2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 1 of 38
Original language: English/French/Spanish RESPONSES FROM CONTRACTING PARTIES TO LETTERS OF CONCERN
AND LETTERS OF IDENTIFICATION RECEIVED BEFORE 10 OCTOBER 2014
CPC Letter of concern Letter of identification No necessary
action
Reply received
Albania X
Algeria X
Angola X
Barbados X
Belize X
Brazil X
Canada X
Cap Vert X 13/09/2014
China X
Côte d'Ivoire X 08/10/2014
Curaçao X
Egypt X
European Union X 07/10/2014
France (St. P&M) X
Gabon X
Ghana X 02/10/2014
Guatemala X
Guinea Ecuatorial X
Guinée République X 17/09/2014
Honduras X
Iceland X
Japan X
Korea X
Libya X
Maroc X
Mauritanie X
México X 09/10/2014
Namibia X
Nicaragua X
Nigeria X 6/03/2014
Norway X
Panamá X 10/10/2014
Philippines X
Russia X
Sao Tome & Principe X
Sénégal X
Sierra Leone*
South Africa X
St. Vincent & G. X
Syria**
Trinidad & Tobago X
Tunisie X
Turkey X
UK-OT X
Uruguay
USA X
Vanuatu X
Venezuela*** * The Commission requested written confirmation of null catches in 2012 in accordance with Rec. 11-15.
**The Commission reminded Syria of its reporting obligations and requested confirmation of null catches in 2012 and 2013 in accordance
with Rec. 11-15.
***The Commission requested timely reporting and a report on national measures to reduce ALB and BUM overharvest.
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 2 of 38
RESPONSES FROM COOPERATING NON-CONTRACTING PARTIES,
ENTITIES OR FISHING ENTITIES TO LETTERS OF CONCERN
AND LETTERS OF IDENTIFICATION
Flag Letter of
concern
Letter of
identification
No letter Reply received
Bolivia
Chinese Taipei X 09/10/2014
El Salvador
Suriname
Letters from the Secretariat were sent informing these CPCs that their cooperating status had been
renewed and reminding them of obligations under Rec. 03-20.
RESPONSES / CORRESPONDENCE FROM NON-CONTRACTING PARTIES
(letters not included in COC-309 but in COC-312)
NCP Letter
received
Subject Note
Guyana 03/10/2013
22/08/2014
Further to its
revocation, new
request for
cooperating
status
The request arrived late (after
the deadline established in Rec.
03-20). However the Secretariat
included the request in doc.
COC-312/13 for information.
Cambodia Continuing
identification
No reply received concerning
possible illegal transhipment in
the Gulf of Guinea with
Cambodian purse seiners.
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 3 of 38
CAPE VERDE
DIRECÇÃO GERAL DAS PESCAS
Mr. Derek Campbell PRAIA, 12 September 2014
ICCAT Compliance Committee Chairman
Corazón de María, 8
28002 Madrid
Spain
Fax: 34 91 415 2612
N/Ref. 020 DGRM/DG/2014
SUBJECT: LETTER OF CONCERNS REGARDING DATA
2. The summary table of requirements was not included in the second part of the annual report.
3. The compliance tables were not submitted.
4. The internal actions report for vessels over 20 meters was not submitted.
5. The information regarding access agreements was not submitted.
Dear Sir,
I would like to express my appreciation and acknowledge receipt of your correspondence No. 725,
dated 13 February 2014, as regards the "Letter of concern regarding data".
In your correspondence you refer to the fact that Cape Verde has not complied with its
obligations, in accordance with the Recommendation by ICCAT on Compliance with Statistical
Reporting Obligations [Rec. 05-09]. In this respect you state that the Compliance Committee has
determined that Cape Verde had not submitted all the required reports and data within the
established deadlines, such as:
1. The annual report for the Standing Committee for Research and Statistics (SCRS) was
submitted late.
I would like to inform you that each year Cape Verde prepares the statistical data and its annual
report for the SCRS which are sent by our national correspondent, Ms. Vanda Marques Monteiro.
Please find attached the message that was attached to these data, dated 25 July 2013 for statistical
data and 27 September 2013 for the annual report. Considering that the deadline for the
submission of statistical data for the SCRS is the 31 July and that the deadline for the submission
of Annual Reports is the 16 October, you can observe that the deadlines established were
respected.
As regards the compliance tables, there was indeed a delay regarding data reporting. The
deadline is the 15 September and it was transmitted on 9 October (copy of email and table
attached). We apologize for the inconveniences caused.
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 4 of 38
In fact the internal actions reports for vessels over 20 meters - CP10-IntAc20, as well as the
information regarding access agreements, were not submitted. We apologize once again for this and
we would like to guarantee that we will continue to make every effort to comply with our ICCAT
obligations
Please accept the assurances of my highest consideration.
Juvino Vieira
Director General of Fisheries
Cape Verde
cc: Mr. S Depypere, Commission Chairman Driss Meski, ICCAT Executive Secretary Ms. Vanda Monteiro, Scientific Correspondent of Cape Verde
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 5 of 38
Annex 1
Votre accuse réception concernent les données statistiques 2010, 2011 et 2012
De: Mauricio Ortiz [[email protected]]
Enviado: sexta-feira, 26 de Julho de 2013 5:51
Para: INDP / Vanda Marques Monteiro - Bióloga Grandes Pelágicos; info; Carlos Palma
Assunto: RE: DONNÉES STATISTIQUES
Madame Vanda Marques Monteiro
Le Secrétariat de l’ICCAT vous remercie et accuse officiellement réception de la soumission de
données statistiques du Cap Vert : 2010, 2011 et 2012 en date du Juillet 25, 2013. Veuillez noter que
nous pourrions vous contacter ultérieurement si des éclaircissements sont nécessaires. Nous vous
remercions pour votre collaboration.
Meilleures salutations,
Mauricio Ortiz, PhD
Research, Statistics and Information Technology Dpt
ICCAT Secretariat
Madrid 28002, Spain
www.ICCAT.int
Annex 2
Votre accuse réception concernent le tableau d’application 2012.
De: Info [mailto:[email protected]]
Enviada: quarta-feira, 9 de Outubro de 2013 14:04
Para: MIEM / Dir Geral Pescas - Juvino Mendes Vieira
Cc: USA - Christopher Rogers
Assunto: RE: CAP VERT : Circulaire ICCAT # 3796 / 2013 - TABLEAUX ICCAT DE
DECLARATION DE L'APPLICATION, REC. 11-11- CAP-VERT
Cher Monsieur,
Nous accusons réception le 9 octobre 2013 des tableaux d’application pour le Cap Vert.
Meilleures salutations,
Secrétariat ICCAT
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 6 of 38
CÔTE D’IVOIRE
Ministry of Animal and Fishery Resources
Directorate of Aquaculture and Fisheries
The Director
Republic of Côte d’Ivoire
Union-Discipline-Work
No. 296/MIRAH/DPH/sdpml
Abidjan, 3 October 2014
To.
