How much longer will it take? Preliminary Findings of a Ten Year - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Preliminary Findings of a Ten Year Review of the Implementation of the UNGA Resolutions 61/105, 64/72 and 66/68 on the Management of Bottom Fisheries in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction

How much longer will it take?

Matthew Gianni Deep Sea Conservation Coalition Beth Pike Marine Conservation Institute Susanna Fuller Ecology Action Centre Side Event: UN FSA Resumed Review Conference 26 May 2016, United Nations

• DSCC formed in 2004, following concern regarding bottom trawl

fishing on the high seas

• Active participants in global negotiations since 2004 (e.g. UNGA,

UNFAO, CBD)

• Called for moratorium on bottom trawl fishing in ABNJ
• Active participants in implementation of UNGA resolutions

through RFMOs since UNGA 61/106 in 2006

• Participated in FAO Guidelines negotiations 2007/2008 and

UNGA reviews 2009, 2011 and FAO workshops (2010; 2015)

• Engage with scientists, policy makers, States and civil society

towards conservation of the high seas

DSCC Engagement

• Three new RFMO agreements: North Pacific, South Pacific and

Southern Indian Oceans

• Framework regulations and interim measures adopted by most

RFMO/As (Exceptions: Indian Ocean/SIOFA and Mediterranean/GFCM)

• Impact Assessments (IAs) for all DSF required by CCAMLR, North

and South Pacific RFMOs

• IAs required in “new” fishing areas or when new scientific

information becomes available in NE, NW, and SE Atlantic RFMOs

• EU adopted regulation 734/2008 to require IAs and reverse burden
• f proof to implement UNGA resolution in non-RFMO/A areas (SW

Atlantic).

Progress to Date

• Freezing footprint & delineating ‘existing fishing areas’: SPRFMO,

NEAFC, NAFO, SEAFO, NPFC; imposing restrictions on fishing in ‘new’ fishing areas

• A number of known or representative areas of VMEs closed

NAFO, NEAFC, CCAMLR, GFCM, NPFC, SPRFMO, SEAFO

• Closing seamounts to bottom fishing (NAFO)
• Prohibition of bottom trawling (CCAMLR; GFCM > 1000m)
• Prohibition of bottom gillnet fishing (SPRFMO, NEAFC (>200m)

SEAFO, CCAMLR)

• Gear restrictions/regulations in other area (e.g. set gillnets in

North Pacific)

• SW Atlantic: Spain closed most areas as VME areas below 300-

400m to bottom fishing based on extensive impact assessment

Progress to Date cont.

Shortcomings in Implementation

• Inadequate or partial impact assessments: failure to follow FAO

Guidelines; scientific uncertainties; mapping not done; unverified assumptions concerning risk; restricted interpretation

• f VMEs
• No cumulative impact assessments (VME degradation over time;
• ther stressors e.g. ocean acidification and deep-sea corals)
• Identified VMEs in some areas remain open to bottom fishing

without to avoid impacting fishing

• Excessively large footprints (i.e. app 50-90% of seabed at key

depths in NAFO, SPRFMO and in South Indian Ocean

Shortcomings in Implementation

• Bottom trawling remains dominant method of bottom fishing on

high seas

• Move-on rules vary widely from region to region but rarely

triggered outside of CCAMLR area (thresholds too high)

• Overfishing, no stock assessments for many target species; little

to no information on impacts of bycatch species (South Pacific: 22 target species; 115 bycatch species)

• Most species impacted long lived, slow growing low fecundity: in

some cases endangered species (roundnose grenadiers, deep- sea sharks in NE Atlantic)

Small number of flag States: Several EU Member States (Spain, Portugal); Australia; New Zealand, Japan, Republic of Korea; Russian Federation; Cook Islands; several others Numbers of vessels and volume of catch varied over past 10 years but probably less than was believed to be the case in 2001 (IUCN) and 2006 (UN FAO)

