Report of the eleventh session of the Commission and of the Eighth Session of the Committee for the Development and Management of Fisheries in the Lesser Antilles - St. George's, Grenada, 21-24 October 2003

WESTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC FISHERY COMMISSION

PREPARATION OF THIS DOCUMENT

This is the final version of the report approved by the eleventh session of the Western Central Atlantic Fishery Commission and the eighth session of the Committee for the Development and Management of Fisheries in the Lesser Antilles held in St George's, Grenada, from 21 to 24 October 2003.

Distribution

Participants to the sessions
Members of the Commission
Other national and international organizations interested
FAO Fisheries Department
Fishery Officers in the FAO Regional Offices
FAO Representatives in WECAFC member countries

OPENING OF THE SESSION

1. The Eleventh Session of the Western Central Atlantic Fishery Commission (WECAFC) and the Eighth Session of the Committee for Development and Management of Fisheries in the Lesser Antilles were held at the Grenada Trade Center, St George's, Grenada, from 21 to 24 October 2003, at the kind invitation of the Government of Grenada.

2. Delegates from 19 WECAFC member countries and the European Community, and observers from the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Caribbean Environment Programme Regional Coordinating Unit and the Centre for Resource Management and Environmental Studies (CERMES), attended the Sessions. The list of participants is given in Appendix B of the report.

3. At the official opening of the Sessions, the delegates were welcomed by the Chief Fisheries Officer of Grenada, Mr Justin Rennie. The Chief Fisheries Officer said that it was an honour for Grenada to collaborate with FAO in hosting these meetings. He noted that the WECAF Commission was essential for the management and conservation of the fishery resources of the region, the majority of which are shared or straddling stocks. He expressed the hope that the outputs of the meetings would contribute to the strategic plan for responsible fisheries in the region. The Chief Fisheries Officer encouraged the delegates to enjoy their short stay in Grenada.

4. At the invitation of the Chairperson, Mr Jean-François Pulvenis de Séligny, Director, Policy and Planning Division, addressed the Commission and expressed, on behalf of the Director-General of FAO, Mr Jacques Diouf, and Mr Ichiro Nomura, Assistant Director-General, Fisheries Department, the appreciation of FAO to the Government and people of Grenada for their generous hospitality and excellent preparation in hosting the Sessions.

5. After recalling that 30 years had passed since the establishment of the Commission, and stressing the great importance that FAO confers to it, Mr Pulvenis de Séligny referred to the work done throughout these years and the successful way the Commission had utilized the resources at its disposal, particularly through the establishment of five ad hoc working groups. Stressing that members should look for ways and means to improve the work of the Commission, he referred to the four main challenges that the Commission is facing. These challenges are related to the organization of the work of the Commission; the need to provide the Commission with the resources, both human and financial, that are necessary for the implementation of its task; the situation of the living marine resources in the WECAFC region and the nature and scope of the measures that must be taken to face this situation; and finally the evolution of the political and normative background which has a necessary influence on the definition and implementation of policies, in particular, the adoption of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries as well as the International Plans of Action on Fishing Capacity, Sharks and Seabirds and Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing. Mr Pulvenis de Séligny invited the participants to consider these challenges, and explore ways to strengthen the Commission, particularly through an increased support from its members.

6. The Minister of Agriculture, Lands, Forestry and Fisheries of Grenada, the Honourable Claris Charles, then welcomed the participants in the meeting on behalf of her Government. She noted that the management of the natural resources of the region, including fisheries resources, and the maintenance of environmental sustainability were key policy issues which always require attention, not only as individual states but collectively as a region. In this regard, she urged the delegates not to forget the purpose of the Commission, which is to assist in international cooperation efforts for the conservation, development and sustainable utilization of the living marine resources of the Western Central Atlantic region. It is quite obvious that since most of the fishery resources are shared by Member States of the Commission, there must be cooperation from all nations within the region in order to effectively manage the resources for the benefit of our peoples.

7. The Minister observed that fisheries is important for food security and trade in Grenada and that every effort should be made to avoid overexploitation and to enhance the contribution of fishers to the economy of Grenada through the development of value-added products. She noted that most of the Small-Island Developing States of the Caribbean are located in what is termed the hurricane belt and as a consequence, were vulnerable to natural disasters. The Minister recommended that mitigation measures be developed to minimize damage to the fisheries sector from natural disasters such as hurricanes. She wished the meeting fruitful deliberations and encouraged delegates to enjoy their stay in Grenada, the beautiful "Isle of Spice".

ELECTION OF THE CHAIRMAN

8. At the Tenth Session of WECAFC held in Barbados in October 2001, and in accordance with Article II (3) of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission, Grenada was elected Chairperson and Trinidad and Tobago, Vice-Chairperson for the Eleventh Session. The delegate of Grenada, Mr Justin Rennie, took the chair.

ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE SESSION

9. The meeting adopted the Agenda that is given in Appendix A. The documents presented to the Commission are listed in Appendix C.

10. In relation to the adoption of the Agenda, the Chairman stated the following: "The European Community (EC) is participating in this meeting in accordance with paragraphs 8 and 9 of the FAO Constitution. I have been asked to inform you that the declaration made by the European Community and its Member States is contained in Information Document WECAFC/XI/03/Inf.4, "Statement of Competence and Voting Rights submitted by the European Community (EC) and its Member States", which has already been distributed to all members of this meeting. I wish to draw the attention of the meeting to this declaration".

11. The Delegate of Brazil, Subsecretary Gerson Teixeira, requested permission from the Chair to make a statement.

12. The Subsecretary, Mr. Gerson Teixeira, addressed the commission and referred to the new institutional reality of Brazil and the consequence of the privileged political status conferred to the sector since the inauguration of President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, in January 2003. He briefly summed up the actions taken by the current Brazilian administration in this field, including the creation of a Special Secretariat for Aquaculture and Fisheries (SEAP/PR), as the expression of the objective commitments of the Government of Brazil, at the highest levels, to the social inclusion of artisanal fishers, to training the fishing sector in the exploitation of marine fisheries in the economic exclusive zone and in international waters, and to revert the inherited bad conditions of regulatory systems towards coastal and continental fishery. The creation of the Secretariat also represents the link of the fisheries and aquaculture sectors to the Government's strategies in the macroeconomic area, to industrial policy, to food security and to fight against poverty. The Subsecretary stressed that Brazil was aware of the cooperative, systematic and synergetic action at the regional and global levels and looked forward to greater interaction with FAO and its bodies in the field of fisheries. He added that, in spite of the need for assuming a cautious attitude in its participation in the Eleventh Session of WECAFC, and without ignoring or minimizing Brazil's participation in previous meetings of the Commission, the Brazilian Government reaffirmed the importance it gave to the activities of WECAFC and wished to have a strong and active presence in this important forum for the fishing policies of the Western Central Atlantic region.

REVIEW OF STATE OF FISHERIES AND OF SELECTED FISHERY ISSUES

State of fisheries resources

13. The Secretariat introduced document WECAFC/XI/03/2, "The Status of Fisheries Resources in the WECAFC Region". After highlighting the trends in catches and the available information on the status and management of some important resources in the region, the Secretariat concluded that there was a need for substantive improvement in fisheries management throughout the region. Some priorities included: the need for improved systems for monitoring landings and fishing effort; better and more analyses of fisheries and other information to determine the status of and trends in resource abundance; implementation of improved management measures more robust to uncertainties such as regulation of fishing effort, size limits, marine protected areas, closed seasons and others; effective enforcement of regulations; and greater international cooperation, including through WECAFC and its ad hoc working groups.

14. There was widespread agreement with the results and conclusions of the paper. Several delegations reiterated the need to improve national systems for data collection and monitoring of fisheries, stressing that improvements in this area were a high priority for the region. In this regard, attention was drawn to an FAO workshop on status and trends scheduled for 2004. The need for improved enforcement of regulations by many countries was emphasized. Other issues raised included: the need for collection of information on the economic value of fisheries to demonstrate their social and economic importance to decision-makers; the requirement for stronger conservation measures throughout the region; and the role of greater international cooperation in addressing many of the problems facing fisheries conservation and utilization in the region.

15. Several delegations expressed concern about the overall status of stocks in the WECAFC region. It was also suggested that little progress had been made in improving the situation over the last 20 years or more and that in contrast, the status of stocks had deteriorated over this period. The need for WECAFC Members to address the problems more seriously and to look for new ways and initiatives to strengthen fisheries management throughout the region was also raised. It was agreed that while good progress had been made in raising awareness at the international and regional levels of the problems and needs in fisheries, this awareness had not been successfully transferred to the national level in many countries. Some delegations suggested that greater effort needed to be made to convince the higher national political levels of the importance of fisheries in their countries and of the severity and socio-economic implications of the problems being experienced in fisheries throughout the region. It was hoped that an increased awareness amongst national decision-makers would lead to greater support and resources being directed towards addressing the problems.