Mr. Derek Campbell
Compliance Committee Chair
ICCAT Corazón de María 8-6th floor
28002 Madrid, Spain
Subject: Côte d’Ivoire’s Response to the Letter of Concern
Dear Mr. Chair of the Compliance Committee,
I am writing this correspondence on behalf of Côte d'Ivoire in response to the letter of concern
transmitted to Côte d'Ivoire on 12 February 2014.
In the name of the government of Côte d'Ivoire, I acknowledge the deficiencies as regards to data
reporting for 2013.
Allow me, Mr. Chair, without questioning the work of the Compliance Committee, to inform you that
the fleet characteristics were correctly transmitted to the Secretariat with an acknowledgement of
receipt on 31 July 2013.
Moreover, for the marlin overharvest in 2010, Côte d'Ivoire transmitted an email to the ICCAT
Secretariat on 27 August 2013 providing information on marlin catches.
As regards to other issues, internal measures were taken by Côte d'Ivoire to correct these deficiencies.
These are as follows:
- the submission of the report to the SCRS within the established deadline
- the submission of information on access agreements
Besides, I would like to inform you that the data reported by Côte d'Ivoire includes information on
artisanal fishing.
With the support of the Compliance Committee in recognizing the progress made by my country, be
assured that Côte d'Ivoire will continue to carry out the necessary efforts to comply with its ICCAT
obligations.
Please accept, Mr. Chair of the Compliance Committee, the assurances of my highest consideration.
(Signed and sealed)
Shep Helgullè
cc. Mr. S. Depypere, ICCAT Chairman
Driss Meski, ICCAT Executive Secretary
Attachments:
- Mail regarding information on marlin catches
Acknowledgement of receipt of Task I and Task II data
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 7 of 38
Ministry of Animal and Fishery Resources
Directorate of Aquaculture and Fisheries
The Director
Republic of Côte d’Ivoire
Union-Discipline-Work
No. 227/MIRAH/DAP
Abidjan, 27 August 2013
TO.
Mr. Chris Rogers
Compliance Committee Chair
ICCAT Corazón de María 8-6th floor
28002 Madrid, Spain
Subject: Information on fisheries and marlin management
Dear Mr. Chair of the Compliance Committee,
Among the issues included in the letter of concern addressed to Côte d’Ivoire, is the transmittal of
information on Côte d’Ivoire’s fisheries and information on the management of marlin species, in
particular, white marlin, following the overshoot of quota for 2011. I would like to point out that this
quota excess goes back to 2010 with 7.17 t for a quota of 2.31 t.
This fishery was mainly targeted by artisanal fishing. Artisanal fishermen became more aware of the
problem of dealing with this issue. Likewise, data information on these species has improved.
These provisions have allowed to reduce these consumptions from 7.17 t in 2010 to 0.52 t and 00 t, in
2011 and 2012, respectively.
Once again, I would like to reaffirm our wish to implement all the ICCAT recommendations
applicable to Côte d’Ivoire and I rely on the Compliance Committee to assist us.
Please accept, Mr. Chair of the Compliance Committee, the assurances of my highest consideration.
(Signed and sealed)
Shep Helgullè
cc. Mr. M. Miyahara, ICCAT Chairman
Driss Meski, ICCAT Executive Secretary
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 10 of 38
EUROPEAN UNION
Subject: European Union reply to ICCAT letter of concern
Thank you for your letter of 13 February 2014 highlighting the deficiencies that the Compliance
Committee (CoC) noted at the 23rd Regular Meeting of ICCAT. The European Union (EU) has
carefully investigated the questions you raised regarding its performance identified during the 2013
Annual Meeting, so as to take the necessary corrective measures, as and when required.
I would like to point out that over the last few years, thanks to the continued efforts of both the ICCAT
Secretariat and the EU to streamline and rationalize the process, the level of compliance of the EU
with the ICCAT reporting obligations has considerably improved. As you know, the EU has to
coordinate and process information received from its Member States. This requires the collection and
consolidation of data from a large and diversified fleet which ranges from small artisanal vessels to
large scale industrial vessels, which is a complex exercise.
Despite all our efforts for timely and comprehensive data submission, some delays occurred. I can
ensure you that we continue pay special attention to the need of timely and complete submission of
reporting and we always look for ways of further improving our record by adapting our internal
procedures. We also pay particular attention to the quality of the data and this may, on some
occasions, also entail some short delay in the transmission of such data. The European Commission
ensures that the EU Member States are constantly updated on the different ICCAT reporting
obligations, clearly identifying and regularly reminding them of data requirements, deadlines, formats,
and contact persons.
Response to the deficiencies identified by CoC:
As regards the Task I fleet characteristics and Task II size data missing for some EU Member States,
some of them faced formatting difficulties that delayed their contributions. Some reports, though
received timely in the European Commission, were found to contain some incorrect and/or missing
information that had to be corrected and re-submitted. We regret that the corrected information was
not available on time for the SCRS work. We are working with the concerned Member States in order
to ensure that these difficulties are solved for future submissions.
With reference to the Part II of the Annual Report, we regret the late submission on 14 November
2013 and we assure you that we are continuing our efforts to improve our timeliness in sending such
data.
The SWO-MED closure report was received late by ICCAT due to the complexity of gathering and
compiling the relevant information delays in the transmission of information by some Member States
prior to the finalisation of the report by the European Commission. I would like however to clarify that
all measures have been taken at EU level to ensure effective implementation and monitoring of the
closure periods and to prevent similar delays in future.
The issue of the wrong unique identification number in EU-Greece has been resolved in 2013.
The reasons why some BCDs sent to the Secretariat were not completed and some BCDs were not
received 5 days after validation are multiple and mainly resulted from the complexity of the Bluefin
Tuna (BFT) fishery itself as explained thereafter. We have already provided, in the past, the main
reasons for such delays occurring and we are happy to provide the following additional information.
(1) Feedback from European Union Member States frequently refers to difficulties in complying
with the present 5 days deadline, particularly in the context of the farming sector. During
2013, several Member States experienced difficulties with IT systems specifically designed for
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 11 of 38
the purpose of recording the information contained in the BCDs. These IT related
shortcomings have now been addressed and similar issues are not expected to occur anymore.
It is worthwhile noting that the implementation of the IT systems concerned has in turn
allowed identifying missing information which would otherwise not have been detected. In
many cases, delays can also be linked to the complexity of the various administrations
involved in each Member States, such as Fisheries directorates, Coast Guards or Customs. The
transmission of information between these various administrations can imply unexpected
delays preventing the provision of BCDs to the Secretariat within the imparted deadline.
Finally, some delays have been linked to BCDs for BFT caught as by-catches by fishermen
not familiar with the filling in and submission of BCDs.
