Review of Fisheries in OECD Countries, 1995 (1997 Edition).

393 Pages·1998·1.437 MB·English

by  OECD

REVIEW
D
OF FISHERIES
IN OECD
C
COUNTRIES
E
O
1 9 9 7
E D I T I O N
REVIEW
OF FISHERIES
IN OECD COUNTRIES
1 9 9 7
E D I T I O N
ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT
ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION
AND DEVELOPMENT
Pursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris on 14th December 1960, and which came into force
on 30th September 1961, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shall promote
policies designed:
– to achieve the highest sustainable economic growth and employment and a rising standard of living in
Member countries, while maintaining financial stability, and thus to contribute to the development of the
world economy;
– to contribute to sound economic expansion in Member as well as non-member countries in the process of
economic development; and
– to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, non-discriminatory basis in accordance
with international obligations.
The original Member countries of the OECD are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany,
Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland,
Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The following countries became Members subsequently
through accession at the dates indicated hereafter: Japan (28th April 1964), Finland (28th January 1969),
Australia (7th June 1971), New Zealand (29th May 1973), Mexico (18th May 1994), the Czech Republic
(21st December 1995), Hungary (7th May 1996), Poland (22nd November 1996) and the Republic of Korea
(12th December 1996). The Commission of the European Communities takes part in the work of the OECD
(Article 13 of the OECD Convention).
Publie´ en franc¸ais sous le titre :
EXAMEN DES PEˆCHERIES DANS LES PAYS DE L’OCDE
(cid:211) OECD 1997
Permission to reproduce a portion of this work for non-commercial purposes or classroom use should be obtained through the
Centre franc¸ais d’exploitation du droit de copie (CFC), 20, rue des Grands-Augustins, 75006 Paris, France,
Tel. [phone], Fax [phone], for every country except the United States. In the United States permission
should be obtained through the Copyright Clearance Center, Customer Service, [phone], 222 Rosewood Drive,
Danvers, MA 01923 USA, or CCC Online: http://www.copyright.com/. All other applications for permission to reproduce or
translate all or part of this book should be made to OECD Publications, 2, rue Andre´-Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, France.
FOREWORD
The Committee for Fisheries approved
this review at its 78th Session in October 1996.
The Council agreed its derestriction in January 1997.
(cid:51)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
General Survey....................................................................... 7
Tables to General Survey ............................................................... 29
COUNTRY NOTES
Australia................................ 39 Portugal .............................. 129
Canada ................................ 55 Spain ................................ 133
European Union.......................... 65 Sweden .............................. 149
Belgium .............................. 73 United Kingdom........................ 157
Denmark.............................. 79 Iceland................................. 163
Finland............................... 87 Japan .................................. 171
France ............................... 93 Mexico................................. 177
Germany.............................. 101 New Zealand ............................ 187
Greece ............................... 105 Norway ................................ 197
Ireland ............................... 113 Poland ................................. 209
Italy ................................. 119 United States............................ 215
The Netherlands........................ 127
Statistical Annex to Country Notes ........................................................ 227
Special Survey : Russian Federation...................................................... 387
Republic of Korea ...................................................... 393
(cid:53)
GENERAL SURVEY
SUMMARY
On the international scene, 1995 will be remembered as an active year in which three major events,
with potential important implication for the future sustainability of fisheries resources, took place. The
United Nations Conference on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks concluded its work
in August 1995, the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, prepared under the auspices of the FAO,
was adopted in October 1995, and the Kyoto Declaration and Plan of Action on the Sustainable Contribu-
tion of Fisheries to Food Security was finalised in December 1995.
While OECD catches fared reasonably, crisis may be the word which best describes the 1995 fishing
season. Resource managers once again underlined the importance of coming to grips with reduced
fish stocks, some of which are at such historically low level that collapses cannot be excluded.
The world economy did not fare well during 1995 and the major markets were reticent with regard to
demand for luxury fish products like shrimp. For a number of lower valued species prices came down in an
effort to match falling relative food prices, while for other species quantities marketed increased and
hence put pressure on prices.