16. A number of delegations called for increased assistance from FAO and WECAFC to member countries. Specific areas requiring assistance included the assessment of national and regional large pelagic resources and identification of shark landings, especially in cases where the sharks were landed in "dressed" condition. The need for FAO to work with countries, CITES and relevant regional organizations in helping countries to address the CITES regulations on Queen conch was raised by a number of delegations. It was also suggested that WECAFC should approach ICCAT for assistance in assessing the more important coastal large pelagics of the Western Central Atlantic region.

Status and trends of fisheries and aquaculture

17. The Secretariat introduced the agenda item by referring to document WECAFC/XI/03/3 that summarized the trends in fisheries and aquaculture in the WECAFC region. It also provided an overview of supply and demand trends. Considering that most resources were fully exploited or overexploited, it was stressed that the supply of fishery products would depend on a better resource use and management and on aquaculture development. The results of the review indicated that the fisheries sector continued to be an important contributor to the economy of member countries of WECAFC in terms of food supply, food security, foreign currency earnings, employment, rural and coastal development and poverty alleviation. The outstanding importance that the international community is assigning to the impact of subsidies on overfishing, fleet over capacity and trade were also highlighted. The activities and the role of FAO in this respect were mentioned. IUU fishing and FAO activities related to IUU fishing were also presented.

18. The US delegation informed the meeting that their national plan of action on IUU based on the International Plan of Action (IPOA) was being developed and encouraged other member countries to do the same. The Small-Island Developing States of WECAFC noted that IUU fishing undermines their efforts towards sustainable use of their fisheries resources and its contribution to their food security.

19. Most participants agreed that countries should address IUU fishing at a national level, particularly through the development of national plans of action and the updating of their national legislation. Fisheries management measures concerning IUU fishing must be implemented and enforced. It was also suggested that countries exchange, through the WECAFC Secretariat, lists of registered fishing vessels flying their flags and authorized to fish, as well as lists of vessels involved in IUU fishing, in order that all member countries be aware of IUU fishing in the region so that they can take appropriate measures.

20. With respect to subsidies, the meeting agreed that subsidies should be identified and categorized, particularly in relation to their effects on the resources and on the fishing effort and habitats. Most participants stressed that bad subsidies that contribute to overfishing and IUU fishing should be eliminated. The European Community (EC) informed WECAFC of its recent submission to the World Trade Organization (WTO) regarding fisheries subsidies. It stressed that this submission gave a clear indication of what type of subsidies should be prohibited and those that could be acceptable. Furthermore, the EC had recently reformed its common fisheries policy which reflected this approach regarding subsidies.

21. The delegate of Brazil commended FAO's approach to the debate on subsidies and its impact on the overexploitation of marine species. It was contradictory to have a debate on sustainable fisheries activities without giving due consideration to the negative impacts of subsidies on fisheries policy. Collective action by WECAFC members was required for the subject of subsidy to be placed firmly on the international agenda and to avoid the current treatment given to the debate on agriculture subsidies at the forum that discussed trade liberalization.

22. The meeting recommended that FAO continue its work on subsidies in order to deepen the understanding of the impact of subsidies on sustainability of fishery resources, fleet over capacity and trade. It was suggested that case studies should also involve WECAFC member countries.

STRATEGIES FOR INCREASING THE CONTRIBUTION OF SMALL-SCALE CAPTURE FISHERIES TO FOOD SECURITY AND POVERTY ALLEVIATION

23. The Secretariat presented the document, WECAFC/XI/03/4, "Strategies for Increasing the Contribution of Small-scale Capture Fisheries to Food Security and Poverty Alleviation in the WECAFC Region". The characteristics of small-scale capture fisheries and the constraints and opportunities that impact on their contribution to poverty alleviation and food security were highlighted. The Secretariat invited the Commission to seriously consider the role of small-scale fisheries in poverty alleviation and in contributing to food security in the region, and to review a number of strategies to provide guidance to Member Nations, FAO and other agencies and international organizations, as to strategies that might be promoted to ensure significant improvement in small-scale fisheries development, with particular reference to the sector's contribution to food security and poverty alleviation.

24. Many member countries noted that the contribution of small-scale fisheries to food security and poverty alleviation was generally overlooked and underestimated and that a major part of fish supplies for internal consumption and export were provided by this sector. In some member countries, small-scale fishers contributed approximately 90 percent of total landings.

25. Several countries informed the Commission that poverty alleviation and food security policies were first priority for their governments and that small-scale fisheries were considered as a main contributor to food security, poverty alleviation and employment, especially in coastal and riverine communities and Caribbean SIDs.

26. The meeting also considered that open access to fisheries hampers the potential of small-scale fisheries to contribute to food security, poverty alleviation and employment generation.

27. The Commission agreed that the suggestions contained in document WECAFC/XI/03/4, for follow-up actions were relevant and requested their inclusion in the report of the meeting, as follows:

• gaining a better understanding of the nature, extent, and causes of vulnerability and poverty in small-scale fisheries and improved information on and indicators for monitoring the contribution of small-scale fisheries to food security and poverty alleviation;

• improvement of cross-sectoral and interagency collaboration and development of effective strategies and policies to address poverty and food security issues, and, where appropriate, inclusion of small-scale fisheries in national poverty reduction strategies and policies;

• better management through the allocation of secure fishing rights, backed by appropriate legislation to small-scale fishers in coastal and inland zones and their effective protection from industrial fishing activity or activities that degrade aquatic resources and habitats;

• implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, and development of technical guidelines on increasing the contribution of small-scale fisheries to food security and poverty alleviation; and lastly,

• the encouragement of the formation of fishers' organizations at the community level and the facilitation of their representation at local, regional and national levels, thereby creating a sense of ownership and accountability by the small-scale stakeholders in the decision-making process.

28. The meeting requested FAO to consider the possibility of convening, during the intersessional period, a consultation on the contribution of small-scale fisheries to food security and poverty alleviation in the region.

INTERSESSIONAL ACTIVITIES AND MATTERS REFERRED TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COMMISSION

Report of the activities of the WECAFC ad hoc Working Groups

29. The Secretariat introduced this agenda item by referring to document WECAFC/XI/03/5, which outlined the activities of the WECAFC ad hoc working groups and provided summary reports highlighting the work of the following groups:

• ad hoc Working Group on Shrimp and Groundfish Resources in the Brazil-Guianas Shelf;

• ad hoc Working Group on Caribbean Spiny lobster (Panulirus argus);

• ad hoc Working Group on Queen Conch (Strombus gigas);

• ad hoc Flyingfish Working Group of the Eastern Caribbean; and

• ad hoc Working Group on the Sustainable Development of Moored Fish Aggregating Device Fishing in the Lesser Antilles.

30. The Chairperson of the ad hoc Working Group on Shrimp and Groundfish Resources in the Brazil-Guianas Shelf (Yolanda Babb, Suriname) reported on the two meetings held during the biennium. The Workshop on the Assessment of the Demersal Stocks shared by Trinidad and Tobago and Venezuela was held on 18-22 November 2002 and the Regional Conference on the Sustainability of Fisheries Resources in the Brazil-Guianas Shelf from 5 to 7 March 2002. This meeting had included the fishing industry, fishery managers, decision-makers and scientists.

31. The current Chairperson of the ad hoc Working Group on Caribbean Spiny lobster, Vice-Minister Rene Besteiro of Cuba, complimented the report of the Secretariat by highlighting the principal conclusions and recommendations of the Second Workshop on the Management of Caribbean Spiny lobster Fisheries in the WECAFC region, Havana, Cuba, 30 September - 4 October 2002. He reiterated the following joint statement of the ministers responsible for fisheries and the decision-makers who participated in this workshop:

"We note that the Western Central Atlantic Fishery Commission (WECAFC) provides the countries with a neutral forum and the mechanism for regional cooperation in fisheries management and conservation. We support the important role played by the WECAFC ad hoc Working Group on Caribbean Spiny lobster, within the framework of WECAFC, in providing an effective mechanism for the interaction of fisheries managers, scientists and decision-makers at the regional level and for the generation and sharing of scientific information and analyses essential for responsible management of the valuable Caribbean Spiny lobster resource. We undertake to support the full participation of our respective countries in the activities of the WECAFC ad hoc Working Group and to make it self sufficient over time".

32. The Vice-Minister also reiterated the following offer made by Cuba to the Group at the above-mentioned meeting:

• the facilities and technical staff of the Centro de Investigaciones Pesqueras to conduct research on the Caribbean Spiny lobster; and

• technical assistance to member countries of the WECAFC ad hoc working group either bilaterally or through the working group. The technical assistance to countries could include the preparation of national management plans for the Spiny lobster.

