TABLE OF CONTENT - ACP Fish II

53 Pages·2014·0.78 MB·English

" Strengthening fisheries management in ACP states "

FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

Support to formulate fisheries management plans
for Guyana, Suriname and Trinidad and Tobago

ACP Fish II – Strengthening fisheries management in ACP states
9 ACP RPF 128 Accounting No. RPR/006/07 – EDF IX

Reference: CAR-1.4-B4c

September 2013

Project implemented by

“This publication has been produced with the assistance of the

European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole
This project is financed by the European Union responsibility of the consultant and can in no way be taken to reflect
the views of the European Union.”

“The content of this document does not necessarily reflect the views of the concerned governments.”
" Strengthening fisheries management in ACP states "

Table of Contents
Abbreviations and Acronyms .................................................................................. 2
Executive Summary ................................................................................................. 3
1. Background ......................................................................................................... 6
2. Approach to the assignment .......................................................................... 9
3. Comments on the Terms of Reference ........................................................ 11
4. Organisation and Methodology .................................................................... 12
4.1 Delivery of Terms of Reference (table as below) .................................................................. 12
4.2 Conduct and details of the assignment ................................................................................. 16
4.2.1 GUYANA ............................................................................................................................. 16
4.2.2 SURINAME .......................................................................................................................... 22
4.2.3 TRINIDAD & TOBAGO ........................................................................................................ 31
5. Conclusions and recommendations ............................................................ 44
5.1 Guyana ....................................................................................................................................... 44
5.2 Suriname ................................................................................................................................... 45
5.3 Trinidad & Tobago .................................................................................................................... 45
Annexes ................................................................................................................... 47
FTR Annex 1: Terms of Reference .................................................................................... 48
FTR Annex 2: Inception Report ......................................................................................... 49
FTR Annex 3: Guyana documents .................................................................................... 50
FTR Annex 4: Suriname documents .................................................................................. 51
FTR Annex 5: Trinidad and Tobago documents ................................................................... 52
This project is financed by the European Union Project implemented by
" Strengthening fisheries management in ACP states "

Abbreviations and
Acronyms

CARIFORUM Forum of the Caribbean Group of African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States
CFO Chief Fisheries Officer
CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
CPUE Catch Per Unit Effort
EAF Ecosystems Approach to Fisheries
FD Fisheries Division (or Fisheries Department)
FMP Fisheries Management Plan
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GUY Guyana
KE Key Expert
MT Metric Tonnes
NBSLME North Brazil Shelf Large Marine Ecosystem
QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control
RFU Regional Facilitation Unit
SFO Senior Fisheries Officer
SUR Suriname
T&T Trinidad and Tobago
TED Turtle Exclusion Device
ToR Terms of Reference
TT Technical Team

This project is financed by the European Union Project implemented by
" Strengthening fisheries management in ACP states "

Executive Summary
Project outline
This project was initiated to assist three states, Guyana (GUY), Suriname (SUR) and Trinidad and
Tobago (T&T), to develop management plans for key marine fisheries, in order to facilitate robust and
sustainable management. Three European consultants were stationed, one in each country, for two
missions between February and July 2013. The consultants worked with the Fisheries Departments
and stakeholders to develop the management plans and then to refine the drafts via a consultation
process, including a validation workshop to which all key stakeholders were invited.
The approach adopted for developing each policy was participatory, with attention given to
government, non-governmental, private and individual stakeholders. Consultations were carried out
via a variety of methods, including individual meetings, participatory workshops and media publicity. In
particular, community consultations were held in key, pre-identified fishing communities in each
country, to ensure that a wide spectrum of fishing interests could express their views.
The process of management plan development was guided by a Technical Team (TT), made up of
senior members of the Fisheries Department/Division and, in Trinidad & Tobago, representatives of
other stakeholder organizations. This team met periodically to steer key aspects of the programme.
The Fisheries Divisions of each country participated very actively in the process and, together with the
technical teams, provided solid and consistent support for the plan formulation and validation process.

Project outputs
For Guyana (GUY), fisheries management plans were prepared for the following fisheries:
the artisanal fishery (mixed gears and species, mainly finfish, some shrimp);
the ‘semi-industrial’ red snapper fishery (Lutjanus purpureus, handline and trap);
the ‘industrial’ shrimp fishery (prawn Farfantepenaeus spp. and seabob Xiphopenaeus kroyeri,
trawl);
the shark fishery (mixed gears and species – shark are taken in the above fisheries but a
separate management plan was prepared in order to conform with recent CITES listings of
some relevant shark species).
For Suriname (SUR), a fisheries management plan was prepared for the whole fisheries sector (sea
and coastal inshore). Sectors that were addressed are:
the ‘industrial’ seabob shrimp fishery;
the ‘industrial’ fishery for large shrimp;
the line fishery for red snapper and mackerel;
the ‘industrial’ fishtrawl fishery;
the line fishery for large fish (tuna, and others);
the drift net fishery:
the fyke fishery.