(2) Before BCDs are sent to the ICCAT Secretariat, they have to be validated by the competent
national authorities. If problems are identified, authorities have to verify the situation together
with all the parties involved. Furthermore, according to paragraph 86 of ICCAT
Recommendation 10-04, an investigation shall be initiated to verify the number and the weight
of fish. Such investigation can lead to a release procedure to be implemented by the authorities
concerned. Recommendation 12-03 replaced Recommendation 10-04 and confirmed this
provision. In addition Recommendation 12-03 added another control procedure involving the
assessment of caged quantities of BFT with stereoscopical cameras, also potentially leading to
an investigation and a release. These additional controls and their outcomes in the form of
release operations have resulted in some delays, sometimes, increased by the multi-parties
nature of the investigations, as the fishing and farming operations generally involve more than
one EU Member State. Sometimes there is also an important geographical distance between
the port or the farm and the national authorities concerned, which delays the necessary
verification on the spot. For these reasons, we consider that delays that have occurred are
related to an improvement in the monitoring and control of the farming activities. We consider
that this issue should be addressed in the context of the Annual session of the Commission.
It is important to note that the EU has further increased its efforts to ensure a full implementation of
ICCAT Recommendation 13-07 and in particular its paragraph 88. This has an important impact on
BCD related procedures due to the new provisions concerning the estimation of number and weight of
fish. Particular attention was given by the European Commission and the EU Member States to
enhance coordination at technical and political level and to exchange relevant information without
delay.
With regard to the late submission of a Member State annual BCD report, the delay in question was
due to difficulties encountered in the transmission of information between the various administrations
of the Member State in question.
I trust that the above elements provide a satisfactory response to the points raised in your letter of
concern and I wish to reaffirm the strong commitment of the European Union to ensure full
compliance with ICCAT measures.
Yours faithfully,
Stefaan Depypere
Head of Delegation of the
EU to ICCAT
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 12 of 38
GHANA
At the 23rd Regular meeting of ICCAT (18-25 November 2013, Cape Town, South Africa), the
Commission issued Ghana a "Letter of Concern" in relation to three issues, namely: (I) continued
overharvest of S Atl. SWO; (2) monitoring of VMS messages; and (3) implementation of Rec-12-06
on prohibition of transshipment at-sea. Below is Ghana's response and actions taken in respect of these
compliance concerns.
(1) Continued Overharvest of S Atl. SWO
I provide some background explanation highlighting the complexity of the issues surrounding Ghana's
SAd SWO quota allocation in order to put the issue in proper perspective.
Ghana's S Ad SWO fishery has, for a long time, been an artisanal fishery, supporting food security and
subsistence lifestyle of fishing communities along Ghana's coast. Since 2007, catches of S Ad SWO
have varied between 54 and 177mt, with an average of 101mt per year.
The first ICCAT allocation agreement for S Ad SWO was documented in Rec 02-02. Although
catches of S Ad SWO by Ghanaian fishers had been recorded, there was no specific allocation to
Ghana in that agreement. In Rec 06-03, an allocation of 100 mt per year for 2007-2009 was made to
Ghana, despite Ghana's request for an allocation of 150 mt. Subsequent agreements have essentially
rolled over Ghanaian's initial allocation without much debate.
At the 23rd Regular Meeting of ICCAT a "Letter of Concern" was issued to Ghana for overharvesting
S Atl. SWO by 2.0 mt. Based on the compliance tables from COPCI3, it can be inferred that Ghana
recorded over-harvests in the years 2009 and 2010 with an aggregated over-harvest value of 48mt. In
2012, Ghana harvested only 54mt out of its allocation of 100mt and consequently recorded an under-
harvest value of 46mt. The conclusion here is that concern of over-harvest of 2mt expressed, is the
difference between Ghana's outstanding aggregated overharvest value of 48mt and the under-harvest
value of (46mt) from the 2012 harvest record.
Corrective Measures
Data for 2011, 2012 and 2013 show that Ghana did not overharvest its S Atl. SWO quota. However,
Ghana is putting in place a number of proactive measures at the national and ICCAT levels to ensure
that we stay within our agreed allocations over time and we intend to pursue the following strategies in
this respect.
• A new Fisheries Management Plan, to be implemented by mid-2015, will pay particular attention to
fleet management and capacity reduction. The Plan will also explore the use of alternative fishing
gears for the artisanal fishery (such as use of set nets) to harvest semi pelagic fish species in the
inshore exclusive zone (comprising the coastal waters between the coastline and the 30 metre isobath
or the 6 nautical miles offshore limit, whichever is further). It is planned that funds from the Enhanced
Billfish programme of ICCAT will be used as done in the past to collect data and monitor the fishery
in conformity with ICCAT regulations which include among others prohibiting landing of juvenile
fishes less than 115cm LJFL.
• Given the nature of the fishery (artisanal, canoe-based fishing mainly for domestic consumption to
support food security, for which catch likely reflects variability in availability), Ghana intends to make
proposals to ICCAT in 2015 to review its S Atl SWO allocation table to reflect these features as the
control of the artisanal sector is certainly not possible using the same techniques applicable to the
industrialized sector.1
1 It is noteworthy that the natural variability in availability to 'non-directed' fisheries has been used to modify allocation schemes in the
history of ICCAT. For example, for N Atl ALB, the US argued that essentially these features resulted in fairly large variations in its Rod and
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 13 of 38
• Rec 06-03 contained a provision for carry-over of under harvested allocation (50%) and a pay-back
schedule for over harvest (typically within 2 years after the year in which over harvest was reported).
Ghana's adjusted quota for 2013 is 87.72mt. Ghana's 2013 data (yet to be presented to ICCAT) is
31.63mt, resulting in a significant under-harvest of 56.09mt. In accordance with Rec 06-03, Ghana
will seek to carry over its under-harvested allocation.
• Ghana also intends to request other ICCAT CPCs that have underused quota of S At! SWO to
transfer some of their quota to Ghana.
(2) Implementation of Vessel Monitoring System (VMS)
Ghana has previously reported to the Commission how it implements the ICCAT requirements on
VMS. However, due to persistent concerns expressed about the effectiveness of the measures, the
Commission requested more detailed information on how Ghana implements VMS in ICCAT
fisheries. Specific concerns that have been raised about Ghana's VMS in the past included:
• Lack of adequate training of VMS staff to undertake routine operations;
• Lack of analytical skills to effectively use VMS as a compliance tool (eg identifying and
interpreting fishing signatures and jumps in VMS signal;
• Lack of Guideline or administrative procedures for the operation of the system; and
• Lack of adequate human resources to operate an efficient VMS.
Corrective Measures Implemented
Ghana has, since the beginning of 2014, implemented a number of corrective measures, which have
effectively addressed all the short-comings in its VMS. These measures are summarised below.
• Legal Framework: The use of VMS as a condition of fishing license is mandatory under Ghana's
fisheries legislation. Under section 76(2)(n) of the Fisheries Act (Act 625), one of the reasons the
Commission can refuse to grant a fishing license to a Ghanaian fishing vessel is where "the vessel for
which the license is sought is not equipped with a working transponder for satellite monitoring." The
Fisheries Regulations reinforce the provisions of the Fisheries Act by making it mandatory for all
fishing vessels to have operational VMS before proceeding to sea. Until 2014, the VMS requirements
were applied only to tuna fishing vessels. Ghana's VMS has been significantly enhanced since January
2014 and has become mandatory for all fishing vessels with the exception of artisanal canoe vessels.