33. The Vice-Minister noted that the ad hoc working group provides a mechanism for the periodic transparent exchange of information on the Spiny lobster resource. This information should be used to prepare and refine regional management plans for this species. He noted that it was essential for the group to meet periodically. In this regard, the Chairperson expressed concern about the continuity of the activities of the working group and mentioned three options to support the next meeting of the group: (i) obtain financial support from FAO or seek donations through FAO; (ii) the participating countries provide specific support; or a combination of (i) and (ii).

34. The Caribbean Fishery Management Council (CFMC) representative (Miguel Rolón) presented the report of the ad hoc Working Group on Queen conch. In doing so, he gave a brief history of the meeting that led to the present arrangements for the management of Queen conch, including the formulation of recommendations on the collection and analysis of data relating to Queen conch. The situation where Queen conch was listed on Appendix 2 of CITES was described where all the importers and exporters were within the WECAFC membership. The countries in the region had been divided into three categories. Category 1 were countries where there was concern over a lack of information, Category 2 where countries were developing the necessary tools and Category 3 for countries that were complying with the recommendations. The CFMC had cooperated with TRAFFIC in producing a CD-ROM on Queen conch and a book was being prepared for free distribution. In discussion, there were comments on the illegal and unconstrained harvest of Queen conch by foreign vessels within national waters whereas the national fleets were constrained by national quotas. The view was also expressed that the allocation (of quotas) at all levels was important. Negligible damage was done by the local fishers but nothing was being done about IUU fishing.

35. The representative of IFREMER Martinique (Lionel Reynal) presented a brief report on the Lesser Antilles ad hoc Working Group on the Sustainable Development of Moored FAD (Fish Aggregating Device) Fishing. He outlined the activities of the group during the biennium, which included research on the dynamics of the fisheries resources around anchored FADs to determine species assemblage and predator/prey relationship and to perfect selective fishing techniques. The next meeting of the Group has been rescheduled for early 2004.

36. During discussion the successful deployment of FADs in Saint Lucia was described. Following the establishment of marine reserves, the use of FADs had encouraged the fishers to move further offshore. The fishers, communities and cooperatives had pooled resources to deploy and maintain FADs. A new method of using 60 fathom drop lines had been developed to fish for large yellowfin tuna leading to the ability of the small-scale fishers to target these resources and the development of a very good cooperation between the Department of Fisheries and the fishers.

37. Other delegations reported that problems emerged over the ownership of the FADs even to the extent of fishers using very light moorings to be able to move the FADs when they were discovered by other fishers. There was a need to manage and monitor FADs at a national level. There was also need to monitor the resources as they moved through the chain of islands. IFREMER responded that these issues were foreseen and that the working group plans to address them during future meetings. The delegate from IFREMER advised that software had been produced for the use of national authorities in the monitoring of FAD catches. This software is available to WECAFC members gratis, upon request.

38. The delegate from Nicaragua requested that Nicaragua be included in the ad hoc working group on Queen conch even though they were not actively fishing this species. The Representative of the CFMC took note of the request and suggested that Nicaragua should designate a competent focal point for this species which whom he can communicate.

39. In response to a request for the reports generated the CFMC representative informed the meeting of the various reports published which can be found at the CFMC Web Site and the Web Site, Strombusgigas.com, run by the CFMC. These reports are available gratis, upon request.

40. The Commission expressed satisfaction with the work and achievements of the WECAFC ad hoc working groups. One delegate observed that the "common thread" in all the presentations was the need for regional cooperation in the management of the fisheries resources of the WECAFC region.

41. In concluding the discussion of the agenda item, the Secretariat thanked the Chairpersons and members of the Working Groups, particularly those coordinated by the CFMC and IFREMER, pointing out that this was an excellent example of the type of partnerships in which WECAFC should be involved.

Intersessional activities and follow-up actions

42. The Secretariat introduced this agenda item by referring to document WECAFC/XI/03/6, which provided a brief on the projects and activities that were implemented during the last biennium.

43. These included:

Projects

a) TCP/RLA/0069 - "Development of standards for the construction and survey of small fishing vessels"

b) TCP/RLA/0070 - "Preparation for an expansion of the domestic fisheries for large pelagic species"

c) TCP/RLA/0071 - "Assistance to health management in shrimp aquaculture in Latin America d) TCP/JAM/2901 - "Development of a policy framework and strategic plan for sustainable fisheries management"

e) TCP/GUY/2802 - "Support for the integration of aquaculture into farming systems (in Guyana)"

f) GEF/UNEP/FAO - "Reduction of environmental impact from tropical shrimp trawling through the integration of bycatch reduction technologies and change of management"

g) GCP/RLA/140/JPN - "Scientific Basis for Ecosystem-based management in the Lesser Antilles, including Interactions with Marine Mammals and other Top Predators"

h) TCP/ANT/2902 - "Assistance in Fisheries Legislation"

Activities

a) First regional conference on the sustainability of resources in the Brazil-Guianas Shelf, Paramaribo, Suriname, 5-7 March 2002

b) Institutional strengthening of the fisheries administration, Guyana

c) Workshop on fisheries statistics and data management, 10-22 March 2003

d) Inventory of fisheries resources in the WECAFC area

e) Costs and earning survey of marine capture fisheries

44. In response to several requests for reports of meetings and workshops, the Secretariat informed that these could be obtained on the various FAO websites and that hard copies would be made available.

45. Jamaica reported that the project TCP/JAM/2901 would result in a Green Paper, which would determine Government policy on the fisheries sector.

46. Some concern was expressed over the reference to marine mammals in GCP/RLA/140/JPN, bearing in mind that another IGO had the mandate for the management of marine mammals. However, it was pointed out that the project was a scientific project addressing the ecosystem as a whole, and did not include policy or management decision-making. The subject also had been discussed at the FAO Committee on Fisheries during the last two sessions and the project was consistent with the guidelines developed therein. Some delegations also pointed out that the project could have important influence in poverty alleviation and food security in the countries concerned.

47. With regard to the project TCP/RLA/0070 on large pelagics, there was some concern on the possible lack of catch reporting to ICCAT, but it was pointed out that the reporting requirements and involvement of ICCAT had been built into the project. The CARICOM Secretariat was at present reporting on behalf of some countries to ICCAT.

48. With regard to the project TCP/RLA/0069 on standards for construction and survey of small fishing vessels, the safety of small-scale fishers was considered to be very high priority, because unacceptably high numbers of fishers are lost at sea. The recent example of nine fishers from Jamaica being lost in a storm was mentioned. Larger vessels came under the mandate of IMO but the safety and welfare of small-scale fishers tend to get neglected. In many cases there was no formal reporting systems for accidents and identification systems for fishing vessels. There needed to be some support for the follow-up actions recommended by the project.

49. The Commission expressed satisfaction with the follow-up activities undertaken by the Secretariat and the intersessional activities that were implemented.

Progress in the implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries

50. The Secretariat presented document WECAFC/XI/03/7, "Progress in the implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries", a summary of COFI document COFI/2003/3, addressed to the WECAFC member countries, but which included tables covering all Latin American and Caribbean countries. The document was based on the replies to a questionnaire sent to all FAO member countries, international organizations and regional fishery bodies and arrangements. It highlighted the activities undertaken by FAO, the progress in the application of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries at national level and the priority ratings by Latin American and Caribbean countries. Only seventeen out of twenty-eight member countries of WECAFC had replied to the questionnaire, and the Secretariat encouraged them to do it in time for the next opportunity. The Commission was invited to provide guidance and suggestions to improve the application of the Code.

51. The European Community noted that their reply was not mentioned in the report. The Secretariat took note and stated that the EC response will be included in future reports.

52. The delegate from Jamaica also stated that the questionnaire had been delivered and the Secretariat promised to investigate this situation further and take appropriate action. Those countries which had not completed and sent the questionnaire promised to do so in the future.

53. One delegation observed that there were no items in the questionnaire on the Code concerning follow-up action to the implementation of the Code at the fisher level. Another member enquired about the inclusion of WECAFC non-member countries in the tables and suggested that, in the future, information be provided to include only WECAFC member countries. Another table could cover information on the wider Latin American and Caribbean region as well as global information for comparison purpose.

54. The Secretariat took note of the suggestion that further reports on the implementation of the Code should be done at the WECAFC level, at Latin America and the Caribbean level and the global level to provide additional information to member countries on efforts to implement the Code.

55. All participants informed the meeting that their countries had undertaken actions regarding the implementation of the Code and many of them were taking steps to update their national legislations accordingly. The need for harmonizing fisheries legislations among member countries was also highlighted.