For Trinidad and Tobago (T&T), a fisheries management plan was prepared for the hard-substrate
demersal fishery, a predominantly artisanal fishery which targets primarily snappers, groupers, grunts,
and spiny lobster, using a variety of gear types.

Comments on the assignment and lessons learned
GUY: Lessons learned from Guyana project
This project is financed by the European Union Project implemented by
" Strengthening fisheries management in ACP states "

1. Difficulties in timing and organisation made the stakeholder meetings and consultations difficult
and slow to organise, resulting in poorer attendance. This problem was addressed for the
individual stakeholder meetings (e.g. with government bodies and NGOs) by taking the initiative
and contacting individual stakeholders directly by phone. Once informed that a formal letter had
been or would be sent to their organisation, they were normally happy to make arrangements to
meet over the phone. The problem with the community consultations was more difficult to solve.
However, it was partially addressed by arranging additional meetings where participation had
been poor – e.g. separate visits by the consultant to Three Door Sluice and to #66 Village.
2. The project’s main counterparts (Addevi Persaud and Seion Richardson) had worked long hours
to ensure that the project could move forward. They reported that they found their participation in
the project rewarding.
3. More time than initially planned was required to obtain basic fisheries data (estimates of catch
and effort) from the relevant Fisheries Department staff. Organization needs to be optimized next
time to allow sufficient time to extract and process the required catch and effort data.
4. In relation to project organisation, it should be reported that some elements, such as purchasing
and invoicing, were dealt with very efficiently and smoothly. The main counterparts (named
above) worked very hard and competently to try and ensure the success of the project. The
Validation Workshop was very successful with good attendance, since the lessons of previous
consultations had been learned.

SUR : Lessons learned from Suriname project.
1. First, it must be said that the project in Suriname has been very successful, thanks to the great
help of the FD staff. Especially the help of Asraf Radjeskumar who was assigned to the project
was invaluable. He has helped to organise the Consultation meetings and made sure that
fishermen in the fishing communities were informed about the meetings coming up by their local
representatives well in time. As a consequence, all meetings had a very high attendance.
Formal invitations were send in all occasions but this attendance surely resulted from mouth to
mouth communications.
2. In the Terms of Reference it was foreseen to organise 4 consultation meetings. Additional
meetings were held (as agreed during the Inception Meeting) in Boskamp and Galibi as these
villages are important fishery communities and could not be left out according to the Director of
Fisheries. The fact that in Boskamp and Galibi respectively 49 and 21 fishermen participated
shows that this was a good decision.
This project is financed by the European Union Project implemented by
" Strengthening fisheries management in ACP states "

3. During the consultation meetings the participants have provided information on issues that
should be included in the FMP. It was explained that the consultant would write the Draft FMP
and that a Validation Meeting would be organised in June. Several participants felt that they
should be given the opportunity to comment on the draft FMP before the Validation Meeting
would take place. Therefore it was promised to these participants to send them the draft well in
advance of the Validation Meeting. In a later stage of the project however it was decided by the
FD and the consultant that it would be better to discuss the draft FMP in additional
consultations. This would allow to discuss directly with the stakeholders, in order to more
efficiently take into account important comments on the measures formulated in the draft. It was
thought that this would prevent that major issues came up at the validation meeting and that
further discussion about them would be conducted. Thus the plan could not be endorsed at the
Validation meeting. Consequently, 5 additional meetings were organised in Commewijne,
Boskamp, Coronie, Nickerie and Paramaribo. Four of these meetings (with the artisanal sector)
were held during the absence of the consultant. The last meeting with the industrial sector was
held one week before the Validation Meeting in the presence of the consultant who went to
Suriname 10 days earlier than planned before in order to be able to chair this meeting. The FD
staff member assigned to the project, Asraf Radjeskumar, chaired the other meetings and notes
were taken. When the consultant arrived in Surinam, an additional Technical Team meeting was
held and the issues that had arisen were discussed. On the basis of the discussion with the TT,
the draft FMP was amended. Also the additional consultation meeting in Paramaribo resulted in
several amendments to the draft FMP. Representatives of the seabob shrimp fishery asked for
an additional meeting with the consultant and during that extra meeting, several amendments to
the plan were agreed on. The lesson learned is that in the initial planning of the project, the
second mission in the country was too short. In reality more time was needed to discuss the
draft FMP with the FD staff and with stakeholders. It was also clear that the presence of the
consultant at the FD resulted in new attention to the project. As a result, most input by TT
members was given when the consultant was back in Suriname.
4. The consultant omitted to agree on a deadline for comments on the draft FMP by the FD. The
result has been that comments were received In a very late stage. The lesson learned is that a
clear deadline should have been set.