Additional Conclusions

Black Coral Locations & Predicted Habitat: NAFO

• Used global data sources for ecological and

biological data – bathymetry, seamounts, predicted coral habitat

• Aggregated RFMO footprint and closure data

– started with FAO VME database and updated with more accurate and/or recent data from RFMO websites and publications

• Analyzed footprint and closures in ABNJ for

amount of ‘fishable’ areas (varied by RFMO), seamounts and predicted habitat

Mapping Methodology & Data Sources

CCAMLR

% "Fishable" Seamounts % "Fishable" Area

CCAMLR

% Predicted Coral Habitat - Octocorals % Predicted Coral Habitat - Scleractinian 2200m Areas closed to bottom trawling 100.0% 100.0% Areas closed to bottom trawling 100.0% 100.0% Areas closed to bottom fishing 2.4% 0.7% Areas closed to bottom fishing 1.5% 0.0% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted 97.6% 99.3% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted 98.5% 100.0% 1,047 5,302,522 1,774,402 2,024 seamounts km2 km2 km2

GFCM

% "Fishable" Seamounts % "Fishable" Area

GFCM

% Predicted Coral Habitat - Octocorals % Predicted Coral Habitat - Scleractinian 1500m Areas closed to bottom trawling 39.7% 18.7% Areas closed to bottom trawling 23.6% 0.0% Areas closed to bottom fishing 0.0% 0.0% Areas closed to bottom fishing 0.0% 0.0% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted 60.3% 81.9% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted 76.8% 0.0% 136 1,496,929 790,094 seamounts km2 km2 km2

NAFO

% "Fishable" Seamounts % "Fishable" Area

NAFO

% Predicted Coral Habitat - Octocorals % Predicted Coral Habitat - Scleractinian 2000m Areas closed to bottom fishing 57.6% 12.9% Areas closed to bottom fishing 12.9% 10.1% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted 0.0% 79.0% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted 78.9% 86.4% Areas where prior impact assessment required before bottom fishing can occur 42.4% 8.1% Areas where prior impact assessment required before bottom fishing can occur 8.1% 3.5% 33 140,368 139,431 60,482 seamounts km2 km2 km2

NEAFC

% "Fishable" Seamounts % "Fishable" Area

NEAFC

% Predicted Coral Habitat - Octocorals % Predicted Coral Habitat - Scleractinian 1500m Areas closed to bottom fishing 33.1% 16.7% Areas closed to bottom fishing 22.6% 25.0% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted 8.6% 37.3% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted 25.9% 29.9% Areas where prior impact assessment required before bottom fishing can occur 58.3% 46.0% Areas where prior impact assessment required before bottom fishing can occur 51.5% 45.2% 139 300,646 222,512 189,897 seamounts km2 km2 km2 TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL

NPFC

% "Fishable" Seamounts % "Fishable" Area

NPFC

% Predicted Coral Habitat - Octocorals % Predicted Coral Habitat - Scleractinian 1500m Areas closed to bottom fishing 0.3% 0.5% Areas closed to bottom fishing 0.5% 1.0% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted 12.1% 38.9% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted 38.9% 69.8% 398 49,823 49,778 7,820 seamounts km2 km2 km2

SEAFO

% "Fishable" Seamounts % "Fishable" Area

SEAFO

% Predicted Coral Habitat - Octocorals % Predicted Coral Habitat - Scleractinian 2000m Areas closed to bottom trawl 1.8% 5.1% Areas closed to bottom trawl 4.8% 6.9% Areas closed to bottom fishing 21.5% 16.1% Areas closed to bottom fishing 16.3% 13.6% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted 25.5% 42.9% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted 42.7% 44.9% Areas where prior impact assessment required before bottom fishing can occur 53.0% 41.0% Areas where prior impact assessment required before bottom fishing can occur 41.0% 41.5% 502 175,943 170,756 104,992 seamounts km2 km2 km2

