SEAFOODNEWS.COM (EDITORIAL COMMENT) December 3, 2014 — So far the measures taken by the Western and Central Pacific regional management council have been ineffective.
The Western and Central Pacific management area accounts for about 60% of global tuna supplies, mostly skipjack and yellowfin. But Bigeye tuna, with a catch of 146,00 tons in the region, is overfished and overfishing continues, and in this region it is in the worst shape of any of the large global tuna stocks.
The reason overfishing continues is that the preferred fishing method, use of unregulated fish aggregating devices, captures a high proportion of juvenile bigeye, and appears to be having a direct impact on the stock.
So far the measures taken by the Western and Central Pacific regional management council have been ineffective.
This year, at the current meetings, NOAA and others are proposing a 36% reduction in bigeye harvest from the average of the past few years, and the ISSF has called for a series of simple, enforceable measures like total seasonal closures, to control effort.
However, it looks like the council is going to punt, and not take further action.
This should call forth a major reaction by tuna buyers, and a frenzy of activity among NGO’s who will urge market based measures in the face of management inaction.
Even the ISSF, which was started by international tuna canners to enable effective tuna management, has said in the past their members could call for economic sanctions and boycotts if a management body manifestly failed to act to end overfishing.
In the past we have been very critical of market-based NGO campaigns to steer buyers to certified fisheries, when the buyers were choosing from a range of fisheries that all had demonstrably good management.
Our view is that once a fishery has a record of success and sustainability, further NGO involvement is often due to a desire to stay relevant by raising the bar, not by solving the original problems of overfishing and lack of sustainability.
But the reverse is also true. When fishery managers fail to act to end overfishing when they have a legal framework to do so, they lose their moral authority to determine what actions will best preserve the fishery.
The WCPFC regional management organization is on the verge of such a failure. Because it is a consensus based organization, Asian distant water fleets, along with some American distant water longliners, are pushing for delay and no changes to current bigeye management.
If they do punt, in our opinion the tuna industry in the Western Pacific will be fair game for whatever pressures NGO’s and buyers can throw at them.
A lack of action will inevitably tarnish the major ISSF members like Chicken of the Sea, Tri-Marine, Starkist, Dongwon and Bumblebee, all of whom have extensive interests in other fisheries, and have longstanding retail relationships. It is fair to ask the question as to why ISSF members will not agree to put economic pressure on those fishing vessels and nations opposing management action.
One upshot will be the continued decline in tuna sales as the reputation of canned tuna takes another hit for being environmentally irresponsible.
Lets hope that our fear of failure here is wrong, but if not, then we will not criticize the NGO campaigns against tuna in the Western and Central Pacific, nor would we criticize buyers who insist on MSC certification for their tuna. In this case, they will have ample justification of management failure.
This story originally appeared on Seafood.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.