56. Many countries agreed that there was a need to define indicators to evaluate application of the Code of Conduct at the fisher level. Some countries requested assistance from FAO to hold national workshops on and to disseminate the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries at the fisher level.

REPORT OF THE SECOND SESSION OF THE SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY GROUP

57. A member of the Scientific Advisory Group (SAG), Lionel Reynal, presented document WECAFC/XI/03/8, "Report of the Second Session of the Scientific Advisory Group" which was held in Le Robert, Martinique, 28-30 April 2003. He drew the attention of the Commission to the major conclusions and recommendations of SAG. These included a wider dissemination of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, placing greater emphasis on the role of ecosystem approach to fisheries, taking actions to improve the efficiency of the ad hoc working groups, more use of the scientific information generated by the ad hoc working groups to inform decision-making and strengthening the links between them and the Commission.

58. The SAG expressed the concern that countries and the fisheries authorities, particularly the smaller ones, were not making better use of affordable tools such as the internet to communicate more regularly, exchange new ideas and information, conduct background research and enhance their scientific and management capacities at a relatively low cost.

59. A few delegations mentioned that their industrial fishery for shrimp and lobster were willing, in principle, to support the work of WECAFC through the ad hoc working groups.

60. The Commission noted the conclusions and recommendations of the second meeting of the SAG. In approving the report, the Commission asked the Secretariat to implement the recommendations taking into consideration the limited resources available to the Commission.

CURRENT STRATEGY OF WECAFC

61. The Secretariat introduced this agenda item using document WECAFC/XI/03/9 and informed the meeting that this review of the current strategy of WECAFC was made at the recommendation of the Tenth Session of the Commission (October 2001). The Commission, during its Ninth Session in September 1999, adopted a new strategy to organize its work and provide technical assistance and advice to its members to assist them to achieve sustainable fisheries. At the centre of this strategy was the working group approach outlined in the document.

62. In its presentation the Secretariat highlighted accomplishments achieved using the new approach and identified the main constraints facing the Commission. The major constraint facing the Commission was the absence of adequate financial resources to ensure continuity of the working groups and to implement the work programme for the groups fully and effectively. The main strengths and weaknesses of WECAFC were also identified. The greatest threat to the current strategy was the level of and uncertainty about the funding required for the ad hoc working groups' activities. The Commission was invited to review the current strategy of WECAFC and suggest or recommend areas for improvement.

63. The Commission expressed satisfaction with the work and achievements of the ad hoc working groups given the limited financial resources that were at their disposal and suggested no changes in the focus of the current working groups at this stage. The need to work effectively with other relevant regional and international organizations was emphasized. In addition to the programmed activities, in the longer term the Commission should monitor regional and international developments, so as to be able to determine, if and when, additional regional activities or interventions may be required.

64. The delegation from the United States of America drew attention to the poor state of many resources in the region, and referred to the many interventions during the meeting on the need for greater cooperation at a regional level between WECAFC Members. The delegation suggested that these two factors made it necessary to consider the need for a new strategy within WECAFC, particularly in relation to shared and straddling stocks. A very important feature of WECAFC was that it was the only Regional Fishery Body (RFB) that included all the countries of the region. However, during the nearly 25 years of its existence there had been no major changes to its strategy or mandate. The delegation recommended that this should now be reconsidered and attention given to strengthening the Commission and its mandate.

65. The USA tabled a draft recommendation for the establishment of a WECAFC intersessional working group to explore the feasibility of strengthening regional fisheries management as well as the costs, benefits and other implications of such action.

66. In response to questions about funding, the delegation of the USA explained that its Government would attempt to identify sources for the required funding. He referred to the White Water to Blue Water (WW2BW) Conference as such a potential source.

67. After a thorough discussion, the proposal was adopted with some amendments. The adopted recommendation is attached to this report as Appendix D. The Commission agreed to include the activities envisaged under this recommendation in the Programme of Work for WECAFC for the next biennium, subject to the funds being obtained.

WORK PROGRAMME OF WECAFC

68. The Secretariat introduced the Draft Work Programme for 2004-05 by referring to document WECAFC/XI/03/10. The Draft Work Programme took into consideration the strategy adopted by the Commission at its Ninth Session and endorsed by the Tenth Session. The strategy was that the Commission should operate through ad hoc working groups with clearly defined terms of reference, notwithstanding the possibility of carrying out some complementary activities. The Secretariat explained the process for arriving at the Draft Work Programme which took into consideration, inter alia, the strategy adopted by the Commission, the areas of priority identified by the Commission, the need for continuity and the potential for funding from extra budgetary sources.

69. The Commission was invited to consider the Draft Work Programme 2004-05. In its review, the members were requested to take into account the limited resources (financial and human) available to the Secretariat. The sources of extra budgetary funds utilized over the previous biennium for these purposes have come to an end and there were no immediate prospects of additional funds for future working group activities.

70. Some delegations were of the view that more emphasis should have been placed on other priority areas such as small-scale fisheries and its contribution to food security and poverty alleviation, disaster management, data collection and quality control and implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. Some delegations suggested that the Commission should develop a programme that is tailored for the region for the implementation of the Code at the fisher level.

71. Some delegations observed that the Commission should be realistic and not be advocating an ever-increasing work load given the current financial constraints being faced by the Commission. One delegation pointed out that countries should also have their national work plans which should dovetail with the regional work programme of the Commission for synergy, as is the case with the Working Group on Shrimp and Groundfish resources in the Brazil-Guianas shelf, and that countries should set obligations for themselves and decide on priority areas of work at the national level.

72. Several delegations noted that Item G of the Draft Work Programme, "Coordination and Liaison", especially with regional organizations working in the area of fisheries, should be accorded high priority in order to avoid duplication and to ensure optimal use of the limited human and financial resources available to the region.

73. Some delegations suggested that WECAFC member countries should participate more actively in COFI in order to attract more attention to the problems and issues facing the region and also more resources to the region.

74. The Commission adopted the Work Programme for 2003-05, Appendix E, and noted that its successful implementation would depend on obtaining the necessary financial resources from extra budgetary sources.

75. The Delegate of Suriname offered to bear the local costs for Activities A1 and 2 of Appendix E related to the meeting of the ad hoc Working Group on Shrimp and Groundfish Resources in the Brazil-Guianas shelf.

76. The EC delegate informed the Commission that the EC may consider funding some of the activities mentioned in Appendix E in close coordination with France, Martinique, Guadeloupe and French Guiana. He promised to discuss this possibility with the relevant colleagues in Brussels and inform the Secretariat accordingly.

77. The Commission welcomed the offers of the EC and Suriname.

INTRODUCTION TO ECOSYSTEM APPROACH TO FISHERIES

78. The Secretariat provided a brief introduction to ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF) with particular emphasis on the FAO Technical Guidelines on EAF^[1]. In this introduction it was emphasized that the concept of EAF was not new and that there had been an awareness at the international level of the importance of ecosystem interactions in fisheries since, at least, the 1972 UN Conference on the Human Environment. While the 2001 Reykjavik Declaration marked the formal acceptance by many fishing nations of the need to implement EAF, most of the important elements of EAF had already been included in the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct. It was also noted that the 2003 World Summit on Sustainable Development had encouraged the implementation of EAF by 2010.

79. The Secretariat explained that the most important feature of EAF was that it recognized the importance of the interactions between fisheries and the ecosystem. In practice this recognition required a broadening of the focus of fisheries management and operations to include not only the resources of particular importance to fisheries, but also the impact of the fishery on all other components of the ecosystem, and the impact of the ecosystem on fisheries. This expanded focus could potentially affect all aspects of fisheries management and operations, requiring appropriate broadening and adjustment of all related tasks and functions. The Guidelines emphasized an iterative management process that included comprehensive involvement of stakeholders, use of the best available scientific information, and regular review and updating as necessary of objectives and management measures. The primary threats and obstacles to EAF were also presented. These were substantial, but the consequences of a failure to utilize and manage marine resources and ecosystems in a sustainable manner were even greater. FAO was committed, as far as resources and funds would allow, to working with countries and other appropriate organizations to assist them in the implementation of EAF.

80. The value of the EAF Guidelines was acknowledged and some delegations urged FAO to prepare and distribute a simplified and summarized version of the Guidelines to facilitate dissemination and awareness of the approach. This had been successfully done in the case of the FAO Guidelines on IUU fishing. In response to a question, the Secretariat agreed that EAF overlapped considerably with the concept of integrated coastal zone development. Two differences between the two approaches were: i) EAF applied to all fisheries, not just those in the proximity of the coast and ii) EAF focused on fisheries agencies and stakeholders and their tasks and responsibilities while integrated coastal zone development addressed the much wider group of all users of the coastal zone.