T&T: Lessons learned from Trinidad & Tobago
1. During the national consultations and validation workshops, discussion tended to be dominated
by several individuals, who often tried to steer the conversation to issues not relevant to the
FMP. In many cases these individuals were misinformed about fisheries issues. Diplomacy was
needed to get the conversation back on track.
2. The Technical Team was very large (10 members), so it was difficult to schedule Technical
Team meetings. It also took long to get comments on the FMP, and there were many comments
from the Technical Team and stakeholders (86 pages). As a consequence, the consultant
needed more time than planned in the ToR to address all the comments. In future, either the
Technical Team should be limited to 5-6 members, or the consultant should be given more time
to address the comments on the Fisheries Management Plan.
3. More time than initially planned was required to obtain basic fisheries data (estimates of catch
and effort), and when the data were finally obtained, problems with data QA/QC resulted in
unreliable analyses/interpretations of CPUE/abundance trends. Organization needs to be
optimized next time to allow sufficient time to extract and process the required catch and effort
data.
4. Very few data exist to support the development of a fisheries management plan for the demersal
hard-bottom fishery of Trinidad & Tobago. Stock assessment of grouper and snapper was
conducted in the early to mid 1990’s. There are no contemporary size or age data and setting
biological reference points will be difficult. This FMP likely rely on biological information from
snapper/grouper/lobster fisheries of other Caribbean islands, an approach that must be used
with caution.
This project is financed by the European Union Project implemented by
" Strengthening fisheries management in ACP states "

1. Background
The North Brazil Shelf Large Marine Ecosystem (NBSLME), including the adjacent area of the Gulf
of Paria, extends along northeastern South America from the Parnaiba River estuary in Brazil to the
Gulf of Paria, an inlet of the Caribbean Sea that lies between the Venezuelan coast and Trinidad
and Tobago. This area is a highly productive ecosystem, with the Amazon and Orinoco Rivers
producing extensive plumes which are the main sources of nutrients. The extensive mangrove
system along the Venezuelan and Trinidadian coastline represents an important habitat critical for
regional fisheries. The main fisheries of the Guianas-Brazil region are shrimp (including four large
penaeids and smaller seabob shrimp) and groundfish (red snapper, sea catfish, etc.). Other
fisheries include schooling pelagic resources (mackerels, jacks), sharks, and hard substrate
demersals (snappers, groupers, lobsters). The NBSLME is commercially exploited by six countries
throughout the region, with an estimated annual production of 35,384 MT of shrimp and 36,083 MT
of groundfish. While fishing is important, the NBSLME is also known for offshore energy and marine
transportation. This area makes an important contribution to the economy of CARIFORUM
countries, as it generates income and employment through commercial fishing, recreational
activities, and oil and gas exploration and exploitation (Phillips 20111).
The direct beneficiaries of this contract are Guyana, Suriname and Trinidad and Tobago. Of these
three countries, the most populated is Trinidad and Tobago (255/km2) with the least populated
being Guyana (4/km2) and Suriname (3.36/ km2). The per capita consumption of fish protein is
significantly higher than the global average in Guyana (57 kg/person), while the other countries
range from 15-25 kg/person. The average percent contribution of fishing to GDP is higher for
Guyana (6.85), while Suriname’s contribution is 1.80 and Trinidad and Tobago is 0.13. The fisheries
are multi-gear and multi-species using artisanal and/or industrial fishing methods with an estimated
17,600 fishermen operating from over 5,177 artisanal/industrial vessels and 268 fish landing sites.
Marine fishing activities in Guyana are directed at exploiting its shrimp resources using shrimp
trawlers and its ground-fish resources using wooden vessels and various gear types. The marine
fishery comprises the 146 offshore industrial trawl fishery licensed to catch either large penaeid
shrimp or seabob (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri). These trawlers measure about 21 m in length and use
double outrigger shrimp trawl nets with Turtle Exclusion Device (TEDs) and operate in waters 14-91
m in depth over the seabed of mud, gravel or sand. The artisanal or small-scale fishery sector
consists of approximately 1,300 vessels ranging in size from 6 to 18 metres, propelled by sail or
outboard or inboard engines, and using gear that include Chinese seine (a fyke net), pin seine
(beach seine), cadell lines and handlines, drift seine, gillnets and circle seine. Gillnets are the most
widely used gear. The red snapper fishery consists of trap vessels with an average size of 15-20 m
and operates in depth of 30 m, and approximately 10 Venezuelan longliners contracted to local
fishing companies.
The fishing fleet in Suriname consists of industrial boats (with long trips lasting several weeks) and
commercial small-scale artisanal vessels with fishing trips varying between 1 and 12 days. The
industrial fleet targets shrimp using trawlers and finfish (snapper, shark, and tuna) using hook and
line and longline. In 2010, there were 139 registered trawlers of which 25 were shrimp trawlers, 20
seabob, 29 finfish and 65 snapper handlines. The artisanal fleet of 316 vessels, operates in depths
less than 10 m, targets multispecies using multiple gear types (including gillnet, longline, chinese
seine, and drag net) to catch primarily sciaenids and marine catfishes. Vessels are “V-shaped”
wooden plank boats of two types, open Guyana type boats, 8-14 m long, powered by 25-50 hp
outboard engines and a closed decked Guyana type boat 15 m long with 45-80 hp diesel inboard
engines.

