of IUU fishing (gear, species, as appropriate)

Extent, impact (volumes, TAC percentage, values, other)

Intensity, gravity (number of vessels, trends, other)

Algeria: Long line tuna fish
Libyan A.J.: Trawl fishing
Turkey: Access to closed areas

Algeria: Trawls demersal fish
Turkey: Using illegal, non-selective fishing gears

Algeria: Drifting nets
Turkey: Catch of undersized fish

Table 5, Part III: Constraints and solutions for combating IUU fishing activities in the GFCM region

Please identify up to three main constraints for your country in combating IUU fishing in the GFCM Region.

Please identify key solutions for these constraints, that may be taken at national and/or regional levels.

Algeria: Lack of adequate means of control.

Algeria: VMS, High speed patrol vessels

Libyan A.J.: Lack of technical means for inspection

Libyan A.J.: Provide necessary means and capabilities.

Turkey: Lack of proper input and output control mechanism and catch verification system

Turkey: Measures to address IUU include the more effective and widespread use of enforcement units and VMS (in association with electronic log books), together with stricter rules for use of log books and in-port recording of catch.

EU: The absence of control measures approved internationally and the diversity of control measures between coastal states encourage the development of IUU fishing above all in international waters.

EU: The implementation by the GFCM of an appropriate system of inspection tailored to the specific nature of Mediterranean fisheries.

Algeria: Lack of qualified human resources

Algeria: Reinforce control by installing fisheries inspectors.

Libyan A.J.: Adequate legislative measures

Libyan A.J.: Formulation and adoption of new amendments in view of recent data available.

Turkey The significant economic gains available through IUU fishing. The causes leading to illegal fishing practices in fisheries are usually as a direct result of certain problems of economic, institutional and social nature.

Turkey: Economic gains obtained by illegal fishing makes difficult to combat with IUU. Efforts to combat IUU fishing need to recognize this basic fact and be integrated into wider fishery policy developments and initiatives, such as the expansion of legitimate and responsible forms of fishing.

EU: Mediterranean and other fisheries are confronted with the problem of illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU). These illegal fishing activities are undermining conservation and stock management efforts and creating unfair distortions of competition with regard to fleets which comply with the conservation and management measures.

EU: The establishment by the GFCM of procedure for identifying vessels carrying out IUU activities (black list), as well as actions to be taken against these vessels.

Algeria: Lack of technical and scientific support

Algeria: Reinforcement of the existing centre of research by technical and human capacities.

Libyan A.J.: Declaration of well identified protected fishing zones.

Libyan A.J.: Formulation and adoption of new amendments in view of recent data available

Turkey: Insufficient level of fisherman awareness on the responsible exploitation of living resources in a sustainable manner.

Turkey: Enhance awareness and sensitization of fishermen on biodiversity and the sustainability of resources; the strengthening of local fisheries organizations and institutions for community based and or participatory management or co-management. Employment of more educated staff on board of fishing vessels.

EU: The absence of GFCM register of vessels authorized to fish which define the type of vessel authorized, the duties of the flag state and the consequences for vessels not included in the register.

EU: The establishment by the GFCM of procedures for establishing a register of authorized vessels.

Table 6: Principal legal measures of monitoring, control and surveillance in most GFCM Members

COUNTRIES

Register or record of fishing vessels

Register or record of fishers

Marking

Inspection[169]

Reporting of data on catch and fishing effort

Landing of catch

Transshipment

Observer programmes

VMS

Albania

Register (Art. 13 of Law No. 7908 of 1995)

Register (Art. 12 of Law No. 7908 of 1995)

Requirements (Art. 38 of FR No. 1 of 1997)

General inspection power (Art.38 of Law No. 7908 of 1995)

Monthly and annual reporting (Art. 25 of Law No. 7908 of 1995 and Art. 61 of FR No. 1 of 1997)

Landing of catch in an Albanian port (Art. 21 of Law No. 7908 of 1995)

Requirements (Art. 16 of Law No. 7908 of 1995)

Algeria

Register(Art. 43 of Law No. 01-11 of 2001)

Foreign vessels (Art.18 of Decree No. 95-38 of 1995 and Art.3 of Interministerial Order of 4 November 1995)

Reporting requirements (Art. 52 of Law No. 01-11 of 2001) Logbook for foreign vessels (Art.19 of Decree No. 95-38 of 1995)