USE OF MONITORING, CONTROL AND SURVEILLANCE OF FISHING AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF FISHERIES MANAGEMENT

81. The Secretariat introduced WECAFC/XI/03/12, "The Use of Monitoring, Control and Surveillance (MCS) of Fishing as an Integral Part of Fisheries Management in the WECAFC Region". This paper described how the concept of Monitoring, Control and Surveillance (MCS) had developed and the defining influence that the Law of the Sea had on modern MCS. The changes that had occurred during the last two decades were described and the problems that some countries had, with regard to their responsibilities, were outlined. MCS could be described as a toolbox with various tools available for the implementation of MCS. These were vessels, aircraft, observers and port inspectors. To these conventional tools of MCS, could be added the newer technologies of MCS, such as Vessel Monitoring Systems (VMS), which are in the process of being implemented globally and satellite surveillance, which is at the stage of a pilot project in one region. With regard to the latter, the problems and results of the European satellite surveillance project IMPAST (Integrated Fisheries Monitoring by Active and Passive Satellite Technologies) were described. The experimental system that was being used for the safety of small boats in the Seychelles was outlined.

82. The amendments that had been made to the IMO Safety of Life at Sea Convention in order to meet concerns about Maritime Terrorism were highlighted and how increasing controls over all ships would increase controls over fishing vessels. New technologies were expected to increase the implementation of integrated surveillance systems, both across national boundaries and across administrations (i.e. fisheries, customs, immigration etc). The International Plan of Action to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing was introduced and the measures required to be taken by flag states and port states described. The countries were advised to consider joining the MCS Network. The paper concluded by proposing a series of mini-workshops on VMS and satellite monitoring for the region.

83. During the discussion it was queried whether VMS was able to monitor other variables (e.g. engine parameters) as well as position. It was explained that with modern technology this was quite feasible and that electronic logbooks were able to act in parallel with VMS, which is essentially a communications system.

84. One delegate explained that his country had been in the process of implementing an integrated VMS system involving other agencies such as coastguard, immigration, customs etc. However, in situations where the resources such as patrol vessels, and administrative systems are inadequate, the overall MCS can be rendered ineffective. Therefore, it was necessary to evaluate the viability of VMS within the overall MCS before implementing it.

85. The Secretariat pointed out that for national vessels the critical control point was the monitoring of the catch at the point of landing, whether a VMS was in use or not. If, however, fishing was prohibited in certain areas, VMS was very useful even in the absence of a seagoing capability. Each tool within the MCS toolbox, including VMS had its strengths and weaknesses. It was pointed out that a decision not to use a VMS system to monitor a fishery was quite a legitimate one, even for fisheries using large vessels, if the particular circumstances of the fishery meant that it could be managed very well by other tools in the absence of VMS. An example of one developed country that had come to this conclusion was given.

86. The driving force to introduce VMS for small vessels could be marine safety and the cost of search and rescue rather than fisheries management. However, the relative cost for small vessels would always be an issue. The issue of regional cooperation was raised and the view that such cooperation could be carried out at little cost was expressed. With reference to the decision-making process on the choice of VMS systems, the Secretariat replied that the FAO Guidelines on Vessel Monitoring Systems could be regarded as a first point of reference for such information.

87. It was explained that many of the technical and economic issues raised with regard to VMS would be addressed in greater depth and at greater length in the proposed VMS Workshops. In view of the numerous reports of IUU Fishing in the region, and the clarifications provided by the Secretariat, there were no objections to the proposal to hold VMS Workshops, as recommended in the paper, in the WECAFC region.

MAIN DECISIONS OF THE TWENTY-FIFTH SESSION OF COFI

88. The Secretariat introduced document WECAFC/XI/03/13, which reproduces the main decisions of the Twenty-fifth Session of the Committee on Fisheries (COFI), as contained in the report of the Committee that was submitted to the Council of the Organization, including those endorsing the decisions and recommendations of the two COFI Subcommittees on Trade and Aquaculture. The Secretariat made a few introductory comments on the successful character of that session of COFI in terms of attendance and participation. It noted that a representative of a member country of WECAFC, Mexico, had been elected Chairperson of the Committee. After stressing that most of the issues referred to in the decisions adopted by COFI had already been discussed under the other agenda items of this meeting of WECAFC, the Secretariat made a presentation of the most important decisions reproduced in the document. It noted that these decisions generally reflected the concerns expressed by the members of WECAFC during the present meeting, particularly concerning the sustainable contribution of small-scale fisheries to food security and poverty alleviation and the need to improve data and information on the status and trends of capture fisheries. It emphasized the actions called for by COFI, in particular, those related to the convening of technical consultations on the International Plan of Action on Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported fishing (IPOA-IUU), IPOA-Capacity, IPOA-Subsidies, on the role of the port states to prevent, deter and eliminate IUU fishing and on sea turtle interaction and conservation. It highlighted those decisions concerning the special situation of developing countries, for instance in relation to the establishment of a trust fund to be managed by FAO for the implementation of Part VII of the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement, as well as those decisions directly referred to regional cooperation and the work of regional fishery bodies and arrangements. It stressed that, among the priority areas that were identified by COFI for future action, which should be reflected in the Programme of Work and Budget of FAO for the next biennium, the strengthening of regional fishery bodies and arrangements was expressly mentioned. Two other issues were also highlighted: first, the emphasis put by COFI on IUU fishing and the decision the Committee took to recommend that this issue be included in the agenda of the Thirty-second Session of the FAO Conference, and second, the question of the relationship between FAO and CITES and the process of negotiation of a memorandum of understanding between the two organizations.

89. In the following discussion it was suggested that, in future meetings of WECAFC, this agenda item should be placed at the start of the meeting, as the decisions and recommendations of COFI would help to inform and guide subsequent discussions. It was also suggested that the document on this topic should not only list the main decisions of COFI, but should also provide some analysis of and comment on the decisions to assist participants at WECAFC to interpret and understand them. One delegation stated that the document accurately reflected the deliberations at COFI and he welcomed the emphasis given there to small-scale fisheries. In response to a question, the Secretariat stated that no further progress had been made on the development of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between FAO and CITES. Fundamental differences in interpretation of the roles of FAO and CITES in relation to commercially exploited aquatic species had prevented agreement on a draft MOU at COFI. The same differences had also prevented agreement being reached on the wording of a draft MOU at a meeting of the CITES Standing Committee in April 2003. The information available to the FAO Secretariat was that no progress had been made subsequently in resolving these differences. The topic would be discussed again at the COFI Subcommittee on Fish Trade meeting in February 2004.

ANY OTHER MATTERS

90. The Regional Project Coordinator, IOCARIBE Large Marine Ecosystem Project, gave an overview of the project "Sustainable Management of the Shared Living Marine Resources of the Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem (CLME) and Adjacent Regions". The project is being developed by IOCARIBE for funding by the Global Environmental facility (GEF). It focuses on governance of transboundary resources and is thus highly complementary to much of the work of WECAFC. It is aimed at addressing the widely recognized need in the region for governance mechanisms for transboundary resources that include processes for generating management advice, decision-making, implementation and review on a regular cycle.

91. The project proposal must also be endorsed by participating countries before it can be funded by the GEF. Endorsement is sought through the UNDP and GEF focal points in each country. Representatives at this meeting of WECAFC were asked to provide their support in obtaining national endorsements when the proposal is received in their country.

92. Given the relevance of the LME project to the WECAFC region, particularly in the area of fisheries, and that FAO input was requested on the draft project proposal, the Commission agreed that it would be important for FAO/WECAFC to collaborate with IOCARIBE and GEF in the development of the project.

White Water to Blue Water

93. The delegate of the US provided a synopsis of the White Water to Blue Water (WW2BW) initiative which was first proposed by the US delegation at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa, September 2002 and presented it to the Twenty-sixth Session of COFI. WW2BW seeks to promote partnerships among governments, businesses, intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations in the Wider Caribbean in four thematic areas: integrated watershed management; marine ecosystem based management; environmentally sound marine transport and sustainable tourism. The principal objectives of WW2BW include strengthening national and regional institutional capacity, facilitating closer cooperation and good governance and engaging business partners. The WW2BW Conference will be held in Miami, USA, in March 2004 and at least three participants from each country of the Wider Caribbean would be invited to the meeting. The delegate informed the Commission that additional information can be obtained from the WW2BW website.

Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism

94. The CARICOM delegate briefly explained the process of formation of the Caribbean Regional Fishery Mechanism (CRFM), a fishery body of the CARICOM, which was inaugurated in March 2003. He highlighted the goals, structure and functions of the CRFM and its decision-making procedures. The decision to establish this intergovernmental organization was taken by the heads of governments of CARICOM countries. Its focus is to promote the sustainable management and development of the marine and aquatic resources of the CARICOM countries.