Revision to Ghana's fisheries legislation, anticipated to be approved by the Ghanaian Parliament by
December 2014, will significantly revise the VMS provisions of the Fisheries Regulations and
increase the penalties for breach of the VMS requirements.
• Technical Enhancement and Capacity Development: Efficiency of Ghana's VMS has been
significantly improved since beginning of 20 14 through technical improvements and capacity
enhancement. For example:
• The Fisheries Monitoring, Control, Surveillance and Enforcement Unit (FEU), as mandated by
the Fisheries Act, 2002, became functional on 21st October 2013, with a new staff
complement of 17 (increased from only 2).
• Additional conditions relating to the tampering of VMS have been imposed on all fishing
licenses (copy available for inspection if required).
• Comprehensive training has been provided to the FEU staff by DG Mare (through EU
technical assistance and CLS-Argos) on the use of VMS and other MCS tools to detect IUU
fishing.
Reel Sector catches and used a higher value than might have otherwise been agreed to account for that feature. Japan frequently applies a %
of its targeted catch (for example bigeye) to define a by-catch allocation limit that is taken as an average over a 5 or so year period.
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 14 of 38
• Radio equipment that enables FEU staff to communicate with Navy and Marine Police as well
as with fishing vessels has been installed in the Fisheries Monitoring Centre (FMC) and
formal training in the use of the equipment has been provided.
• A 200kVA electrical generator to serve as alternative power source for the FMC has been
purchased and installed.
• The FMC is also equipped with AIS through an MOU with the US Government. Apart from
the overhaul of the old system, 13 staff made up of 1 technician, and 12 FEU were given
training in SeaVision and TV32 operations by personnel from the US Navy.
• A comprehensive MCS Operation Manual (including VMS) has been developed and training
has been provided to all VMS staff.
• Ghana's VMS will be supplemented by the Electronic Monitoring System (EMS) project under
the FAO ABNJ Tuna project which is intended to enable Ghana to more closely monitor its
purse seine fleet.
(3) Transshipment at Sea
The third area addressed by Ghana's "Letter of Concern" relates to the implementation of ICCAT
transhipment requirements. ICCAT Rec 12-06 (amending Rec 06-11) requires that all transshipment
within the Convention area of tuna and tuna-like species caught in association with these species that
were harvested in the ICCAT Convention area, must take place in port.
Corrective Measures
Ghana gave domestic legislative effect to the transshipment provisions of Rec 06-11 and 12-06
through Regulation 33(8) of the Fisheries Regulation which provides that "Transshipment of all fish
can only be undertaken at authorised ports."
To address concerns about the effectiveness of Ghana's implementation of the transhipment provisions
of Rec 12-06, Ghana has implemented additional measures since beginning of 2014. These include:
• Ministerial Directive to Enforce Transshipment Prohibitions: In February 2014, the Minister of
Fisheries and Aquaculture Development, acting pursuant to section 3(2) of the Fisheries Act 2002,
issued a directive compelling the Fisheries Commission to immediately ensure full compliance with
ICCAT Recommendation 06-11 on prohibition at sea, transshipment by Large Scale Tuna Fishing
Vessels (Copy available for inspection if required).
• Restriction on the operation of carrier Vessels: At the centre of the transhipment allegations
against Ghana was the operation of Ghana's two carrier vessels. Since the beginning of2014, the
operations of the two carrier vessels have been restricted to port and they are required to have 100%
observer coverage.
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 15 of 38
Summary
In summary, Ghana can report as follows:
• Continued Overharvest of S.Atl. SWO: Data for 2011, 2012 and 2013 shows that Ghana did
not overharvest its SAt. swordfish quota. Measures that are being implemented will further ensure that
over-harvest does not occur in future.
• Implementation of Vessel Monitoring System (VMS): Ghana's VMS has been substantially
upgraded since the beginning of 20 14, with comprehensive training provided to all VMS staff. FEU
analyses in 2014 demonstrate that Ghana's VMS is now operating effectively and all the concerns
expressed by ICCAT have now been fully rectified.
• Transshipment at Sea: With the effective implementation of legislation and additional licensing
conditions instituted, Ghana can confidently report that the ICCAT transshipment requirements are
being fully complied with. The enhanced VMS monitoring of all Ghanaian tuna fishing vessels, as
reported above, will provide additional safeguard against the breach of the ICCAT transhipment
requirements.
I will be happy to provide supporting documents if required.
Yours Sincerely,
Samual Quaatey
Head Delegate for Ghana
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 16 of 38
REPUBLIC OF GUINEA
Subject: Letter of concern
I have the honour to acknowledge receipt of your letter # 728/ICCAT/Salida dated 12 February 2014
regarding the above-mentioned subject.
I note with great interest the observations made in your correspondence and I welcome the recognition
made by ICCAT as regards the efforts carried out by the Republic of Guinea which have allowed our
country to improve its classification, particularly, the lifting of Identification and registering as
Concern.
This recognition by ICCAT is also a call in favour of consolidating and strengthening the work carried
out by the Republic of Guinea's authorities.
- I would like to confirm that the Task I and Task II data were correctly transmitted to ICCAT
and that an acknowledgement of receipt was provided by ICCAT. Once again, I am
submitting this information.
- Since 2012, the data on catch statistics have been correctly transmitted on a quarterly basis,
including a consolidated report each year.
- There continue to be problems related to monitoring, collection, processing and publication of
statistical data due to constraints that require capacity building.
- Data on fleet characteristics, that include three vessels, have been submitted. This
transmission was carried out when the vessels were re-registered for 2013-2014, as confirmed
in 2014.
- Notwithstanding, the three vessels flying a Republic of Guinea flag, registered under the
framework of the ICCAT Convention, there is no Agreement or arrangement with any other
fleet, International, Regional or Sub-regional Institution.
The adoption of the following measures should also be considered:
- The installation of a satellite location device which is fully operative on all vessels is a
condition for licensing.
- The prohibition of all vessels flying a Republic of Guinea flag to carry out fishing activities at
sea without prior authorization;
- The mandatory embarkation of observers on board all fishing vessels flying a Republic of
Guinea flag and holding a fishing licence, for all fishing areas frequented including high seas.
Please do not hesitate to request further information which could be useful to you and I reiterate my
commitment to strengthen our cooperation.
Please accept the assurances of my highest consideration.
(Signed and sealed)
Hassimiou TALL
Attachment: - Task I data, Task II data and Consolidated report on catches
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 17 of 38
MEXICO
As regards your correspondence No. 133, dated 13 February 2014, regarding the data submitted by
Mexico, in accordance with the ICCAT Recommendation on compliance of statistical reporting
obligations [Rec. 05-09].
