The following is a summary of the ICCAT measures taken at this year’s negotiations including comments based on my perspective (Ellen Peel) as the representative of the recreational fishing community. Some issues raised this year will be back on the table next year, including follow up to the first Recreational and Sportfishing Working Group meeting with which we will need to significantly influence. This year’s delegation members Ray Bogan, Rob Kramer and Dr. Russell Nelson did an excellent job in helping to secure the gains we made; I appreciate their service. I will keep you informed prior to and after any and all inter-sessional meetings held in 2010. While international negotiations move very slowly due to the diverse economic and cultural priorities placed on fish and fishing by member nations, it is very important for our US interests in recreational sportfishing for highly migratory species to maintain an effective and strong presence at the negotiations. We can never let other nations think that we, as the angling community, will ever go away and not stand up for responsible conservation and management of the ocean resources.

The 21st ICCAT meeting was held in Brazil and was preceded by a one day meeting of ICCAT’s Recreational Working Group and a two day weekend session of the Compliance Committee. The U.S. Delegation was led by Dr. Rebecca Lent, Director of the Office of International Affairs, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). NOAA’s Chief of Staff Margaret Spring attended much of the meeting and was a clear demonstration of high level NOAA interest in ICCAT. I served as the Recreational Fishing Commissioner.

Working Group on Sports & Recreational Fishing

This year’s ICCAT negotiations were preceded by a one day inaugural session of the Working Group on Sports and Recreational Fishing. The U.S. was the only nation of the 20 attending that submitted requested detailed information on the nation’s recreational fisheries. The working group acknowledged there are some socio-economic impacts derived from sport fishing, but no agreement was reached on its relative position to commercial fishing economics. A lot of debate was generated by a European Community (EC) attempt to secure agreement to a definition of recreational and sportfishing. While this might appear harmless, it is not. Each nation should retain the authority to define its recreational sportfisheries, which the US has done in the US Magnuson-Stevens Act. The EC ( France specifically) suggested the definition include a distinction between recreational and sportfishing. The way it was worded would require every angler, yes US, to be a member of a French organization for their fishery to be considered legitimate by ICCAT. As you can imagine that suggestion received no favorable support from the US . We know who we are and what we do, have a US legal definition, and don’t need Frenchmen putting us in categories and in a way by which they would make money. The outcome was for each nation to “strive” to develop a definition that can be agreed upon before next year’s negotiations. Also each nation is to provide detailed descriptions of how their recreational sportfisheries operate in their national waters, which the US already submitted.

So long as fish are federally managed within departments of commerce and/or agriculture, and not in conjunction with departments of natural resources or environment and with no influence from tourism departments, the stocks will be viewed solely as commodities for consumption. This paradigm must change so persuasive management and conservation strategies weight positive economic impacts, compatibility with sustaining natural resources and good user ethics rather than solely overfishing and consumption. This change will take some time, whether a listing of bluefin under the CITES treaty would help change the current paradigm; we will have to wait and see what the decision was in 2010. The Whaling Commission was once all commercial and governmental representatives, but it went through a major shift for the better of the resource, though there has been some recent back sliding. We must strongly urge anglers and tourism officials from other nations to secure seats on their nation’s delegation if at all possible. Additional socio-economic studies documenting the value of recreational sportfishing are very important and must be brought into the management and conservation arenas to bring about change.

Swordfish

North Atlantic swordfish measures were extended through 2010, but with a reduced Total Allowable Catch (TAC) down to 13,700 metric tons (mt), which is consistent with scientific advice. For ICCAT this measure could be viewed as precautionary in nature. If the 13,700 mt are exceeded in 2010 there will be a prorated reduction in quota share. The US lost 400 mt of underage or uncaught quota that had been rolled forward. One hundred metric tons went to Senegal which then gave it to Canada . This gain by Canada caused a great deal of angst within the US delegation. The two primary reasons for this reaction is the high incidence of sea turtle bycatch taken in the Canadian pelagic longline fishery and the fact that the US fleets have complied with domestic sea turtle (ESA) conservation and swordfish conservation measures over the past ten years. The US argued that those nations that have taken an ecosystem approach to conservation and management of swordfish, which subsequently benefitted all nations fishing for swordfish, should not be penalized. We know US vessels have to try to avoid sea turtles or face not fishing if a cap is met. Many of the turtles avoided in US waters subsequently swim to Canada, where many are killed, which further reduces the stock size and that can trigger more restrictive measures again in the US. As you know Canada often dumps some of its swordfish tonnage into US markets and that drives the prices down for US caught swordfish entering the market at the same time.

The TAC for the South Atlantic swordfish stock was set at 15,000 mt, which falls within scientific advice, for 2010-2012 with a cap of 45,000 mt over the three-year plan. The United States retained its 100 mt quota as well as its ability to carry forward up to 100 mt of under harvest -- but agreed along with other parties to transfer some underharvest to help achieve agreement.

For Mediterranean swordfish a measure was adopted that requires additional catch permitting, reporting and monitoring requirements, including a fishing vessel register. Unfortunately, the proposed expansion of the time/area closure recommended by the science committee (SCRS) did not pass.

Bluefin Tuna

Eastern bluefin tuna was the focus species at this year’s negotiations due to a pending petition to list it under Appendix I of the Convention on the International Trade of Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (CITES). Such a listing would prohibit all international trade in the species, but would not impact fishing within national waters. CITES meets in March 2010 to make this determination. Scientific advice recommended a TAC between 8500 mt and 15,500 mt, with a notation that a zero quota would be best to insure a recovery by 2023. Libya recommended a zero TAC, but no nation completely supported that measure. The EC recommended 15,500 mt. The US said it would prefer 8,500 mt. The final decision was 13,500 mt in 2010 (a 32% reduction from the previously agreed 2010 TAC of 19,950 mt). This doesn’t allow for a real increase in spawning stock biomass. We will all be interested in what next year’s bluefin stock assessment will indicate.

A significantly expanded time and area closures for the Mediterranean bluefin fishery was approved that allows purse seine fishing to fish for only one month (May 15-June 15). The TAC for the years 2011-2013 are to be set at the level that will ensure a 60% chance of rebuilding the stock by 2023. To achieve these reductions in catch/landings, additional vessel (capacity) reductions have to be made, as well as limits on joint fishing operations (JFO). Turkey registered reservations on those two points.

The western Atlantic bluefin rebuilding program was not reopened.

Albacore tuna

A rebuilding program was established for northern albacore through 2020 with a TAC of 28,000 mt for 2010 and 2011, which is consistent with scientific advice. The United States accepted a 2% reduction in quota to 527 mt. The bulk of the reduction was shouldered by the EC and Taiwan .

Bigeye tuna

A small reduction in the bigeye TAC was approved down from 90,000 mt to 85,000 mt for 2010. No agreement was reached unfortunately on a larger time and area closure in the Gulf of Guinea . The small fish from the Gulf migrate to the US and are important to our fisheries. Hopefully next year we can get the needed closure approved.