Landing of catch in an Algerian port except authorization (Art. 57 of Law No. 01-11 of 2001)

At sea transshipment is prohibited except in case of force majeure (Art. 58 of Law No. 01-11 of 2001)

Observer programme applicable to foreign vessels (Art.13 of Decree No. 95-38 of 1995)

Position reporting by foreign vessels (Art. 15 of Decree No. 95-38 of 1995)

Croatia

Register (Art. 14 and 26 of MFA[170] of 1997)

General inspection power (Art.62 of MFA of 1997)

Logbook for commercial vessels and small-scale fisheries reporting (Art.57-59 of MFA of 1997)



Cyprus

Requirements (Sec.5 of FR of 1990)

Requirements (Sec. 10 of FR of 1990)

Landing of catch by any vessel operating outside Cypriot waters is subject to a license (Sec.23 of FR of 1990)


Egypt

Requirements (Art.2 of Act No. 124 of 1983)

Technical inspection (Art.30 of Act No. 124 of 1983)

Data reporting (Art.22 of Act No. 124 of 1983)



European Union

Each Member State required to keep a register of national vessels and Commission required to set up a Community fishing fleet register (Art.15 of CR[171] No. 2371 of 2002)

Third-country vessels operating in community waters must comply with rules on marking (Art.28c of CR No. 2847 of 1993)

Inspection of Community fishing vessels within and outside Community waters (Art.28 of CR No. 2371 of 2002)

Keeping of a logbook is required for Community fishing vessels whose overall length equals or is more than 10 m (Art.6 of CR No. 2847 of 1993)

Port schemes for landing of catch are established by Member States, obligation to comply with such schemes (Art.7 of CR No. 2847 of 1993)Rules for third-country vessels (Art.28e-g of CR No. 2847 of 1993)

Requirements for transshipment by Community vessels are determined by each Member State
Authorization for third-country vessels to transship in Community waters (Art. 28b of CR 2847 of 1993)

Obligation for master of a Community fishing vessel to accept observers on board and to cooperate with them (Art.22 (d) of CR No. 2371 of 2002)

All fishing vessels operating in Community waters must be equipped with a remote monitoring system (Art.22b of CR No. 2371 of 2002)

France

Requirements (Art 26 of Decree No. 90-95 of 1990)

Logbook (Art.18 of Decree No. 90-95 of 1990)

Requirements (Art.4 of Decree of 9 Jan 1852)


Greece[172]








Israel


General inspection power (Sec.6 of Fisheries Ordinance of 1937)

Logbook and information reporting (Sec. 7A and 14 of Fisheries Rules of 1937)

Landing of catch in Israeli ports by foreign vessels subject to a permit (Sec.4 of Fisheries Ordinance of 1937)


Italy

Register (Art. 9 and 11 of Law No. 963 of 1965 and Art.32-47 of Presidential Decree No. 1639 of 1968)

Annual reporting (Art. 29 of Decree of 26 July 1995)



Lebanon[173]








Libyan A.J.

Register (Sec.6 of Resolution No. 71 of 1990)

Requirements and specifications (Sec.34 of Resolution No. 71 of 1990 and Sec. 2 of Resolution No. 80 of 1990)

Inspection of vessels prior to issuance of licenses (Sec.15 of Resolution No. 71 of 1990)

Reporting requirements for foreign fishing vessels (Sec.13 of Law No. 14 of 1989 and Sec.47 of Resolution No. 71 of 1990)

Landing of catch at port of registration (Sec.11 of Resolution No. 71 of 1990)

At-sea transshipment prohibited except with authorization (Sec.13 of Law No. 14 of 1989 and Sec.11 of Resolution No. 71 of 1990)

Malta

Record and issuance of certificate of entry (Sec.7 of Act No. II of 2001)

Marking of the licensed vessel as a condition to fishing license (Sec.12 of Act No. II of 2001) and marking requirements as a prerequisite to entry in record of fishing vessels (Sec.7 of Act No. II of 2001)

General inspection power (Sec.19 of Act No. II of 2001)

Statistical information prior to entry in record of fishing vessels or licensing and as condition to license (Sec.15 and Sec.12 of Act No. II of 2001)Notification of fish on board by foreign fishing vessels (Sec.11 of Act II of 2001)