1 Phillips, T. 2011. Consultancy to deliver the CLME Project causal chain analysis (CCA) revision, CCA gap
analysis and the update of the continental shelf ecosystem Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis (TDA) Caribbean
LME project: Colombia. 64p.
This project is financed by the European Union Project implemented by
" Strengthening fisheries management in ACP states "

The hard bottom demersal fishery, in Trinidad and Tobago targets mainly snappers, groupers and
lobsters off the east coast of Trinidad and the southern coast of Tobago. Other species such as
grunts are captured incidentally. Both artisanal and semi-industrial, multi-gear vessels are involved
in the fishery. Fishpots are the main gear used for capture of groupers and lobsters while bank lines
are used for catching snappers. Over the last 5 years an estimated 340 tonnes of snapper and 24
tonnes of grunt and grouper were landed by the artisanal multi-gear, semi-industrial and industrial
trawl fleet of Trinidad. Within the last 3 years the Trinidad artisanal multi-gear fleet landed an
estimated 10,500 kg of lobster, valued at 120,063 USD. These statistics are underestimates, as they
do not include landings from the semi-industrial multi-gear fleet.
The status of the shrimp and finfish fisheries in the Guyana, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago
area varies. The shrimp resource is the most important export oriented fishery for these countries.
These resources include four larger penaeids (southern pink shrimp, pink spotted shrimp, southern
pink shrimp, and southern white shrimp) and the smaller seabob shrimp. Pink spotted shrimp is
important to Guyana and Suriname, while brown shrimp is mainly found in the inshore area of the
Gulf of Paria in Trinidad and Tobago. Stocks of brown shrimp are close to being fully exploited,
while the pink spotted shrimp is being overexploited in some areas. In the case of seabob shrimp
fisheries in Suriname and Guyana, there is no evidence that the stock is overfished and/or that
overfishing is occurring (Phillips 2011).
The groundfish resources are red snapper (the most important fishery), weakfish, corvina, and sea
catfish. There are signs of overexploitation of the southern red snapper resource due to declining
catch rates and a decrease in the size of this species. There are also signs that the corvina is
overexploited, similarly the lane snapper, bangamary (Macrodon ancylodon) and sharks are also
showing signs of overexploitation. The pelagic resources (mackerels), small coastal pelagic,
demersal species and sharks targeted by artisanal fishers in Guyana are highly exploited (Heileman
20082).
In all countries, Fisheries Administration falls under the Ministry of Agriculture (Ministry of Food
Production in Trinidad and Tobago). In Guyana, the fisheries is regulated by the Fisheries Act
(2002) which includes a provision that mandates the Chief Fisheries Officer to prepare and keep
under review a plan for the management and development of fisheries. In Suriname, marine
fisheries are regulated by the Decree on Marine Fishery, Decree C-14, 1981. The new 1992
fisheries law makes provision for the elaboration of a FMP by the Fisheries Department, which
provides details on management issues and proposing management strategies. It also makes
provision for national consultations on the FMP and the development of regulations for fisheries
management and development. Trinidad and Tobago will soon implement a revised Fisheries
Management Act, which will repeal the Fisheries Act of 1916. This revised Act gives consideration to
the changing national, regional and international environment for fisheries management and
conservation. The Act provides for the development and implementation of fisheries management
plans (FMPs), among other things, for the effective management of the fisheries resources of
Trinidad and Tobago.
Guyana, Suriname and Trinidad and Tobago are facing a number of challenges in the management
of their fisheries resource: namely, inadequate capacity to implement fisheries policies,
development, and management strategies; inadequate institutional capacity and resources to
support effective stakeholder participation in fisheries management; insufficient data and manpower
for research and management; insufficient staff to fulfil functions and poor communication between
levels of management; excessive by-catch and discards and destructive fishing practices; and the
continued rise of illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing, both by local and external
vessels threatens stock sustainability, with the countries having inadequate essential resources to
police their territorial waters. Despite the challenges facing the sector, there are also opportunities
to increase exploitation levels in some fisheries, to increase trade to Europe and North America, to
increase access to credit from financial institutions, and improve harvesting and processing
practices to internationally accepted standards.
The assignment proposed under these Terms of Reference will support the beneficiary states in the
updating or devising of specific fishery management plans to guide the sustainable use of the
sector.