Taking into account the information stated in this correspondence, please find below the following
considerations and responses to each of the issues identified.
Report for the SCRS.
Firstly, it should be noted that the deadline for the submission of the report was the 16 September
2013. Mexico's response was submitted via email to the ICCAT Secretariat on 13 September 2013,
Mazatlán time (UTC-7:00), in compliance with the established deadlines for the submission of
information. (Email of transmittal attached).
Furthermore, the SCRS report was submitted by hand, by the Mexican representatives at the Standing
Committee on Research and Statistics meeting (SCRS), held in Madrid, Spain from 30 September to 5
October 2013, where it was reviewed.
We would like to express our interest and commitment in complying with the correct submission of
information and within the deadlines established by the Commission and to this end we are working in
our communication and management procedures among the different areas of this process.
BET/YFT Vessel List:
Mexico reiterates its commitment to comply with Recommendation 11-01, regarding the transmittal of
the list of vessels fishing bigeye and yellowfin tuna. In this regard, the actions required were carried
out to update the information, which was fully submitted in compliance with the internal procedures.
The above was carried out as the consolidation of information includes joint validations among
different technical areas which only include part of the information.
Note that this information was transmitted to the Secretariat on 1 July 2013, stating that the
information was correctly submitted in a timely manner.
The BCD unique identification number is incorrect as it does not comply with the format stated
in Recommendation 11-20.
As regards the BCD unique identification number, I would like to point out that the information was
correctly sent on time, however, due to an involuntary error in the issuance process, it was transmitted
in the previous format.
Therefore, to avoid this type of situation at domestic level, the work is coordinated among different
bodies involved in the process, aimed at validating the bluefin tuna catch documents, in compliance
with Recommendation 11-20. Pursuant to the procedures established at domestic level, and transmitted
to the ICCAT Secretariat these documents are issued through the Sub-delegations of Fisheries
As regards the numbering in the format, the Sub-delegations of Fisheries were requested to
immediately correct this and the following bluefin tuna catch documents were corrected. To this
effect, the instruction sheet which was distributed to the offices responsible of this process, is attached.
Undoubtedly, the eBCD will avoid these types of man-made errors. We therefore take the opportunity
to reiterate our interest and commitment to move forward in this process.
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 18 of 38
White marlin and blue marlin fishery management
To strengthen the management and the handling and rebuilding measures of white marlin and blue
marlin stocks, the measures which have been adopted and updated at domestic level to this end are as
follows:
On 24 December 2013, the "Agreement establishing the catch quota for the exploitation of blue marlin
(Makaira nigricans) and white marlin (Tetrapturus spp.), in the federal jurisdictional waters of the
Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea for 2013, 2014 and 2015", was published in the Official Journal
of the Federation (Diario Oficial de la Federación), which establishes, among other measures, a total
catch quota for the marlin fishery at 70 t for blue marlin and 25 t for white marlin per year, during
2013, 2014 and 2015, to be distributed among the incidental catch of the tuna longline fleet and the
sport and recreational fleet in waters under the Federal Jurisdiction of the Gulf of Mexico and the
Caribbean Sea, as well as the prohibition to catch blue marlin (Makaira nigricans) under 251 cm
lower jaw fork length and 168 cm for white marlin (Tetrapturus spp.). (Annexed)
It should be stressed that there are no commercial fisheries targeting these species, except for
incidental catches which are authorized under specific values (percentages) per semester for swordfish
and marlins, thus contributing to reduce the fishing pressure on species included in this this
recommendation.
Moreover, the Official Mexican Regulation (Norma Oficial Mexicana) NOM-023-PESC-1996, which
regulates the exploitation of tuna species by longline vessels in waters under the Federal Jurisdiction
of the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea (Annex). Item 4.4 states a total annual incidental catch
rate for swordfish, sailfish, bluefin tuna, marlins (Makaira and Tetrapturus)and sharks, not greater that
20% of the nominal catch obtained during the calendar year of this fishery, which contributes to the
recovery of these populations. This measure is mandatory for all Mexican longline vessels that catch
tunas.
It should be noted that this regulatory provision is being updated to include the regulations adopted by
ICCAT. Among others, the update includes the following provisions:
o It establishes the characteristics of authorized longline; measuring a maximum of 60.00
metres; 100% circle hooks, caliber 16/0 and a maximum of 800 longline hooks.
o It establishes the maximum allowable limit of effort units.
o It establishes that for each vessel, the total annual incidental catch of bluefin tuna
(Thunnus thynnus), marlins (Makaira and Tetrapturus), swordfish (Xiphias gladius),
sailfish (Istiophorus albicans) and sharks, must not be greater than 20% of its nominal
catch.
o It establishes that when marlins (Makaira and Tetrapturus), swordfish (Xiphias gladius)
and sailfish (Istiophorus albicans) are caught as by-catch during tuna fishing operations,
they must be released in good survival conditions.
In compliance with ICCAT regulations, Mexico has established the necessary measures for the
effective management of blue marlin and white marlin in its national legislation.
It should also be taken into account that the Inter-sessional meeting of the Billfish Species Group was
held in Mexico, where the available information on fishing effort, biological parameters and tagging
data of specimens supported by specialized laboratories, was reviewed. This information which will be
the base of future decision making for the exploitation and handling of these fisheries within the
ICCAT framework.
The Mexican government reiterates its commitment to continue working and strengthening
cooperative actions carried out within the framework of ICCAT towards responsible and sustainable
fishing.
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 19 of 38
With kind regards.
Dr. Antonio Garza de Yta
cc. Lic. Mario Gilberto Aguilar Sánchez.- National Commissioner of Aquaculture and Fisheries
Raúl Adán Romo Trujillo.- Director General of the National Institute of Fisheries
Attachments
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 22 of 38
HOJA DE INSTRUCCIONES DEL DOCUMENTO DE CAPTURA DE ATÚN ROJO
De conformidad con la Recomendación de ICCAT sobre el programa ICCAT de documentación de
capturas de alón rojo [Rec. 07-10], los pescadores, criadores y comerciantes de atún rojo (BFT) que
comercian con, importan o exportan atún rojo y las instituciones o personas autorizadas por las Partes
contratantes y las Partes, Entidades o Entidades pesqueras no contratantes colaboradoras (CPC) de
ICCAT deberán rellenar, validar o verificar las secciones adecuadas del Documento de captura de atún
rojo (BCD).
Sólo los BCD cumplimentados y validados garantizarán el comercio, importación o exportación en el
territorio o al territorio o desde el territorio de una CPC de ICCAT.
Cualquier cargamento que no vaya acompañado de un BCD cumplimentado y validado no será
aceptado por la CPC importadora, excepto cuando todo el atún rojo esté marcado en lugar de contar
con la validación. Se considerará que cualquier envío que no vaya acompañado de un BCD, o que
vaya acompañado de un BCD incompleto, inválido o falsificado, ha sido capturado contraviniendo las
medidas de conservación de ICCAT y su comercio, importación o exportación será suspendido a la
espera de recibir un BCD adecuadamente cumplimentado y validado.