Landing of catch as a condition to fishing license (Sec.12 of Act No. II of 2001) and empowerment of Minister responsible for fisheries to regulate landing of fish (Sec.38 (k) of Act No. II of 2001)

Licensing (Sec.16 of Act No. II of 2001) and restrictions in respect of place or places where transshipment may take place as condition to fishing license (Sec.12 of Act No. II of 2001)

The Minister responsible for fisheries is empowered to place observers on fishing vessels (Sec. 38 (s) of Act No. II of 2001)

The Minister responsible for fisheries is empowered to establish a satellite-based system for monitoring the position of fishing vessels (Sec.36 and 38 (t) of Act No. II of 2001)

Morocco

Marking of vessels (Art.3 of Law No. 25 of 1922) and gears (Art.26 Law No. 1-73-255 of 1973)

Technical inspection of vessels (Art. 27 of Law No. 1-73-255 of 1973)

Reporting requirements for license holders (Art.2 of Decree No. 2-92-1026 of 1992)


Establishment of a VMS (Law No. 1-73-255)

Slovenia

Record (Art. 14 of MFA[174] of 2002)

Port inspection (Art. 75 of MFA of 2002) and general inspection power (Art.89 of MFA of 2002)

Logbook and requirements (Art. 15 and 77 of MFA of 2002)

Landing of catch in Slovenian ports for national vessels - advance notice for foreign vessels (Art. 78 and 80 of MFA of 2002)

Monitoring of vessels’ movement (Art. 76 of MFA of 2002)

Spain

Record (Art.22 of Law No. 3 of 2001)Register (Art.57 of Law No. 3 of 2001)

Register of professional fishers (Art.44 of Law No. 3 of 2001)

General inspection power (Art.39 of Law No. 3 of 2001)

Logbook except for specified categories of vessels (Art.33 of Law No. 3 of 2001)

Landing of catch by national and foreign vessels subject to catch report (Art.34 of Law No. 3 of 2001)

Advance notice for national vessels and authorization for foreign vessels (Art.34 and 35 of Law No. 3 of 2001)

Establishment of periodical communications systems (Art.32 of Law No. 3 of 2001)

Syrian A. R.

Register (Art. 15 of Legislative Decree of 1964)

Register (Art.15 of Legislative Decree of 1964)

Requirements (Art. 25 of Legislative Decree of 1964)

General inspection power (Art.26 of Legislative Decree of 1964)

Logbook for sponge diving operations (Art. 48 of Legislative Decree of 1964)

Designated places to land sponges (Art.43 of Legislative Decree of 1964)


Tunisia


General inspection power (Art.28 of Law No. 94-13 of 1994)

Reporting of statistical data (Art. 18 of Law No. 94-13 of 1994)

Landing of catch in Tunisian ports except with authorization (Art.16 of Law No. 94-13 of 1994)

At-sea and in-port transshipment subject to authorization (Art.15 of Law No. 94-13 of 1994)

Turkey

Licence numbers to be shown on vessels (Art.5 of FR of 1995)

Reporting of information on fishing activities (Art.28 of Law No. 1380 of 1971)





Table 7: Some RFMO requirements for authorized vessel lists

RFMO

VESSELS LISTED

CONSEQUENCE FOR NON-LISTED VESSELS

DUTIES OF PARTIES AND COOPERATING NON-PARTIES (CPCS)

DUTIES OF RFMOS

IATTC
Resolution C-03-07 2003 on the establishment of a list of longline fishing vessels over 24 deters (LSTLFVs) authorized to operate in the Eastern Pacific Ocean

Initial list to consist of Longline fishing vessels larger than 24 metres overall length (LSTFV List) of Parties, Cooperating non-parties, entities, fishing entities or regional economic integration organizations (collectively, CPCs).
Specific vessel information required

LSTLFVs not on record deemed not to be authorized to fish for, retain on board, transship or land tuna and tuna-like species in the Eastern Pacific Ocean

Change or any modification of information to be notified
Specific flag state duties;
Review internal actions and measures, including punitive sanctions and Report to IATTC;
Ensure IATTC measures are implemented (e.g. validating statistical documents of vessels only on list);
Notify IATTC if non-listed vessels are fishing.

