INDIAN OCEAN TUNA COMMISSION SPECIAL SESSION ON FADS

Indian Ocean Tuna Commission Special Session on FADs. “Chaotic approach risks crippling the IOTC as a functional institution and devastating Small Island Developing States.”

The Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) held a Special Session from 3rd to 5th February 2023 in Kenya, on Fish Aggregating Devices (FADs) intended to protect yellowfin stocks by reducing catch of juvenile fish. After a fractious, tense and at times dysfunctional meeting, a vote was carried to enforce a ban on the use of drifting Fish Aggregating Devices (dFADs) in the high-seas areas of the Indian ocean from 1st July to 11th September 2024 and consecutive years.

“No scientific data was presented to demonstrate that this measure would be effective. It was a measure voted for as a wish rather than a strategy and represents significant problems for the tuna processing industry in Mauritius. That it was sponsored by countries which have refused to adhere to existing resolutions on yellowfin reduction is adding insult to injury and should shame the pole and line NGOs whose fingerprints are all over this proposal” explains Cougen Purseramen, President of STA (Sustainable Tuna Association).

Fish Aggregating Devices

At the IOTC meeting, resolutions were tabled by India for a total ban on FADs and by Kenya for a 3-month FAD closure period. The Indian proposal received no support whatsoever due to a lack of credibility of the proposal. The Kenyan proposal, mysteriously dropped by Kenya on the first morning only to be picked up and proposed by Indonesia, and an EU counter proposal on FAD management and agreeing to more research, more data on the effectiveness of a FAD closure, were the two most discussed and contested proposals. The current proposed ban has been imposed without prior scientific recommendations from the IOTC Scientific Commission which meets only once a year, in early December.

“Fundamentally, the Indian Ocean is a mixed fishery with a wide range of gear types and fishing nations involved. For the tropical tunas, the purse seine method represents around one third of the catches. While it is perfectly reasonable to expect the purse seine sector to go further and faster with conservation measures than some artisanal fleets, we cannot expect the purse seine sector to act on its own or be held solely responsible for a shared stock” added Mr Purseramen.

Tropical tunas are highly migratory species moving across the whole of the Indian Ocean, transiting in different EEZs and in the high seas. No country can thus pretend to have its own stock of tuna independently from the others. To whom this Resolution truly benefits?

“Mauritius and Seychelles have developed a processing industry since our countries have become independent. In the case of Mauritius, our industry is celebrating its 50th anniversary. But it should be noted that we are overshadowing another industry: the pole and line one. Whether manufactured in Mauritius or Seychelles, we are competing in UK and European markets with tuna from the Maldives and Indonesia. And behind this industry, we find one big company with an influential network of NGOs that are pulling the strings behind the G16,” said Mr Purseramen.

Maldives tuna has long been the only tuna in the Indian Ocean to have MSC certification, and thus having a premium value on its exports markets which are the same as Mauritius and Seychelles. But now that purse seiners increasingly hold this ecolabel after a decade of improvements, their share of the markets are eroding. “This is a commercial strategy under the cover of sustainability” added Mr Purseramen.

STA members also believe that the choice of the dates for the closure is not without ulterior motive. While the resolution applies a FAD fishing ban in the IO from the 1st of July to the 11th of September, other oceans such as WCPO (Western Central Pacific Ocean: 1st July to September 30) and IATTC (Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission: July 29 to October 8), have coinciding closures.

“From a sustainability perspective, it would be surprising that the same environment conditions prevail at the same time in the 3 oceans, and result in a FAD closure. However, when you analyse this choice from a commercial perspective, you see that there is a clear intent to damage the processing industries of Seychelles and Mauritius, by
making it impossible for us to buy fish from other oceans” added Mr Purseramen.

The fact that there are simultaneous closures will inevitably lead to a global shortage of tuna during this period, which will likely result in an increase in the prices of the raw material and will definitely affect the competitiveness of both Mauritius and Seychelles. As this measure only affects purse seine fishing, it conveniently leaves the way open for fish caught by other fishing gears to be sold on the European markets.

72 days closure = 130 days without fish

The length of this FAD closure which also prevents the placement of FADs, does not reflect the length of time during which the Mauritius and Seychelles canneries will remain without supply.

“By the time when the purse seiners will have the right to fish again, they will first have to spend time ‘seeding’ the FADs, waiting for the aggregation of the fish, the fishing effort itself, travel back to port in Seychelles and then onto Mauritius, and we have easily reached a count of at least 130 days – almost 4.5 months – without any supply”.

The cold storage capacities of Mauritius, but also Seychelles, do not allow to stock enough fish to prevent any interruption in supply and the implications for thousands of tuna workers in Mauritius and Seychelles is very serious.

“How do we explain to these workers that a majority vote -supported by nations that have made no effort to reduce yellowfin catches – means they should stop working while others continue unhindered?” added Purseramen.

Is it the end of IOTC?

Despite the call from Japan to continue the dialogue at the coming session of the Commission in Mauritius in May, the proponents of the proposal called for a vote, thereby ignoring the spirit of consensus that should have prevailed. The question can thus be asked: is it the new way forward within IOTC? Is this how proposals will be adopted or just blocked? Is this how the G16 is going to impose their positions, ignoring at the same time the vulnerability of certain states such as Comoros, Seychelles and Mauritius?

“We make a call to all Member States of IOTC to come back to reason and to re-ignite the spirit of collaboration and consensus which should prevail within the Commission. Whether we like it or not, our future is intertwined and its only by accepting to make compromises and collaborate that we will achieve our ultimate goal: the recovery of the stocks. The situation is serious for everyone and not for just a segment of the fishery. Let’s start afresh and come up with proposals which will encompass all the gears and create a level playing field for all. Everyone has a proportionate effort to make, so let’s finally put aside our differences and make a success of the coming IOTC Commission in Mauritius” added Mr Purseramen.

Photo credit: IOTC