Structural adjustment has become an increasingly common issue in OECD Member countries. Realis-
ing that fleets are often overcapitalised and that stocks are overfished, administrations are seeking ways to
reduce catch levels. This generally involves reductions in both capital and labour, thus requiring plans to
scrap redundant vessels and the development of strategies to provide employment alternatives for
fishermen (especially when they are located in remote fishing communities).
Aquaculture production continues to be a significant contributor to world fisheries’ supply, account-
ing for approximately 20 per cent of overall supply. Advances in research and gains in experience have
resulted in a doubling of aquaculture output in the last 10 years. It will, however, be necessary to monitor
these developments closely, to ensure that increases in supply are in line with market structures and that
the environmental impacts of aquaculture are fully assessed.
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Governments of OECD Member countries are placing increasing emphasis on marine living resource
management. A number of sciences are calling for a halt to the continued over-exploitation of our marine
living resources. Yet the political establishment has had difficulties in translating this into practical
response for fishing communities.
Conservation measures
General
Under the auspices of the United Nations, an agreement was reached in August on ways and means
of efficiently managing straddling stocks and highly migratory fish stocks. This agreement, which is an
implementing arrangement for the 1982 UNCLOS provisions governing such stocks of fish, will come into
force following ratification by thirty countries. Through the end of 1995 the Agreement had received
29 signatures. (cid:55)
(cid:82)(cid:69)(cid:86)(cid:73)(cid:69)(cid:87)(cid:32)(cid:79)(cid:70)(cid:32)(cid:70)(cid:73)(cid:83)(cid:72)(cid:69)(cid:82)(cid:73)(cid:69)(cid:83)(cid:32)(cid:73)(cid:78)(cid:32)(cid:79)(cid:69)(cid:67)(cid:68)(cid:32)(cid:67)(cid:79)(cid:85)(cid:78)(cid:84)(cid:82)(cid:73)(cid:69)(cid:83)
Within FAO, negotiations on a Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries came to an end in
October 1995. The Code sets out principles and international standards of behaviour for responsible
practices with a view to ensuring the effective conservation, management and development of living
aquatic resources, with due respect to ecosystems and biodiversity. The Code is universal in its scope and
voluntary, except for the ‘‘Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Man-
agement measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas’’ which is binding to those states ratifying it.
The OECD’s Committee for Fisheries continued its review of management practices in Member
countries. The economic aspects of the management of living marine resource in waters under coastal
States’ jurisdiction and beyond were assessed and the outcomes of alternative management measures
were analysed. One of the conclusions of the study was that in many instances traditional management
measures alone have had little success in conserving fish stocks.
The Japanese Government hosted, in December 1995 in Kyoto an International Conference on the
Sustainable Contribution of Fisheries to Food Security. More than 500 participants from 95 States partici-
pated as did a number of international organisations and NGOs. The Conference adopted the Kyoto
Declaration as well as a Plan of Action dealing among other things with ‘‘the role of living aquatic
resources as an important natural renewable source of food’’ and ‘‘effectiveness of multispecies manage-
ment and harvest at multiple trophic levels for sustainable development of living marine resources’’.
Management arrangements pertaining to stocks exclusively within national jurisdiction
Supranational measures
TACs and quotas in EU waters are given in Table 1. Few changes compared to the 1994 fishing season
were introduced. It is interesting to note that in nearly all of the EU’s fisheries the harvest did not reach
the prescribed TAC (cf. EU country note). This is due either to the fisheries being closed as they approach
the TAC, because markets did not justify the harvest of fish, or because the fish were not available in
sufficient quantities.
Table 1/Tableau 1. TACs AND QUOTAS IN EC WATERSa/
TACs ET CONTINGENTS DANS LES EAUX COMMUNAUTAIRESa
1993-1995
’000 tons/tonnes
Foreign fishermen/
Total TAC EU/UE
Peˆcheurs e´trangers
1993 1994 1995 1993 1994 1995 1993 1994 1995
Cod 254.9 205.7 267.6 241.0 191.1 245.1 9.2 9.6 22.5 Morue
Haddock 163.3 192.0 157 129.2 145.3 121 15.3 20.3 36 E´glefin
Saithe 125.9 125.0 137 83.0 76.6 81.4 40 40 55.6 Lieu noir
Whiting 183.8 163.3 143.6 116.0 116.6 108.9 10 10 34.7 Merlan
Plaice 209.4 200.3 149.2 202.2 187.7 140.9 3.1 6 8.3 Plie
Herring 840.2 833.2 1 132 592.1 616.1 954.5 n.a. 100.6 177.5 Hareng
Mackerel 580.8 625.5 506.3 521.2 532.3 434.4 83.1 93.2 71.9 Maquereau
a) Major species only./Principales espe`ces seulement.