Maintain list;
Give publicity to list, including website, consistent with confidentiality;
Communicate with CPC if non-listed vessel is engaged in fishing, transshipment activities;
If flag not of CPC or cannot be determined, report to Commission;
Liaise with CPCs, FAO, avoid adverse effects in other oceans.

ICCAT
Recommendation 02-22 concerning the establishment of an ICCAT record of vessels over 24 meters authorized to operate in the Convention Area

Vessels of CPCs larger than 24 metres authorized to operate in Convention Area; specific vessel information required

LSFVs not on the record deemed not to be authorized to fish for, retain on board, transship or land tuna and tuna-like species

Specific flag state duties;[175]
Review internal actions and measures, including punitive sanctions and Report to ICCAT;
Ensure ICCAT measures are implemented;
Notify ICCAT if non-listed vessels are fishing,

Publicity of list, including website;
Liaison among CPCs and RFMOs and FAO;
Actions by Executive Secretary and Compliance Committee and Permanent Working Group, pursuant to Resolution 02-24,[176] to prevent IUU fishing vessels from being entered on the authorized vessel list.

NAFO
Conservation and Enforcement Measures Article 15

All fishing vessels more than 50 gross tons authorized to fish in Regulatory Area,
Notification required for vessels subject to bare boat chartering at least one month prior to departure from home port, and research vessels prior to and after.

Fishing vessels not on register are deemed not to be authorized to fish in the Regulatory Area.

Information to be submitted in electronic form and in specified format.
Change or any modification of information to be notified.

The Executive Secretary must promptly make the register available to all Contracting Parties in a systematic fashion and in accordance with applicable confidentiality requirements. The Executive Secretary shall delete vessels in the register which have not been active in the Regulatory Area for two consecutive years.

NEAFC
Article 3, Scheme of Control and Enforcement

All Contracting Party fishing vessels authorized to fish in the Regulatory Area, and whether authorized to fish one or more regulated resources. Information requirements for each fishing vessel.

Not explicitly provided in Scheme.

Information to be submitted in electronic form.
Change or any modification of information to be notified.

Secretary to make information available to all Contracting Parties.

Examples of requirements of RFMOs for IUU vessel lists

Table 8.1, Part I: Presumptions and procedural requirements for IUU vessel list: examples of requirements of RFMOs for IUU vessel lists

RFMO, adoption of scheme

Presumption of undermining measures)

Sighting procedure

Surveillance procedure

Communication of sighting

Inspection at sea

Inspection in port

Landings, transshipments, etc. prohibited

Notification of presumed IUU activities

Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources(CCAMLR)Conservation Measures 10-03, 10-06, 10-07, 10-03

Presumption applies to non Contracting Party (NCP) Vessels, if sighted fishing in the Convention Area, or denied port access, landing or transshipment in accordance with CCAMLR Measure Extends to transshipment involving NCP vessel in or out of Convention Area.

Information to be transmitted immediately to Commission, Secretariat to transmit to Contracting Parties (CPs) within one business day and to flag state ASAP.
Procedure to request flag state (FS) to take measures to ensure activities stop, and report back to CCAMLR

N/A

The sighting CP must attempt to inform IUU vessel of sighting, presumption and that flag state and CPs will be informed

Sighted NCP vessel that enters CP port, must be inspected, prohibited from landing or transshipping species subject to CM measures, unless shown fish caught in compliance with measures, requirements under Convention. Inspection to be conducted within 48 hours of entry into port, guided by CCAMLR System of Inspection
Inspection Report to Secretariat

If evidence of IUU fishing at port inspection, prohibition of landing, transshipping catch

North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission(NEAFC)2003

NCP Vessels. Excludes vessels with Cooperating non contracting party (CNCP) status
If sighted fishing in Convention Area beyond areas of national jurisdiction, presumed to be undermining effectiveness of recommendation

CP to immediately transmit information to Secretary according to Surveillance Procedure

Surveillance Report Form to be forwarded by electronic transmission, Secretary to distribute

Sighting CP must attempt to inform IUU vessel of sighting, presumption and that flag state and CPs will be informed

NEAFC Inspectors to request permission to board IUU vessels, procedures to report to Secretary immediately, annually

NCP vessel must be inspected on entry into port according to requirements, procedures to report to Secretary immediately, annually

CP vessels prohibited from receiving transshipments from NCP vessel, engaging in joint fishing operations
Landings, transshipments of NCP vessel prohibited if evidence of IUU fishing

Procedures to transmit information to CPs, other RFMOs;
Request flag state to report on enquiries, measures taken against vessel.