INSTRUCCIONES
1. NÚMERO DE DOCUMENTO ICCAT DE CAPTURAS DE ATÚN ROJO
Línea para que la CPC que emite el documento designe un número de documento codificado de CPC.
2. INFORMACIÓN SOBRE CAPTURA.
Esta sección deberá rellenarla el patrón del buque de pesca o el operador de la almadraba o un
representante autorizado de la CPC abanderante.
El patrón del buque o el operador del buque, o el operador de la almadraba o de la instalación de
engorde o el representante autorizado de la CPC abanderante deberá registrar el nombre del buque o
almadraba, la CPC abanderante, el número de registro ICCAT, la fecha de captura, el número de
peces, el peso total (kg), el área de capture (Mediterráneo, Atlántico occidental, Atlántico oriental o
Pacífico), el arte utilizado (véanse más abajo los códigos de artes) y el peso medio (kg) del pescado
(especificar el tipo de producto (por ejemplo, GG) en peso total y en peso medio si el pescado no está
en poso vivo). Cuando estén disponibles, deberán consignarse los números de las marcas.
Esta información será validada por un representante autorizado de la CPC abanderante para toda la
captura de atún rojo desembarcada, transferida a jaulas o transbordada, con el nombre, cargo y firma.
Dicha validación no es necesaria cuando todo el atún rojo disponible para la venta está marcado por la
CPC del buque/almadraba (las marcas deberían contener la información necesaria requerida por el
BCD o el número de identificación de cada marca debería estar vinculado con la información que debe
incluirse en el BCD).
Si el área de captura es “Pacífico”, entonces sólo deben rellenarse el campo de área de la sección
“Información de captura” y la sección de “Información comercial” de este documento.
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 23 of 38
Observaciones sobre información comercial
Esta sección deberá rellenarla el patrón del buque de pesca o el operador de la almadraba o un
representante autorizado de la CPC abanderante si el pescado es transferido a otra CPC para su
engorde.
Tachar “F/FR” y “RD/GG/DR/FL/OT” ya que no son aplicables al comercio de peces vivos e insertar
el peso neto del cargamento. Identificar el punto de exportación/salida por ciudad, provincia y CPC
(cuando el atún rojo se captura en alta mar, especificar el nombre de la CPC de la zona de pesca donde
fue capturado el atún rojo, si se conoce, o insertar “alta mar” en caso contrario), nombre, dirección y
firma de la empresa exportadora o vendedora y fecha de exportación.
Esta información deberá ser validada por un representante autorizado de la CPC abanderante para la
exportación o venta del atún rojo incluyendo su nombre, cargo y firma, a menos que todo el atún rojo
haya sido marcado por la CPC abanderante. Identificar el punto de importación/destino por ciudad,
provincia y CPC, nombre y firma de la empresa importadora o compradora y fecha de
llegada/importación.
3. INFORMACIÓN SOBRE TRANSFERENCIA
Esta sección deberá rellenarla el patrón del buque de pesca o el operador de la almadraba o un
representante autorizado de la CPC abanderante en el momento de la transferencia si el pescado es
transferido a un remolcador para su engorde.
Insertar el nombre, pabellón y número de registro ICCAT del remolcador que recibe la captura de atún
rojo y los números de las jaulas (en el caso de remolcadores con más de una jaula) del atún rojo
transferido.
4. INFORMACIÓN SOBRE TRANSBORDO
Esta sección deberá rellenarla el patrón del buque de pesca o el operador de la almadraba o un
representante autorizado de la CPC abanderante en el momento de la transferencia si el pescado es
transbordado.
Incluir el nombre, pabellón, puerto de registro, número de registro ICCAT del buque de transporte,
fecha y coordenadas (latitud/longitud) de La posición de la transferencia. Describir el tipo de producto
mediante “F/FR” y “RD/GG/DR/FL/OT”.
Está información deberá ser validada por un representante autorizado de la CPC abanderante del
buque pesquero o de la almadraba con el nombre, cargo y firma a menos que todo el atún esté
marcado.
5. INFORMACIÓN SOBRE ENGORDE
El operador de la instalación de engorde o un representante autorizado de la CPC en que esté situada la
instalación de engorde (en lo sucesivo denominada “CPC de la instalación de engorde”) deberá
rellenar esta sección en el momento en que el pescado entre en la instalación de engorde si los peces
son transferidos a una instalación de engorde.
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 24 of 38
Describir la instalación de engorde con el nombre, CPC de la instalación de engorde, ubicación, y
número ICCAT de la IEAR. Hacer un circulo en “SI” o “No” para identificar si la CPC de la
instalación de engorde participa en el Programa Nacional de Muestreo. Rellenar la fecha de
transferencia y los números de jaula. Registrar el número estimado de peces, el peso total (kg), el peso
medio (kg) por jaula, y la composición de tallas estimada.
Esta información será validada por un representante autorizado de la CPC de la instalación de engorde
con el nombre, cargo y firma.
6. INFORMACIÓN SOBRE SACRIFICIO EN LAS INSTALACIONES DE ENGORDE
Esta sección deberá rellenarla el operador de instalación de engorde, o un representante autorizado de
la CPC de la instalación de engorde cuando los peces sean sacrificados en la instalación de engorde.
Rellenar la fecha de sacrificio, el número de peces, el peso vivo total (kg) y el peso medio (kg) del
atún rojo sacrificado. Cuando estén disponibles, deberán consignarse los números de las marcas.
Esta información será validada por un representante autorizado de la CPC de la instalación de engorde
con el nombre, cargo y firma a menos que todo el atún rojo esté marcado.
7. INFORMACIÓN COMERCIAL
Esta sección deberá rellenarla el exportador o un representante autorizado de la CPC exportadora antes
de que el pescado sea exportado, tal y como estipula la Recomendación 07-10.
Describir el tipo de producto mediante “F/FR” y “RD/GG/DR/FL/OT” e incluir el peso neto (kg) del
cargamento. Identificar el punto de exportación/salida por ciudad, provincia y CPC, nombre, dirección
y firma de la empresa exportadora o vendedora y la fecha de exportación.
Para todas las exportaciones/ventas de atún rojo desde los pescadores hasta los compradores, está
información deberá ser verificada y validada por un representante autorizado de la CPC exportadora, a
menos que todo el atún rojo esté marcado.
Identificar el punto de importación/destino por ciudad, provincia y país o entidad pesquera, nombre,
dirección y firma de la empresa importadora o compradora y fecha de llegada/importación.
Observaciones
- En los casos en que de un BCD resulte más de una transacción de comercio, exportación o envío, un
representante autorizado de la CPC abanderante del buque, almadraba o instalación de engorde deberá
validar una copia del BCD original a menos que todo el atún rojo esté marcado y esta copia se utilizará
y aceptará como un BCD original.