For the first time ever, on 1 January 1995, the Mediterranean fisheries became subject to Community
regulations under the Common Fisheries Policy. Another significant development which materialised
towards the end of 1995 was the agreement of full integration of Spain and Portugal into the Common
(cid:56) Fisheries Policy as from 1996.
(cid:82)(cid:69)(cid:86)(cid:73)(cid:69)(cid:87)(cid:32)(cid:79)(cid:70)(cid:32)(cid:70)(cid:73)(cid:83)(cid:72)(cid:69)(cid:82)(cid:73)(cid:69)(cid:83)(cid:32)(cid:73)(cid:78)(cid:32)(cid:79)(cid:69)(cid:67)(cid:68)(cid:32)(cid:67)(cid:79)(cid:85)(cid:78)(cid:84)(cid:82)(cid:73)(cid:69)(cid:83)
National measures
Japan and the Republic of Korea respectively moved towards the establishment of a 200 miles
exclusive economic zone with a view to declare sovereign rights over its fisheries resources and protect the
marine environment. In Japan a TAC system will be introduced for a range of fisheries within the 200 miles
EEZ, complementing the effort limitation system and technical measures already in place.
Poor stock condition for most groundfish stocks off New England provoked closures on parts of the
George’s Bank fisheries. In particular the cod, haddock and yellowtail flounder fisheries were affected. A
vessel buy-back programme was instituted with a view to reduce effort considerably.
The importance of the fishing industry for the national economy and for fishery-dependent communi-
ties along the coast, and the objective of managing marine resources at sustainable levels, have necessi-
tated an extensive control and enforcement regime in Norway. This has been achieved to a large extent by
establishing a paper trail which documents catches (via logbooks) and sales (via sales notes) enabling the
authorities to compare the two sets of information for consistency. In addition the Coast Guard has direct
access to the quota control system, and may compare catch information in the logbooks with catch in the
hold.
In 1996, Italy introduced a number of sea fishing regulations aimed at protecting its marine resources
and at maintaining its freeze on new fishing licences. However, in accordance with the relevant decree, a
few licences were issued but only for those segments of the fleet that have not reached the fishing capacity
objectives set out in the Multiannual Guidance Programme, as well as for fishing areas and types of fishing
that make more efficient use of biological resources. As part of the planning process required by European
Union’s Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), Italy has reclassified its fleet in line with the EU’s categories.
Following their accession to the EU, Finland and Sweden have also harmonised their resource
management policies in line with the CFP. In the case of Finland this has in particular required legislation
governing the creation of a fishing vessel register, a professional fishing register and a catch register. In
Sweden and Finland catch possibilities regarding regulated species are now determined by the EU under
the relative stability policy and fishermen in both countries are allocated a share of EU stocks from year to
year.
In 1995, the Mexican Government released the 1995-2000 National Development Plan which sets out
the objectives, goals and strategies regulating the country’s programme of economic activities. The Plan
has set the following objectives for fisheries: promoting fisheries through a comprehensive and sustaina-
ble approach, and promoting the diversification and development of new fisheries and untapped
resources, such as industrial fisheries and rural aquaculture. The government policy will also stress job
creation, increase seafood supply to improve nutrition, and to obtain foreign exchange through higher
exports.
Conflicts between recreational and commercial fisheries continue to be a problem in many Member
countries. In New Zealand, for example, commercial fisheries are mainly managed via output controls
whereas recreational fisheries are managed via input controls. In one snapper fishery this has led
commercial fishers to oppose reductions in Total Allowable Commercial Catches because they fear that
any improvements in the health of the fishery will be captured by recreational fisheries who do not have
overall catch limits. This example highlights the commercial recreational conflict as well as the conflict
between different fisheries access rights.