Table 8.2, Part II: Notification requirements for IUU vessel list

PROVISIONAL LIST OF IUU VESSELS

CONFIRMED LIST OF IUU VESSELS

CRITERIA FOR REMOVAL OF VESSELS FROM LISTS

REQUIREMENTS FOR CNCP

ACTION AGAINST VESSELS ON IUU LIST

CCAMLR

Executive Secretary to draft list of CP vessels annually, according to specified criteria, that might have carried out IUU fishing; relevant CPs to provide comments, evidence, etc.
ES transmits draft list, CPs comments, etc., to all CPs.

Compliance Committee[177] reviews information and submits proposed IUU Vessel List to Commission for approval.

IUU Vessel List is on a secure section of the CCAMLR website Commission requests NCPs to address IUU fishing vessels, including withdrawal of registration, licences
CPs to request NCPs to cooperate

Relevant flag state satisfies Commission that they took effective action (sanctions etc.), ownership changed, no fishing in Area, etc.

CPs to:
prohibit licensing of IUU vessels for fishing in Convention Area or in national waters;
prevent their flag vessels from transshipment etc. activities with IUU vessels;
prohibit chartering IUU vessels;
refuse registration;
prohibit imports;
prohibit export, re-export certification, encourage importers, other sectors o refrain from negotiating, transshipping fish caught by IUU vessels;
exchange information;
etc.
CCAMLR to review actions, identified NCPs that have not rectified their fishing activities
Multilateral trade-related measures may be taken.

NEAFC

Provisional List of IUU vessels ("A") List:
NCP vessels sighted fishing in Regulatory area

Enforcement Committee annually reviews:
"A" list, recommends confirmed IUU List ("B") to the Commission;
"B" List, to recommend amendments

Effective action taken, including:
prosecution, sanctions, change of ownership, etc.

Provision of data, respect all measures, inform compliance measures, etc.

CPs to:
prevent landings, transshipment of IUU vessels;
inspect IUU vessels in port;
prevent support, etc. vessels from assisting IUU vessels;
prohibit supply to IUU vessels. for "B" List vessels, prohibit authorization, chartering, grant of flag, imports;
encourage importers etc. not to deal with IUU fish;
exchange information.

Table 9: Summary of measures and institutional arrangements taken by some RFMOs for inspection at sea and in port

INSPECTION

REGIONAL MEASURES

RFMO INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS

At sea

In port

CCAMLR

yes

yes

The CCAMLR System of Inspectioni

Standing Committee on Implementation and Compliance (SCIC) ii

IOTC

no

yes

Resolution 01/03: Establishing a scheme to promote compliance by non-contracting party vessels with resolutions established by IOTC
The Establishment of an IOTC Programme of Inspection in Port,
Recommendation 02/01 (2002)iii

The Commission

IATTC

yes

no

Resolution C-03-04: Resolution on At-Sea Reportingiv

Permanent Working Group on Compliancev

ICCAT

yes

yes

Resolution 79/02: Port Inspection
Resolution 94/09: Resolution by ICCAT on Compliance with the ICCAT
Conservation and Management Measures
Recommendation 97/10: Revised ICCAT Port Inspection Schemevi
Recommendation 97/11: Transshipment & Vessel Sightings
Recommendation 97/12: Vessel Monitoring System Pilot Programme
Recommendation 98/11: Ban on Landing & Transshipments
Resolution 01/20: Management STD. for Large-scale Tuna LL Fishery02/31 General Outline of Integrated Monitoring Measures Adopted by ICCATvii

Permanent Working Group for the Improvement of ICCAT
Statistics and Conservation Measures (PWG)viii
Conservation and Management Measures Compliance Committee (COC)ix

NAFO

yes

yes

Scheme to Promote Compliance by non-Contracting Party vessels with the Conservation and Enforcement Measures Established by NAFO, NAFO/GC Doc. 97/6 (1997)
NAFO Conservation and Enforcement Measures, NAFO FC Doc. 04/1 Serial No. N4936x