- Todos los pesos deberán consignarse en kilogramos.
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 25 of 38
- Tipo de producto: Identificar el tipo de producto que se envía como F/FR (fresco o congelado) y en
RD (peso vivo), GO (eviscerado y sin agallas), DR (canal), FL (filetes) o OT (Otros). Para “OT”
describir el tipo de productos incluidos en el cargamento.
- Descripción del transporte en la sección de INFORMACIÓN COMERCIAL: la documentación
oficial pertinente deberá ir adjunta al BCD.
- CÓDIGOS DE ARTE
BB Barco de cebo
GILL Red de enmalle
HAND Liña de mano
HARP Arpón LL Palangre MWT Arrastre semipelágico
PS Cerco
RE. Caña y carrete
SPHL Lilia de mano deportiva
SPOR Pesquerías deportivas sin clasificar
SURF Pesquerías de superficie sin clasificar
TL Barrilete
TRAP Almadraba
TROL Curricán UNCL Métodos sin clasificar
OT Otro
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 34 of 38
NIGERIA
Re: Letter of Concern
I wish to acknowledge the receipt of the Letter of Concern dated 13th February, 2014. Nigeria
sincerely appreciates the revocation of the letter of Identification issued in 2013.
As expressed by Nigeria at the 23rd Regular Meeting of ICCAT (184 25, November, 2013, Cape
Town, South Africa), Nigeria would continue to do her best to ensure full compliance with all ICCAT
conservation and management measures, in particular, submitting complete and timely data in
accordance with the recommendations of ICCAT on compliance with statistical reporting obligation
(Rec. 05-09).
Nigeria once more wishes to commend the good efforts of the Secretariat and Compliance Committee
and promises to adequately address any data reporting and other compliance deficiencies noted against
Nigeria in order not to impede the work of the Standing Committee on Research and Statistics (SCRS)
in performing its duties.
Thank you for your usual understanding and co-operation.
H.A. Okpe (ICCAT Desk Officer).
For Honourable Minister.
PANAMA
The Republic of Panama, through the Authority of Aquatic Resources would like to take this
opportunity to greet the Compliance Committee of the International Commission for the Conservation
of Atlantic Tunas and respond to the letter of concern transmitted to Panama, under office No. 735,
dated 13 February 2014.
We regret the delayed presentation of data, yet we would like to inform you that these data were
transmitted by Panama in accordance with Recommendation by ICCAT on compliance with
statistical reporting obligations [Rec. 05-09].
As regards the information received by the Republic of Guinea, who stated during the Annual meeting
that there was no access agreement between Panama and the Republic of Guinea, we would like to
inform you that once we have finished communicating with the government of the Republic of
Guinea, we will inform on the outcome of this communication.
We recognize that the problems related to the lack of reporting, late transmittal, incomplete reporting
and poor data quality make it difficult for the work of the Standing Committee on Research and
Statistics (SCRS) when conducting stock assessments and providing management advice, therefore the
Republic of Panama will work towards transmitting this information on time in the future.
We would also like to express that the Republic of Panama has continuously improved as regards the
compliance of management measures and the compliance of obligations as State Party to this C
Commission.
Reiterating the assurances of highest considerations.
Sincerely,
Raul Delgado
Director General
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 35 of 38
CHINESE TAIPEI
Subject: Reply to the Letter of Concern Dated 13 February 2014
In response to the letter of concern of 13th February 2014 from you in the name of the of Compliance
Committee Chairman, we attach an information paper concerning the actions we have taken with
respect to the following items:
1. To fully comply with the Recommendation on a Programme for Transshipment [Rec. 12-06]
2. To fully comply with the Recommendation to Promote Compliance by Nationals of Contracting
Parties, Cooperating non-Contracting Parties, Entities or Fishing Entities with ICCAT Conservation
and Management Measures [Rec. 06-14]
3. To provide information on steps it will take to control its catches, as well as explanations of the
irregularities between catch declarations and total reported landings, which should be informed by
port inspection reports that South Africa and Uruguay agreed to send to Chinese Taipei to facilitate
its investigation.
In view of the positive actions we have taken, we sincerely hope the Compliance Committee and
members of the Commission can recognize the efforts we have made and our commitment in
continuing our cooperation with ICCAT and complying with the management measures adopted and to
be adopted by ICCAT. We request the Commission continue granting Chinese Taipei the Cooperating
Status as before.
Please accept the assurances of my highest consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Ding-Rong LIN
Head of Delegation of Chinese Taipei to ICCAT
cc: ICCAT Secretary
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 36 of 38
Attachment
Actions taken by Chinese Taipei
to comply with the conservation and management measures adopted by ICCAT
In response to the letter of concern from the Chair of Compliance Committee dated 13th February
2014, Chinese Taipei would like to provide the information, investigation results and further steps or
actions taken to comply with the conservation and management measures adopted by ICCAT as
following:
1. Actions taken by Chinese Taipei to be in full compliance with ICCAT Recommendation on a
Programme for Transhipment [Rec. 12-06]
We submitted to the ICCAT Secretariat within the required timeframe and promptly updated
addition, deletion or modification, the list of the carrier vessels that were authorized to receive
transshipments from large scale pelagic longline vessels (LSPLVs) in the Convention area and the
list of our fishing vessels that were authorized to transship at sea.
According to our domestic regulations, any fishing vessel intends to transship at sea or in port
shall apply for permission from the Fisheries Agency at least 24 hours prior to such transshipment,
with the notification of intended transshipment date, location, species, quantities, and other
relevant information. Transshipment shall only be conducted after the receipt of written approval
from the Fisheries Agency. The ICCAT transshipment declaration shall also be submitted within
15 days after the completion of the transshipment. Furthermore, when the vessel monitoring
system device on board the fishing vessel is mal-functioned, no transshipment activity will be
permitted before the device is repaired.
2. Actions taken by Chinese Taipei to be in full compliance with ICCAT Recommendation to
Promote Compliance by Nationals of Contracting Parties, Cooperating non-Contracting
Parties, Entities or Fishing Entities with ICCAT Conservation and Management Measures
[Rec. 06-14]
In December 2008, Chinese Taipei implemented the Ordinance to Govern Investment in the
Operation of Foreign Flag Fishing Vessels, which clearly stipulates that Chinese Taipei nationals
who invest and operate foreign fishing vessels shall apply for authorization and make regularly
report of the data relating to fishing operation to the competent authority of Chinese Taipei. Any
Chinese Taipei national who has invested in a foreign flag fishing vessel which has violated the
RFMOs’ recommendations/resolutions/conservation and management measures shall be liable to
imprisonment for a period of not exceeding 3 years, if convicted, and may be liable to an
additional fine of not exceeding ten million New Taiwan Dollars.
In the 23rd Regular meeting of ICCAT, South Africa mentioned a number of vessels were detained
in its ports for which their beneficial ownership could have some connection with Chinese Taipei,
and requested Chinese Taipei to make investigation. In the past few months, Chinese Taipei took
action to investigate this case in accordance with the information provided by South Africa, and
the Fisheries Agency suspected 2 or 3 nationals of Chinese Taipei might have involved in the case.