Aboriginal fishing activities
In New Zealand, the allocation of ITQ in 1986 brought Maori fisheries grievances to a head with a
threatened injunction by Maori against further ITQ allocations by Government. ITQ allocations were halted
and a series of negotiations between Maori and Government began. The outcome of the negotiations,
resulted in the New Zealand Government agreeing to:
– buy 10 per cent of ITQ from current fisheries to allocate to Maori and to provide assistance to
facilitate the entry of Maori into the business and activity of fishing;
– allocate 20 per cent of the ITQ for new ITQ species to Maori; (cid:57)
(cid:82)(cid:69)(cid:86)(cid:73)(cid:69)(cid:87)(cid:32)(cid:79)(cid:70)(cid:32)(cid:70)(cid:73)(cid:83)(cid:72)(cid:69)(cid:82)(cid:73)(cid:69)(cid:83)(cid:32)(cid:73)(cid:78)(cid:32)(cid:79)(cid:69)(cid:67)(cid:68)(cid:32)(cid:67)(cid:79)(cid:85)(cid:78)(cid:84)(cid:82)(cid:73)(cid:69)(cid:83)
– provide NZ$ 150 million to enable Maori to purchase a 50 per cent share in New Zealand’s largest
fishing company;
– establish a Commission to facilitate the entry of Maori into the business and activity of fishing; and
– establish a regulatory framework which provide for Maori non-commercial fishing interests.
These are specified in the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992. This represented a
comprehensive settlement of fisheries claims and, as a result, Maori fishing interests now control 37 per
cent of New Zealand’s ITQ.
Management arrangements pertaining to joint stocks, straddling stocks and highly migratory
species
Contracting Parties of NAFO reached an agreement on Greenland halibut in the NAFO area. The
agreement includes tighter controls and surveillance and allocation of quota levels.
One of the most important joint stock management areas is the Barents Sea which is shared by the
Russian Federation and Norway. In 1995 the quota arrangement for this area’s most important stock was
700 000 tons for cod and 130 000 tons for haddock. The agreement also included an arrangement for
herring, blue whiting and shrimps. Russia and Norway agreed not to fish for capelin and Greenland halibut
due to poor stock situation. The two parties agreed furthermore to increase the number of patrol vessels in
the area with a view to step up control and surveillance of own vessels, and in particular of third country
vessels fishing in the areas.
In the near future the Russian Federation is expected to maintain its presence in the traditional
fishing areas.
In January 1995, the Governments of Canada and Norway signed a fisheries conservation and enforce-
ment co-operation agreement. Covering an initial period of six years, the arrangement allows for each
party’s fisheries enforcement and inspection vessels to board, inspect and search fishing vessels within
and beyond 200 miles fisheries zones of both countries. In the agreement the parties affirm Norwegian
sovereignty in the Svalbard fisheries zone.
Canada hosted the first Ministerial level meeting of all fishing nations bordering the North Atlantic,
from 19 to 20 October 1995 in St. John’s, Newfoundland. The Ministers who participated were the Fisheries
Ministers of Canada, the Faroe Islands, Iceland, Norway and the Russian Federation. The Minister for
Greenland and the Commissioner for fisheries of the European Union were not able to attend, and were
represented by senior officials. The North Atlantic Fisheries Ministers Conference identified and discussed
common problems regarding fisheries management.