Standing Committee on International Control (STACTIC)xi

NEAFC

yes

yesxii

General Principles for Inspection and Surveillancexiii

Permanent Committee Control Enforcement (PECCOE)xiv

NOTES to Table 9

i. The CCAMLR System of Inspection prescribes, inter alia:

ii. Terms of Reference of the SCIC:

iii. This Resolution notes that port inspection is a central element of a control and inspection programme, and that it can be, in particular, an effective tool to fight against IUU fishing. Measures taken in accordance with the IOTC Agreement are to take full account of the right and duty of the port state in accordance with international law. More specifically, it:

iv. This Resolution agrees:

v. The functions of the Working Group shall be:

vi. The Commission agreed that most ICCAT recommendations can only be enforced during off-loading, and therefore this is the most fundamental and effective tool for monitoring and inspection. This recommendation would modify the existing ICCAT port inspection scheme to require national port inspection schemes and to provide minimum standards in conducting port inspection of foreign and domestic vessels during off-loading and transshipment operations of all ICCAT species. The purpose of the port inspection scheme is to ensure individual vessel compliance as well as to facilitate overall monitoring of each party's fisheries for ICCAT species. ICCAT hopes that the parties will actually exceed these minimum standards in order to effect timely and accurate monitoring of landings and transshipments, check compliance with ICCAT management measures, ensure quotas are not exceeded, and collect data and other information on landings and transshipments.

vii. The Contracting Parties, through the Commission, should establish an observation and inspection programme to ensure compliance with ICCAT conservation and management measures. The programme may inter alia comprise the following elements:

viii. The Commission resolves to establish a Permanent Working Group, with the following terms of reference:

ix. Terms of Reference of the Compliance Committee:

x. NAFO Convention and Enforcement Measures include, inter alia,:

xi. Activities of ATACTIC involve:

xii. for NCPs

xiii. General principles for Inspection and Surveillance:

xiv. This Committee is comprised of representatives of the Contracting Parties, with all Contracting Parties represented. This Committee is responsible for advising the Commission on issues relating to fishing controls and the enforcement of the Scheme.