The Fisheries Agency had forwarded the related information provided by the South Africa as well
as the information collected by the Fisheries Agency to the judicial authority for further
investigation and prosecution, in accordance with the above Ordinance.
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 37 of 38
3. Steps taken by Chinese Taipei to control its catches of the southern Atlantic albacore and
explanations of the irregularities between catch declarations and total reported landings
To ensure catches of our fishing vessels were commensurate with the quota allocated to Chinese
Taipei by ICCAT, the Fisheries Agency set the ceiling on the number of fishing vessels and their
fishing areas. All vessels are not permitted to fish in non-designated areas without prior
authorization. Furthermore, the Fisheries Agency also allocates annual individual catch limit to
each vessel so as to avoid total catches by species exceeding the quota allocated to Chinese Taipei
by ICCAT. When the catch of an individual vessel has reached its allocation, the vessel should
stop fishing immediately and return to the designated port. If the individual catch limit is
overused, the fishery operator will be punished in accordance with relevant regulations.
In addition, Chinese Taipei has taken the following measures to manage fishing vessels that target
south Atlantic albacore:
1. All vessels are required to install vessel monitoring system device and report their positions to
the monitor center every six hours. VMS data is capable to monitor whether the vessel is
operating in the designated area as well as to verify the relevant information on logbooks and
transshipment declarations.
2. The captain of a fishing vessel is required to accurately fill in the catch logbook and rapid catch
report. The fishery operator shall weekly submit the rapid catch report of his/her vessel to the
Taiwan Tuna Association it belongs. The Association is required to compile the data received
and submit in electronic data file to the Fisheries Agency weekly for the purpose of calculation
and controlling the utilization of allocated quota. The Fisheries Agency also requires that
bounded catch logbook be maintained on board the vessel for at least 12 months. In case the
fishing vessel enters into a port or has completed its transshipment, the fishery operator shall
submit catch logbook of his/her vessel to the Fisheries Agency within 60 days of the port entry
for consignment or transshipment.
3. If a fishing vessel intends to carry out at-sea or in-port transshipment, the fishery operator shall
comply with the above-mentioned management measures on at-sea or in-port transshipment.
The related information can be used for crosschecking the amounts of catch by species recorded
by the fishery operators who fill in their rapid catch reports concerned.
4. The fishery operator is required to submit copies of sales notes of the catches to the Fisheries
Agency for crosschecking within 60 days after completion of customs clearance for export of
catch.
4. Explanations of the irregularities between catch declarations and total reported landings of
the southern Atlantic albacore
South Africa and Uruguay mentioned in the 23rd Regular Meeting of ICCAT that catch
declarations for southern Atlantic albacore from Chinese Taipei vessels landing in their ports have
exceeded the quota allocated to Chinese Taipei [i.e. 13,000 t].
Accordingly, the Fisheries Agency asked the fishery operators to provide their reports on the
quantity of southern Atlantic albacore of their fishing vessels which had entered into the ports of
South Africa and Uruguay. Considering the information provided by the fishery operators could
be insufficient as well as taking into account the record of the 23rd Regular Meeting of ICCAT,
Chinese Taipei requested South Africa and Uruguay to provide port inspection reports and the
relevant information on the southern Atlantic albacore landings in their ports by Chinese Taipei
flagged fishing vessels. We had received the information from South Africa on 30th September
2014. However, up to the time of writing this paper we have not received any above information
from Uruguay.
We consider the reason of irregularities between catch declarations mentioned by South Africa and
our total reported landings could be as following:
2014 COM: Responses to Chair’s letters (CPs) Doc. No. COC-309A/2014 nov-14 (16:38)
Page 38 of 38
1. Among the fishing vessels of Chinese Taipei provided by South Africa, two of them are vessels
which operated in the Indian Ocean;
2. The landings of another fishing vessel should be the key irregularity. This fishing vessel
entered into the port of Cape Town twice in 2012, and the total landings, based on the record of
South Africa, were 2,425 metric tons. However, the said fishing vessel has a tonnage of 530
GRT, and its deadweight tonnage is 463 metric tons. In addition, according to the sales note of
the vessel, the total landing was about 335 metric tons. Thus, the total landings (2,425 metric
tons) as provided by South Africa seem unreasonable and we assume this could be due to a
mistake or a typo from South Africa at the time of recording the landings. Except the
aforementioned irregularities, there was no violation recorded under the port State inspections
by South Africa.
3. It should note in practice some vessels which had applied the entry permission with catch
declarations for entering into the port of Cape Town, but eventually they did not enter the port
of Cape Town.
4. Due to the fact that fishery operators could not precisely forecast the exact date of port entry,
they re-applied the entry permission with catch declarations for the same trip and catch amounts
which resulted duplication in the calculation of catch declarations of southern Atlantic albacore.
5. Considering the catch quantity estimated by the captain at sea has high possibility of difference
from the catch quantity measured at land, the fishery operator may tend to slightly increase the
amount of catch for filling in the catch declaration of entry permission issued by the port
authority so as to prevent from being identified as violation.
As for the total landing of southern Atlantic albacore caught by Chinese Taipei fishing vessels in
2012, it should be 12,812 metric tons after crosschecking with our reconciliation data of catch
sales notes and rapid catch reports/logbooks. The figure is close to the preliminary estimated
amount of 12,644 metric tons, and has not exceeded the quota allocated to Chinese Taipei by
ICCAT. The SCRS species groups meeting held in September 2014 also accepted this figure.
5. Further steps to be taken by Chinese Taipei to control catch of south Atlantic albacore
We appreciate CPCs of ICCAT expressing their concerns on Chinese Taipei’s southern Atlantic
albacore catch in 2012. Through the above efforts and measures taken by Chinese Taipei to
control its catch of southern Atlantic albacore, we think the data we provided to the ICCAT are
reliable. Nevertheless, we think there still has the room for improvement of our fishery
management of southern Atlantic albacore, and we will take the following steps to strengthen the
management of southern Atlantic albacore:
1. In order to simultaneously obtain the catch amounts addressed in the applications for the port
entry as well as landing reports issued by the port authority concerned, we will amend the
current regulations, asking the fishery operators to provide the port-entry report and/or landing
declaration when they apply the permission from the Fisheries Agency to transship or land their
catch in foreign ports. This amendment of the regulations will be done in the end of 2014.
2. Considering the benefits of rapid communication by means of e-logbook system which has been
implemented on our big-eye vessels since 2006, we have requested fishing vessels actively
targeting Atlantic albacore tuna to install e-logbook system as from July 2015.
3. Chinese Taipei will continue to contact and consult with the port and/or the fisheries authorities
of South Africa and Uruguay to discuss the issues relating to closer cooperation so as to ensure
our fishing vessels fully comply with the conservation and management measures adopted by
ICCAT.