ELECTION OF OFFICERS

95. In accordance with Rule II-I of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission, the following member states were elected for the next session:

DATE AND PLACE OF TWELFTH SESSION

96. The Commission noted the offer made by Nicaragua to host the twelfth session of WECAFC in October 2005. In accordance with the Rules of Procedure, the exact date will be determined by the Director-General in consultation with the Chairman of the Commission and the competent authorities of the host government. Delegates agreed that the Commission should hold its session during the latter half of October every biennium.

ADOPTION OF THE REPORT

97. The report was adopted on 24 October 2003.

APPENDIX A - AGENDA

1. Opening of the session

2. Election of the Chairman

3. Adoption of the agenda and arrangements for the session

4. Review of the state of fisheries and selected fishery issues in the WECAFC Region

5. Strategies for increasing the contribution of small-scale capture fisheries to food security and poverty alleviation

6. Intersessional activities of WECAFC and matters referred to the attention of the Commission

7. Report of the second session of the Scientific Advisory Group (SAG) of WECAFC

8. Current strategy of WECAFC

9. Work programme of WECAFC

10. Introduction to ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF) and an overview of FAO Guidelines to EAF

11. Use of monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) of fishing as an integral part of fisheries management in WECAFC region

12. Main decisions of the Twenty-fifth session of COFI

13. Any other matters

14. Election of officers

15. Date and place of twelfth session

16. Adoption of the report

APPENDIX B - LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION

Antigua and Barbuda
Antigua-et-Barbuda
Antigua y Barbuda

JAMES, Philmore
Senior Fisheries Officer
Fisheries Division
Ministry of Agriculture, Lands and Fisheries
Perry Bay
St. John's
Tel/Fax: (268) 462-1372
E-mail: [email protected]

Bahamas

DELEVEAUX, Edison
Deputy Director of Fisheries
Department of Fisheries
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Local Government
P.O. Box N-3028, Nassau
Tel: (242) 393-1978/1777
Fax: (242) 393-0238
E-mail: [email protected]/[email protected]

Barbados/Barbade

Belize/Belice

MYVETT, George
Senior Fisheries Officer
Fisheries Department
Princess Margaret Drive
P.O. Box 148
Belize City
Tel: (501) 224-4552
Fax: (501) 223-2983
E-mail: [email protected]

Brazil/Brésil/Brasil

ALVES BARBOSA, Francisco Osvaldo
International Affairs Advisor
Secretaria Especial de Aqüicultura e Pesca
Esplanada dos Ministérios
Bloco D - 9° Andar-Sala 207
70043-900 - Brasilia-DF
Tel: (55 61) 218-2112/2855
Fax: (55 61) 224-5049
E-mail: [email protected]

TEIXEIRA, Gerson L.M.
Subsecretario da Secretaria de Pesca da
Presidencia da República - Brasil
SQN 315 - Bloco "A", Ap. 306
70774-010 - Brasilia-DF
Tel/Fax: (55 61) 274-6688
E-mail: [email protected]

Canada/Canadá

Colombia/Colombie

Cuba

BESTEIRO BAUTA, René
Viceministro
Ministerio de la Industria Pesquera
5ta Avenida Esquina 246
Santa Fé Playa
Ciudad de la Habana
Tel: (53 7) 209-7081; Fax: (53 7) 209-8064
E-mail: [email protected]

Dominica/Dominique

European Community/Communauté européenne/Comunidad Europea

GRAY, Alan
Senior Administrative Assistant
DG-XIV Fisheries, Unit B2
200 Rue de la Loi
1049 Brussels, Belgium
Tel: (32) 2 299-0077
E-mail: [email protected]

France/Francia

REYNAL, Lionel
Chef, Laboratoire des ressources halieutiques
IFREMER
Pointe-Fort
97231 Le Robert
Martinique
Tel: (0596) 65 11 54; Fax: (0596) 65 11 56
E-mail: [email protected]

VENDEVILLE, Philippe
Chef, Laboratoire des ressources halieutiques
Station IFREMER de Guyane
Domaine de Suzini
BP 677, 97300 Cayenne
French Guiana
Tel: (0596) 30 22 00; Fax: (0596) 30 80 31
E-mail: [email protected]

Grenada/Grenade/Granada

Fisheries Division
Ministry of Agriculture, Lands, Forestry and Fisheries
Ministerial Complex
Botanical Gardens
Tanteen
St. George's
Tel: (473) 440-3814/3831
Fax: (473) 440-6613/4191 E-mail: [email protected]

RENNIE, Justin
Chief Fisheries Officer

ST. LOUIS, Johnson
Senior Fisheries Officer

Guatemala

Guinea/Guinée

Guyana/Guyane/Guiana

GEER, Tejnarine S.
Senior Fisheries Officer
Department of Fisheries
Ministry of Fisheries, Crops and Livestock
18 Brickdam, Stabroek
Georgetown
Tel: (592) 2 201-508; Fax: (592) 2 204-977
E-mail: [email protected]

JIWANRAM, Ramroop
Finance Manager
Noble House Seafoods Ltd
Block 'X' Eccles
East Bank Demerara
Georgetown
Tel: (592) 2 332-479; Fax (592) 2 332-485
E-mail: [email protected]

Haiti/Haití

Honduras

Jamaica/Jamaïque

SMIKLE, Stephen G.
Director, Marine Branch
Fisheries Division
Ministry of Agriculture
P.O. Box 470
Kingston 13
Tel: (876) 923-8811-3
Fax: (876) 923-7572
E-mail: [email protected]

Japan/Japon/Japón

Korea, Republic of/Corée, République de/Corea, República de

Mexico/Mexique/México

Netherlands/Pays-Bas/Países Bajos

Nicaragua

MARTÍNEZ, Sergio
Director
CIPA/ADPESCA
P.O. Box 2020
Managua
Tel: (505) 2700956
Fax: (505) 2700977
E-mail: [email protected]

Panama/Panamá

Saint Kitts and Nevis/Saint Kitts-et-Nevis/Saint Kitts y Nieves

WILKINS, Ralph
Fisheries Officer
Department of Fisheries
P.O. Box 03
Paul Southwell Industrial Site
Basseterre
Tel: (869) 465-8045; Fax: (869) 466-7254
E-mail: [email protected]

Saint Lucia/Sainte-Lucie/Santa Lucía

CHARLES, Vaughn A.
Chief Fisheries Officer
Department of Fisheries
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
Waterfront Buildings
Castries
Tel: (758) 468-4134/5; Fax: (758) 452-3853
E-mail: [email protected]

Saint-Vincent and the Grenadines/Saint Vincent-et-les-Grenadines/San Vicente y las Granadinas

STRAKER, Leslie
Fisheries Officer
Fisheries Division
Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries
Kingstown
Tel: (784) 456-1178/2738
Fax: (784) 457-2112
E-mail: [email protected]

Spain/Espagne/España

Suriname/Surinam

BABB-ECHTELD, Yolanda
Head, Statistics and Research Unit
Department of Fisheries
Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries
Cornelis, Jongbawstraat 50
Paramaribo
Tel: (597) 476-741; Fax: (597) 424-441
E-mail: [email protected]/[email protected]

Trinidad and Tobago/Trinité-et-Tobago/Trinidad y Tabago

JOBITY, Ann Marie
Director of Fisheries
Fisheries Division
Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources
35 Cipriani Boulevard
Newtown
Port-of-Spain
Tel: (868) 623-8542/5989
Fax: (868) 623-8542
E-mail: [email protected]

CAESAR, Erol
Fisheries Officer
Marine Resources and Fisheries Department
Tobago House of Assembly
Lower Scarborough, Tobago
Tel: (868) 639-4354/4446
Fax: (868) 639-1382
E-mail: [email protected]

United Kingdom/Royaume-Uni/Reino Unido

WALLIS, Victor C.
Resident British Commissioner in Grenada
British High Commission
Netherlands Building
P.O. Box 56, Grand Anse
St George's, Grenada
Tel: (473) 440-3222/3536
Fax: (473) 440-4939
E-mail: [email protected]/ [email protected]

United States of America/Etats-Unis d'Amérique/Estados Unidos de América

BALTON, David
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Oceans and Fisheries
US Department of State
2201 C Street, NW
Washington DC 20520
Tel: (202) 647-2396
Fax: (202) 647-1027
E-mail: [email protected]

MCIFF, Colin
Foreign Affairs Officer
US Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
Tel: (202) 647-4824
Fax: (202) 736-7350
E-mail: [email protected]

ROLÓN, Miguel A.
Executive Director
USDOC/CFMC
268 Muñoz Riviera Ave.
Suite 1108
San Juan, P.R. 00918
Tel: (787) 766-5928
Fax: (787) 766-6239
E-mail: [email protected]