[130] Excerpt from FAO Document TC-IUU-CAP/2004/3. Questionnaires were distributed by FAO to regional fishery bodies (RFBs) in late 2003 to provide a basis for assessing the progress in implementation of the IPOA-IUU, in preparation for the June 2004 FAO Technical Consultation.
[131] ICCAT has advised that it responded "yes" to a number of questions, particularly relating to MCS, where measures have been adopted but are not expected to formally enter into force until June 2004.
[132] Question 1. CCAMLR, CCSBT, CECAF, CTMFM, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, NAFO, NASCO, NEAFC, NPAFC.
[133] Question 2. CCAMLR, CCSBT, CTMFM, FFA, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, NAFO, NASCO, NEAFC.
[134] Question 3. CCAMLR, CCSBT, FFA, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, NAFO, NASCO, NEAFC.
[135] Question 5. CCAMLR, CCSBT, CTMFM, FFA, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, IPHC, NAFO, NEAFC.
[136] Question 6. CCAMLR, CTMFM, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, NAFO, NASCO, NEAFC, NPAFC.
[137] Question 8. CCAMLR, CECAF, CTMFM, FFA, IBSFC, ICCAT, NAFO, NASCO, NEAFC.
[138] Question 9. CCAMLR, CTMFM, FFA, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, IPHC, NAFO, NEAFC.
[139] Question 10. CCAMLR, CECAF, CMFM, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, IPHC, NAFO, NEAFC.
[140] Question 12. CCAMLR, CECAF, FFA, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, IPHC, NAFO, NEAFC.
[141] Question 20. CCAMLR, CCSBT, CTMFM, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, NAFO, NASCO, NEAFC, NPAFC.
[142] Question 21. CCAMLR, CCSBT, CECAF, CTMFM, FFA, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, IPHC, NAFO, NEAFC.
[143] Question 22. CCAMLR, CCSBT, CTMFM, IBSFC, ICCAT, IPHC, NAFO, NASCO, NPAFC.
[144] Question 28. CCAMLR, CCSBT, CTMFM, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, NAFO, NASCO, NAPFC.
[145] Question 30. CCAMLR, CCSBT, CTMFM, FFA, IATTC, ICCAT, IPHC, NAFO, NASCO, NEAFC.
[146] Question 4. CCAMLR, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, NAFO, NASCO, NEAFC, NPAFC.
[147] Question 11. CCAMLR, CTMFM, FFA, IBSFC, IPHC, NAFO, NASCO.
[148] Question 13. CCAMLR, FFA, IBSFC, IPHC, NAFO, NEAFC, NPAFC.
[149] Question 14. CCAMLR, CCSBT, CTMFM, FFA, IATTC, IBSFC, IPHC, NAFO.
[150] Question 16. CCAMLR, CCSBT, IATTC, ICCAT, NAFO, NEAFC.
[151] Question 17. CCSBT, CTMFM, IBSFC, ICCAT, NASCO, NPAFC.
[152] Question 19. CCAMLR, CTMFM, IATTC, ICCAT, NAFO, NASCO, NEAFC, NPAFC.
[153] Question 23. CCAMLR, CCSBT, CTMFM, ICCAT, NAFO, NASCO.
[154] Question 24. CCAMLR, CCSBT, CTMFM, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, NAFO, NASCO.
[155] Question 25. CCAMLR, CCSBT, CTMFM, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, NAFO.
[156] Question 27. CCAMLR, CCSBT, CTMFM, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, NAFO, NPAFC.
[157] Question 34. CCAMLR, CCSBT, FFA, IATTC, ICCAT, NASCO, NEAFC, NPAFC.
[158] Question 35. CCSBT, FFA, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT, NAFO, NASCO, NEAFC.
[159] Question 7. CCAMLR, CCSBT, IATTC, IBSFC, ICCAT.
[160] Question 15. CCAMLR, CCSBT, IATTC, ICCAT, IPHC.
[161] Question 18. CCAMLR, ICCAT, NAFO.
[162] Question 26. CCAMLR, CCSBT, IATTC, ICCAT, NAFO.
[163] Question 29. CCAMLR, CTMFM, IBSFC, NAFO, NPAFC.
[164] Question 31. CCAMLR, CTMFM, NASCO.
[165] Question 32. IATTC.
[166] Question 33. CCAMLR, IATTC, NAFO, NASCO.
[167] Question 36. CTMFM.
[168] Two states responding with "Plan" also responded with "Yes".
[169] In this column the phrase "general inspection power" refers to general power of inspection vested in authorized enforcement officers to carry out their duties.
[170] Marine Fisheries Act of 1997.
[171] Council Regulation.
[172] No information available at the time of writing.
[173] No information available.
[174] Marine Fisheries Act of 2002.
[175] ICCAT Recommendation 03-12 "Recommendation by ICCAT concerning the duties of contracting parties and cooperating non-contracting parties, entities or fishing entities in relation to their vessels fishing in the ICCAT Convention Area" is a good example of specific flag state duties required by RFMOs, and provides that CPCs must:
a) adopt measures so that their vessels comply with and do not undermine ICCAT conservation and management measures;
b) authorize their vessels to fish in the ICCAT Convention area by means of fishing authorizations, licenses, or permits;
c) ensure they do not authorize their vessels to fish in the ICCAT Convention area unless they are able to effectively exercise their responsibilities in respect of such vessels, including monitoring and controlling their fishing activities;
d) ensure that their vessels do not conduct unauthorized fishing within areas under the national jurisdiction of other states, through appropriate cooperation with coastal states concerned, and other relevant means available to the flag CPC;
e) require their vessels fishing on the high seas to carry the license, authorization or permit on board at all times and to produce it on demand for inspection by a duly authorized person;
f) investigate and follow-up on an alleged violation by a vessel and report the results of such investigation, as well as the actions taken whenever that violation has been confirmed.
2. Each flag CPC shall establish and maintain an up-to-date record of fishing vessels entitled to fly its flag and authorized to fish species managed by ICCAT in the Convention area, which should include vessels of other flags authorized under charter agreements.
3. Each flag CPC shall ensure that its fishing vessels authorized to fish species managed by ICCAT in the Convention area, as well as their fishing gears, are marked in such a way that they can be readily identified in accordance with generally accepted standards such as the FAO standard specification for the marking and the identification of fishing vessels.
[176] "Resolution by ICCAT concerning the implementation of the recommendation concerning the ICCAT Record of Vessels".
[177] Standing Committee on Implementation and Compliance.

Previous Page Top of Page Next Page