Brussels, 10/02/2014 (Agence Europe) - The potential for tuna fisheries development in the Atlantic Ocean is limited due to the limited availability of tuna, but “the continuation of the current agreements (with third countries) and their renewal, instead of private deals, are critical to the proper operability of the EU fleet in West Africa”, states a report published on 7 February on the website of the European Commission's Directorate General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (http://www.ec.europa.eu/fisheries/ documentation/studies/ tuna-east-atlantic/report-tuna-fisheries-in-the-east-atlantic_fr.pdf - report available in French only).
Against the backdrop of a possible extension of the network of bilateral fishing agreements in West Africa and Central Africa, the EU wanted to gather information to feed into an analysis of the current situation of the tuna fleet in the Atlantic and look into the existing opportunities and constraints at ecological, economic and institutional level regarding the negotiation of new bilateral agreements. This was the aim of the report.
In the Atlantic Ocean, the total volume of annual catch for all species of tuna lies in the region of 350,000 tonnes (2006-2010 average), or 10% of global catch. One third of all catch in the Atlantic is taken by EU vessels. The remainder is taken by vessels flying the flags of Ghana, South Korea, Japan and other states. EU vessels mainly practise seine netting and longline fishing (Spanish and Portuguese vessels), and pole-and-line fishing to a lesser extent.
Level of exploitation of stocks. In late 2012, the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) concluded that there was a slight over-exploitation of albacore tuna, full exploitation of bigeye tuna and exploitation of skipjack tuna slightly below its sustainable level.
In July 2013, of the ten EU fishing agreements currently in place in Africa, five are active and are combined with a protocol in force (Cape Verde, Côte d'Ivoire and São Tomé and Principe) or under temporary application (Mauritania and Gabon), with one more initialled but pending ratification (Morocco). Negotiations could start in autumn 2014 with Senegal and one protocol has been frozen (Guinea Bissau). Two are dormant (Equatorial Guinea and Gambia) following the expiry of their most recent protocol.
Private agreements risky. For the countries with which the EU has no partnership agreements in place, European ship-owners use other means of access: private licences, joint ventures and charters. Private agreements of this kind “carry risks to European shipowners, as they come under the national jurisdiction of the coastal state with little recourse available in the event of a dispute” (for example in Liberia), the report explains. The European shipowners are therefore seeking to develop private agreements based on partnership agreements, to give them a more secure regulatory framework (for example in Guinea and Liberia).
Opportunities and constraints. The countries with which the EU already has a fisheries agreement (Cape Verde, Côte d'Ivoire, Gabon, Morocco, Mauritania and São Tomé and Principe) or with which an agreement in force existed previously (Angola, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau and Senegal) “present good levels of biological opportunity for tuna”, the report explains (our translation). Two other countries, Liberia and Sierra Leone, have particularly interesting biological profiles as their exclusive economic zone (EEZ) lies on the migration path of the tunas as they leave the Gulf of Guinea. All of these countries also present constraints, however, in various areas and at different levels, and these “harm the implementation of the protocols”. The main constraints are related to the presence of other, rival foreign vessels (mainly from Asia, but also belonging to European shipowners with vessels flying the flag of a third country), an obsolete regulatory framework and problems faced by the fishery administrations in enforcing the rules and ensuring controls on and monitoring of fishing activities. In spite of these constraints, the partnership agreement remains the most effective means of access for EU shipowners.
Lastly, the report stresses that climate change is expected to have major consequences for the migration processes of tunas. It could move areas of high tuna density to colder waters (towards Morocco in the North, towards Angola in the South). By reducing spawning zones for small pelagic species, the worsening conditions of estuaries could also lead to reduced availability of tunas' prey and thereby reduce their numbers. (LC/transl.fl)