WEAVER, James E.
Assistant Regional Administrator
Southeast Region
National Marine Fisheries Service
9721 Executive Center Drive N.
St Petersburg, FL 33702
Tel: (727) 570-5305; Fax: (727) 570-5583
E-mail: [email protected]

DAVES, Nancy
CITES Coordinator
NOAA-Fisheries
1315 East-West Hwy
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Tel: (301) 713-2319; Fax: (301) 713-0376
E-mail: [email protected]

Venezuela

RAMIREZ, Iris C.
Minister Counselor
Embassy of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
Upper Lucas Str., P.O. Box 201
St. George's, Grenada
Tel: (473) 440-1721; Fax: (473) 440-6657
E-mail: [email protected]

OBSERVERS FROM INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS/OBSERVATEURS D'ORGANISATIONS INTER-GOUVERNEMENTALES/OBSERVADORES DE ORGANIZACIONES INTERGUBERNAMENTALES

UNEP Caribbean Environment Programme Regional Coordinating Unit/Unité régionale de coordination du Programme Environnemental des Caraïbes du PNUE/Unidad de Coordinación Regional del Plan para el Medio Ambiente del Caribe del PNUMA

MILLER, Malden
ICRAN Project Manager
UNEP-CAR/RCU
14-20 Port Royal Street
Kingston, Jamaica
Tel: (876) 922-9267-9
Fax: (876) 922-9292
E-mail: [email protected]

CARICOM Secretariat/Secretariat de la CARICOM/Secretaría de la Comunidad del Caribe

HAUGHTON, Milton
Deputy Executive-Director
CRFM Secretariat
Princess Margaret Drive
Belize City
P.O. Box 642, Belize
Tel: (501) 223-4443
Fax: (501) 223-4446
E-mail: [email protected]

OBSERVERS FROM NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS/OBSERVATEURS D'ORGANISATIONS NON-GOUVERNEMENTALES/OBSERVADORES DE ORGANIZACIONES NO GUBERNAMENTALES

Centre for Resource Management and Environmental Studies/Centre de gestion des ressources et des études environnementales/Centro de Ordenación de Recursos y Estudios sobre el Medio Ambiente

The University of the West Indies (UWI)
Cave Hill Campus, Barbados
Tel: (246) 417-4571; Fax: (246) 424-4204
OXENFORD, Hazel
Director (Ag), CERMES
E-mail: [email protected]

MAHON, Robin
Senior Lecturer, UWI
E-mail: [email protected]

Liaison Officer/Chargé de Liaison/Oficial de Enlace

RENNIE, Justin
Chief Fisheries Officer
Fisheries Division
Ministerial Complex, Botanical Gardens
St George's, Grenada
Tel: (473) 440-3814/3831
Fax: (473) 440-6613/4191
E-mail: [email protected]

FAO Fisheries Department/Département des pêches de la FAO/Departamento de Pesca de la FAO

Viale delle Terme di Caracalla
00100 Rome/Roma, Italy/Italie/Italia

PULVENIS DE SÉLIGNY, Jean-François
Director/Directeur
Fishery Policy and Planning Division/Division des politiques et planification de la pêche/Dirección de Políticas y Planificación Pesqueras
Tel: (39 06) 570 54138
Fax: (39 06) 570 56500
E-mail: [email protected]

COCHRANE, Kevern
Senior Fishery Resources Officer/Fonctionnaire principal (ressources halieutiques)/Oficial principal de recursos pesqueros
Marine Resources Service/Service des ressources marines/Servicio de Recursos Marinos
Tel: (39 06) 570 56109
Fax: (39 06) 570 53020
E-mail: [email protected]

SMITH, Andrew
Fishery Industry Officer/Spécialiste des industries de la pêche/Oficial de industrias pesqueras
Fishing Technology Service/Service de la technologie des pêches/Servicio de Tecnología de Pesca
Tel: (39 06) 57056483
Fax: (39 06) 57055188
E-mail: [email protected]

FAO SUBREGIONAL OFFICE FOR THE CARIBBEAN/BUREAU SOUS-RÉGIONAL DE LA FAO POUR LES CARAÏBES/OFICINA SUBREGIONAL DE LA FAO PARA EL CARIBE

P.O. Box 631-C
Bridgetown
Barbados
Tel: (246) 426-7110/11
Fax: (246) 427-6075

CHAKALALL, Bisessar
Senior Fishery Officer/Fonctionnaire principal des pêches/Oficial principal de pesca
E-mail: [email protected]

WALTERS, Randolph
Fishery Officer/Spécialiste des pêches/Oficial de pesca
E-mail: [email protected]

FAO REGIONAL OFFICE FOR LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN/ BUREAU RÉGIONAL DE LA FAO POUR L'AMÉRIQUE LATINE ET LES CARAÏBES/ OFICINA REGIONAL DE LA FAO PARA AMÉRICA LATINA Y EL CARIBE

PEREIRA, Francisco
Senior Fisheries Officer/Fonctionnaire principal des pêches/Oficial principal de pesca
P.O. Box 10095-Vitacura
Santiago
Chile
Tel: (56-2) 337-2171
Fax: (56-2) 337-2101
E-mail: [email protected]

SECRETARIAT

Host Government

APPENDIX C - LIST OF DOCUMENTS

APPENDIX D - RECOMMENDATION ON STRENGTHENING WECAFC AS AN ORGANIZATION

The Commission recommended intersessional work be conducted to explore the feasibility of strengthening WECAFC to promote effective conservation and management of marine capture fisheries throughout the Western Central Atlantic region.

Participants in the Eleventh Session of WECAFC recognized the following factors as relevant to this recommendation:

• The WECAFC region is extremely diverse, both with respect to social, economic, cultural and political characteristics and with respect to the types of fisheries resources available.

• Many of the most critical fisheries resources are trans-boundary, straddling or highly migratory stocks, making regional and sub-regional cooperation a prerequisite for sustainable fisheries management.

• The lack of effective regional cooperation has contributed to the current state of the region's fisheries. Many of the most economically and socially important fisheries are in decline.

In its 2003 assessment of the Status of Fisheries in the Western Central Atlantic Region, FAO assessed the situation as follows: "Unless urgent steps are taken to collect sufficient information on landings and effort to provide, at least, the minimum information necessary to ensure sustainable utilization, there is a high risk that landings will continue to decline, as this review shows many have already done. This will lead to further erosion of the social and economic benefits currently being derived from the region's marine resources. As so many of the resources are shared between two or more countries, close co-operation between countries at a variety of international levels will commonly be advantageous and often essential in securing this".

The Commission considered that improved regional cooperation leading to effective regional conservation and management measures was essential to change the present situation and believed that strengthening WECAFC was a possible way forward in this regard. The region needs to adopt a unified and coordinated approach to fisheries management for shared stocks, recognizing that the diversity of the region will sometimes require multiple approaches.

As noted in the paper, "Current Strategy of WECAFC" (WECAFC/XI/03/09), "WECAFC is the only regional cooperation institution whose geographic jurisdiction covers the entire region and whose membership includes all of the countries bordering it". For these reasons, a strengthened WECAFC would bring substantial benefits to the region. As the focal point for fisheries management in the region, this organization would be better placed to secure increased financial contributions from member States along the lines of other regional fisheries management organizations. A strengthened WECAFC would also be in a much better position to coordinate relevant scientific research and to contribute to the region's battle against IUU fishing, as it could adopt anti-IUU measures now in use in other regional fora. With progress on the twin goals of science and enforcement, the long-term sustainability of fisheries resources in the Caribbean would be more assured and planners could more effectively use this resource in poverty alleviation programs at the national level.

WECAFC members have repeatedly stressed the need for strengthened regional cooperation for critical fish stocks. With respect to queen conch resources, Caribbean countries have adopted the 1996 San Juan Declaration, which explicitly calls for strengthened regional cooperation on queen conch. Prior to the 2001 WECAFC meeting, Ministers and senior decision-makers at a meeting of the Spiny Lobster Ad Hoc Working Group declared that "greater cooperation was required among lobster-producing nations of the WECAFC region given the shared nature of the resource".

The Commission accordingly recommended the establishment of a WECAFC intersessional working group tasked to study the feasibility of strengthening regional fisheries management in the region and to report to the twelfth session of WECAFC. Funding for the intersessional working group would be channeled through FAO. To achieve equitable geographic distribution, this working group should be open to participation by all WECAFC members. The Scientific Advisory Group should also be invited to participate in the intersessional work.

This Intersessional work should explore the following issues:

• Experience within FAO in strengthening other international fisheries bodies.

• How a strengthened WECAFC could most effectively interact with existing mechanisms and programs in the region.

• How a strengthened WECAFC could increase economic benefits derived from fishing activities, particularly with respect to the contribution of artisanal fisheries to economic development and food security in the region.