2 Heileman, S. 2008. North Brazil Shelf LME. In: K. Sherman and G. Hempel (Eds.) “The UNEP Large Marine
Ecosystems Report: A perspective on changing conditions in LMEs of the world’s regional seas”. UNEP Regional
Seas report and studies No. 182. Pp 701-710 Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme.
This project is financed by the European Union Project implemented by
" Strengthening fisheries management in ACP states "

This project is financed by the European Union Project implemented by
" Strengthening fisheries management in ACP states "

2. Approach to the assignment
The approach to defining the fisheries management plans has been participatory, as required by the
FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. The workplan was therefore heavily orientated
towards consultation throughout. This was a progressive process, starting with the Fisheries
Departments, and then moving on to other agencies and individuals with either a stake in the fisheries
or marine environmental sectors, or whose responsibilities overlap with the Fisheries Departments in
some way. Finally, the consultation process moved on to the fishing communities themselves, with
particular efforts made to ensure that a broadly representative segment of the communities from
around the country were directly involved in the formulation and review of the management plans.
The project was directed at a national level by a Technical Team formed of senior members of the
Fisheries Department. In Trinidad and Tobago, the Technical Team included representatives from the
Fisheries Division (Trinidad), Department of Marine Resources and Fisheries (Tobago), Institute of
Marine Affairs, Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Energy, and a fishermen’s association,
Fishermen and Friends of the Sea. Each Technical Team formulated the strategy for implementing the
project, and notably for carrying out the consultations. Consultations were mainly carried out via
meetings between the consultants and assigned Fisheries Department counterparts (Addevi Persaud
and Seion Richardson in Guyana; Shandira Ankiah and Che Dillon in Trinidad and Tobago;
Radjeskumar Asraf in Suriname) and representatives of relevant organisations. All potentially relevant
stakeholders were invited to participate, but some chose not to. Consultations with fishermen were,
however, conducted by means of workshops, which were held with industrial and semi-industrial
fishermen in Georgetown and with artisanal fishermen in Georgetown, Essequibo and Berbice.
The output of the stakeholder meetings, along with a brief review of relevant literature, legislation and
policy, were summarised for each country in a national discussion paper. The objective of the
discussion paper was to sum up the key issues to be addressed in each fisheries management plan,
and to ensure that plan objectives would fit appropriately into the national and regional policy context.
The discussion paper was not intended, however, to be a formal project output – rather it was a project
implementation tool. The content of the discussion papers was reviewed and agreed by the Technical
Teams. The discussion papers provided the basis for the approach to developing the fisheries
management plans. Separate plans were prepared for each fishery in each country, but were
incorporated into a single document for each country. Draft management plans were provided to the
Technical Teams at the end of the first assignment in country (late March / early April 2013).
After review by the Technical Teams and other stakeholders (if invited to do so), the consultants
returned to their assigned countries in June 2013 for a Validation Workshop. The format of the
Validation Workshops was as follows:
Introduction (Minister of Agriculture (Guyana); Senior Fisheries Officer (Trinidad & Tobago);
Director of Fisheries (Suriname)).
Presentation of the draft management plans (consultant)
General question and answer session
Discussion of individual management plans in break-out groups, facilitated by Fisheries
Department staff (Penary discussions in Suriname)
Presentation of conclusions by each group
Final summing up (consultant)
After the Validation Workshop, the consultant took the comments made during the workshop, as well
as any final comments from the Technical Team, and prepared the final version of the management
plan document.
Working with the Regional Facilitation Unit of the ACP FISH II (RFU), the Fisheries Directorate (FD)’s
and team members, the KE1 (team leader) devised a work plan coupled with templates in order to
provide harmonised activities and outputs where possible. However, as noted above, the team
This project is financed by the European Union Project implemented by