SIOFA

% "Fishable" Seamounts % "Fishable" Area

SIOFA

% Predicted Coral Habitat - Octocorals % Predicted Coral Habitat - Scleractinian 1500m Areas closed to bottom fishing 0.0% 0.0% Areas closed to bottom fishing 0.0% 0.0% Areas voluntarily closed to bottom fishing 6.3% 6.9% Areas voluntarily closed to bottom fishing 7.1% 5.8% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted by Australia 36.0% 19.8% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted by Australia 20.4% 26.1% 253 205,260 199,647 139,468 seamounts km2 km2 km2 TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL

SPRFMO

% "Fishable" Seamounts % "Fishable" Area

SPRFMO

% Predicted Coral Habitat - Octocorals % Predicted Coral Habitat - Scleractinian 1500m Areas closed to bottom fishing by New Zealand 3.3% 15.6% Areas closed to bottom fishing by New Zealand 15.6% 18.7% Areas closed to bottom fishing by Australia 0.0% 0.0% Areas closed to bottom fishing by Australia 0.0% 0.0% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted by New Zealand 3.1% 7.5% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted by New Zealand 7.5% 7.8% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted by Australia 3.1% 14.9% Areas where bottom fishing is permitted by Australia 14.9% 17.0% Areas where prior impact assessment required before bottom fishing can occur for New Zealand vessels 93.6% 76.9% Areas where prior impact assessment required before bottom fishing can occur for New Zealand vessels 76.9% 73.5% Areas where prior impact assessment required before bottom fishing can occur for Australian vessels 96.9% 85.1% Areas where prior impact assessment required before bottom fishing can occur for Australian vessels 85.1% 83.0% 880 371,117 370,620 289,730 seamounts km2 km2 km2 TOTAL TOTAL

• 1. Conduct comprehensive impact assessments consistent with FAO

Guidelines – collect sufficient baseline information; – mapping of VME areas; – use low/non benthic impact technology/methods (avoid/prohibit high impact technology, e,g. bottom trawl gear in research trawl surveys or ‘exploratory’ bottom fisheries)

• 2. Area Closures: All areas where VMEs are known or likely to occur

should be closed unless an impact assessment is conducted science based determination that SAIs not likely to occur.

• 3. SAIs : Impacts on slope sediment ecosystems also should be

assessed - impacts on infaunal biodiversity and the capacity of these ecosystems to act as carbon sinks.

Recommendations

• 4. VME Criteria: must be defined on the basis of the full suite of

criteria outlined in the FAO Guidelines, not only on basis of one or a few of the criteria (e.g. significant concentrations of VME indicator species only).

• 5. Role of VMEs: A better understanding of the role or ecosystem

function of VME species at appropriate bioregional scales is essential for determining the temporal, spatial and ecological extent of impacts and their significance (criteria in paragraphs 17-20 of the FAO Guidelines).

• 6. Cumulative Impact Assessments: Cumulative impact assessments

needed to determine extent to which VMEs impacted/degraded over time (e.g. only remnant populations of VMEs?) and/or are under threat from other stressors (e.g. ocean acidification) and protected accordingly.

Recommendations (cont.)

• 7. Recovery: Where VMEs have been degraded, portions of areas

where they previously occurred should be set aside for regeneration or recovery.

• 8. Multispecies Deep-sea Fisheries: Multispecies deep-sea fisheries

should be prohibited unless or until scientific understanding of the risk to/impact on all affected species can be determined. Selective deep- sea fisheries permitted on the basis of good stock assessments, sustainable catch limits, and rebuilding depleted stocks (UNGA 64/72, paragraph 119(d). Eliminate catch/bycatch of highly vulnerable and endangered species (e.g. deep-sea sharks Indian Ocean; NE Atlantic). 9: Reaffirm Full Implementation of UNGA Resolutions: Finally, the UN General Assembly should reaffirm, in no uncertain terms, the call in paragraph 120 of resolution 64/72 to not authorize bottom fishing activities until such measures have been adopted and implemented.

Recommendations (cont.)

DSCC www.savethehighseas.org

And thanks to the Adessium Foundation, Synchronicity Earth, Pew Charitable Trusts, Kaplan Fund, Oceans 5, DSCC member organizations and the many scientists working on deep-sea fisheries and biology

Publications