Table 2/Tableau 2. TACs AND QUOTAS FOR EEC-NORWAY SHARED STOCKS
TACs ET CONTINGENTS POUR LES STOCKS PARTAGE´S UE-NORVE`GE
1993-1995a
’000 tons/’000 tonnes
Total TAC Norway/Norve`ge EU/UE
1993 1994 1995 1993 1994 1995 1993 1994 1995
Cod 100.7 126.2 120 8.6 8.9 11.4 92.1 111.3 108.6 Morue
Haddock 133.0 160.0 120 27.2 42.3 26.6 105.8 111.7 93.4 E´glefin
Saithe 93.0 97.0 107 45.4 48.4 55.6 47.6 48.6 51.4 Lieu noir
Whiting 120.0 100.0 81 12.0 32.7 8.1 108.0 67.3 72.9 Merlan
Plaice 175.0 165.0 115 6.2 11.6 8.1 168.8 153.4 106.9 Plie
Mackerel 83.2 98.7 76.3 124.7 66.8 50.9 27.7 28.9 25.4 Maquereau
Herring 430.0 390.0 440 55.5 132.1 127.6 305.3 258.0 312.4 Hareng
a) Includes allocations to third countries as well as transfers./Y compris les allocations aux pays tiers ainsi que les transferts.
(cid:49)(cid:48)
Table 3/Tableau 3. NAFO QUOTA ALLOCATION/ALLOCATIONS DE CONTINGENTS DE L’OPAN
1994-1996
Tons/tonnes
Yellowtail flounder/
Cod/Morue Redfish/Se´baste American plaice/Balai
Limande a` queue jaune
1994 1995 1996 1994 1995 1996 1994 1995 1996 1994 1995 1996
Canada 2 946 85 85 6 614 6 614 5 336 4 805 6 825 Canada
Japan – – – 520 520 520 – – Japon
Norway 1 018 1 018 1 018 – – – – – Norve`ge
EU 7 698 5 485 5 485 4 506 4 506 4 040 236 140 UE
Other 5 338 4 412 4 412 28 360 28 360 26 740 759 35 Autres
Total 17 000 11 000 11 000 40 000 40 000 37 000 5 800 0 0 7 000 0 0 Total
Witch flounder/ Capelin/
Squid/Calmara
Plie cynoglosse Capelan atlantique
1994 1995 1996 1994 1995 1996 1994 1995 1996
Canada 1 800 b b b Canada
Japan – 2 250 2 250 2 250 Japon
Norway – – – – Norve`ge
EUb – b b b UE
Other 1 200 13 750 13 750 13 750 Autres
Total 3 000 0 0 0 0 0 150 000c 150 000c 150 000c Total
a) Any quota listed for squid may be increased by a transfer from any ‘‘coastal state’’ as defined in a) Tous les contingents pour le calmar peuvent eˆtre augmente´s par un transfert de n’importe quel
Article 1, paragraph 3 of the NAFO Convention, provided TAC for squid is not exceeded. Transfers «e´tat coˆtier» comme de´fini a` l’Art. 1, para. 3 de la Convention de l’OPAN, pourvu que le TAC du
made to Contracting Parties conducting fisheries for squid in the Regulatory Area shall be reported calmar ne soit pas de´passe´. Les transferts aux parties contractantes qui peˆchent le calmar dans la
to the Executive secretary, and the report shall be made as promptly as possible. zone de surveillance seront reporte´s au Secre´taire exe´cutif et le rapport sera fait le plus toˆt
possible.
b) Not specified because the allocation to these contracting parties ase as yet undetermined, although b) Non spe´cifie´ parce que les allocations a` ces parties contractantes ne sont pas encore de´termine´es,
their sum shall not exceed the difference between the total of allocations to other Contracting bien que leur somme ne de´passera pas la diffe´rence entre le total des allocations aux autres parties
Parties and the TAC. contractantes et les TAC.
c) The TAC would remain at 150 000 tons subject to adjustment where warranted by scientific advice. c) Les TAC resteraient a` 150 000 tonnes soumis a` ajustement garanti par les avis des scientifiques.
(cid:82)
(cid:69)
(cid:86)
(cid:73)(cid:69)
(cid:87)
(cid:32)(cid:79)
(cid:70)
(cid:32)(cid:70)
(cid:73)(cid:83)
(cid:72)
(cid:69)
(cid:82)
(cid:73)(cid:69)
(cid:83)
(cid:32)(cid:73)(cid:78)
(cid:32)(cid:79)
(cid:69)
(cid:67)
(cid:68)
(cid:32)(cid:67)
(cid:79)
(cid:85)
(cid:78)
(cid:84)
(cid:49) (cid:82)
(cid:49) (cid:73)(cid:69)
(cid:83)