• How a strengthened WECAFC could promote the adoption, implementation and enforcement at the national level of compatible management measures for shared stocks in the region.

• How a strengthened WECAFC could build on current structures and programs in the region such as the existing working groups and build effective outreach with related organizations and institutions.

• Cost estimates for the establishment and running of a strengthened WECAFC with management authorities and a timetable for its establishment.

• Whether a strengthened WECAFC should initially focus on species of particular interest. Case studies could include the following spiny lobster, queen conch, snapper-grouper complex, shrimp and groundfish, wahoo, and dolphin fish.

The Commission also expressed the wish that participants in the White Water to Blue Water Conference to be held in Miami, Florida, USA, 21-26 March 2004, specifically support the intersessional work envisioned through this recommendation.

APPENDIX E - TABLE 1. WORK PROGRAMME OF WECAFC, 2004-05

(Subject to obtaining the required extra-budgetary support)

* FAO would provide technical support to these two groups if extra-budgetary funding is available for the proposed activities.

APPENDIX F - MAIN DECISIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION OF THE ELEVENTH SESSION OF THE WESTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC FISHERY COMMISSION

For the attention of FAO and Governments

State of fisheries resources

14. There was widespread agreement with the results and conclusions of the paper. Several delegations reiterated the need to improve national systems for data collection and monitoring of fisheries, stressing that improvements in this area were a high priority for the region. In this regard, attention was drawn to an FAO workshop on status and trends scheduled for 2004. The need for improved enforcement of regulations by many countries was emphasized. Other issues raised included: the need for collection of information on the economic value of fisheries to demonstrate their social and economic importance to decision-makers; the requirement for stronger conservation measures throughout the region; and the role of greater international cooperation in addressing many of the problems facing fisheries conservation and utilization in the region.

15. Several delegations expressed concern about the overall status of stocks in the WECAFC region. It was also suggested that little progress had been made in improving the situation over the last 20 years or more and that, in contrast, the status of stocks had deteriorated over this period. The need for WECAFC Members to address the problems more seriously and to look for new ways and initiatives to strengthen fisheries management throughout the region was also raised. It was agreed that while good progress had been made in raising awareness at the international and regional levels of the problems and needs in fisheries, this awareness had not been successfully transferred to the national level in many countries. Some delegations suggested that greater effort needed to be made to convince the higher national political levels of the importance of fisheries in their countries and of the severity and socio-economic implications of the problems being experienced in fisheries throughout the region. It was hoped that an increased awareness amongst national decision-makers would lead to greater support and resources being directed towards addressing the problems.

16. A number of delegations called for increased assistance from FAO and WECAFC to member countries. Specific areas requiring assistance included the assessment of national and regional large pelagic resources and identification of shark landings, especially in cases where the sharks were landed in 'dressed' condition. The need for FAO to work with countries, CITES and relevant regional organizations in helping countries to address the CITES regulations on Queen conch was raised by a number of delegations. It was also suggested that WECAFC should approach ICCAT for assistance in assessing the more important coastal large pelagics of the Western Central Atlantic region.

Situation and trends of fisheries and aquaculture

19. Most participants agreed that countries should address IUU (Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated) fishing at a national level, particularly through the development of national plans of action and the updating of their national legislation. Fisheries management measures concerning IUU fishing must be implemented and enforced. It was also suggested that countries exchange, through the WECAFC Secretariat, lists of registered fishing vessels flying their flags and authorized to fish, as well as lists of vessels involved in IUU fishing, in order that all member countries be aware of IUU fishing in the region so that they can take appropriate measures.

22. The meeting recommended that FAO continue its work on subsidies in order to deepen the understanding of the impact of subsidies on sustainability of fishery resources, fleet over-capacity and trade. It was suggested that case studies should also involve WECAFC member countries.

STRATEGIES FOR INCREASING THE CONTRIBUTION OF SMALL-SCALE CAPTURE FISHERIES TO FOOD SECURITY AND POVERTY

24. Many member countries noted that the contribution of small-scale fisheries to food security and poverty alleviation was generally overlooked and underestimated and that a major part of fish supplies for internal consumption and export were provided by this sector. In some member countries, small-scale fishers contributed approximately 90 percent of total landings.

25. Several countries informed the Commission that poverty alleviation and food security policies were first priority for their governments and that small-scale fisheries were considered as a main contributor to food security, poverty alleviation and employment, especially in coastal and riverine communities and Caribbean SIDs.

26. The meeting also considered that open access to fisheries hampers the potential of small-scale fisheries to contribute to food security, poverty alleviation and employment generation.

28. The meeting requested FAO to consider the possibility of convening, during the intersessional period, a consultation on the contribution of small-scale fisheries to food security and poverty alleviation in the region.

INTERSESSIONAL ACTIVITIES AND MATTERS REFERRED TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COMMISSION

Report of the activities of the WECAFC ad hoc working groups

33. The Vice-Minister noted that the ad hoc working group provides a mechanism for the periodic transparent exchange of information on the spiny lobster resource. This information should be used to prepare and refine regional management plans for this species. He noted that it was essential for the group to meet periodically. In this regard, the Chairperson expressed concern about the continuity of the activities of the working group and mentioned three options to support the next meeting of the group: (i) obtain financial support from FAO or seek donations through FAO; (ii) the participating countries provide specific support; or a combination of (i) and (ii).

40. The Commission expressed satisfaction with the work and achievements of the WECAFC ad hoc working groups. One delegate observed that the "common thread" in all the presentations was the need for regional cooperation in the management of the fisheries resources of the WECAFC region.

Intersessional activities and follow-up actions

49. The Commission expressed satisfaction with the follow-up activities undertaken by the Secretariat and the intersessional activities that were implemented.

Progress in the implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries

55. All participants informed the meeting that their countries had undertaken actions regarding the implementation of the Code and many of them were taking steps to update their national legislations accordingly. The need for harmonizing fisheries legislations among member countries was also highlighted.

56. Many countries agreed that there was a need to define indicators to evaluate application of the Code of Conduct at the fisher level. Some countries requested assistance from FAO to hold national workshops on and to disseminate the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries at the fisher level.

REPORT OF THE SECOND SESSION OF THE SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY GROUP

60. The Commission noted the conclusions and recommendations of the second meeting of the SAG. In approving the report, the Commission asked the Secretariat to implement the recommendations taking into consideration the limited resources available to the Commission.

CURRENT STRATEGY OF WECAFC

63. The Commission expressed satisfaction with the work and achievements of the ad hoc working groups given the limited financial resources that were at their disposal and suggested no changes in the focus of the current working groups at this stage. The need to work effectively with other relevant regional and international organizations was emphasized. In addition to the programmed activities, in the longer term the Commission should monitor regional and international developments, so as to be able to determine, if and when, additional regional activities or interventions may be required.

65. The USA tabled a draft recommendation for the establishment of a WECAFC intersessional working group to explore the feasibility of strengthening regional fisheries management as well as the costs, benefits and other implications of such action.

67. After a thorough discussion, the proposal was adopted with some amendments. The adopted recommendation is attached to this report as Appendix D. The Commission agreed to include the activities envisaged under this recommendation in the Programme of Work for WECAFC for the next biennium, subject to the funds being obtained.

WORK PROGRAMME OF WECAFC

71. Some delegations observed that the Commission should be realistic and not be advocating an ever-increasing work load given the current financial constraints being faced by the Commission. One delegation pointed out that countries should also have their national work plans which should dovetail with the regional work programme of the Commission for synergy, as is the case with the Working Group on Shrimp and groundfish Resources in the Brazil-Guianas shelf, and that countries should set obligations for themselves and decide on priority areas of work at the national level.

72. Several delegations noted that Item G of the Draft Work Programme, "Coordination and Liaison", especially with regional organizations working in the area of fisheries, should be accorded high priority in order to avoid duplication and to ensure optimal use of the limited human and financial resources available to the region.

73. Some delegations suggested that WECAFC member countries should participate more actively in COFI in order to attract more attention to the problems and issues facing the region and also more resources to the region.

74. The Commission adopted the Work Programme for 2003-05, and noted that its successful implementation would depend on obtaining the necessary financial resources from extra budgetary sources.

INTRODUCTION TO ECOSYSTEM APPROACH TO FISHERIES

80. The value of the EAF Guidelines was acknowledged and some delegations urged FAO to prepare and distribute a simplified and summarized version of the Guidelines to facilitate dissemination and awareness of the approach. This had been successfully done in the case of the FAO Guidelines on IUU fishing. In response to a question, the Secretariat agreed that EAF overlapped considerably with the concept of integrated coastal zone development. Two differences between the two approaches were: i) EAF applied to all fisheries, not just those in the proximity of the coast and ii) EAF focused on fisheries agencies and stakeholders and their tasks and responsibilities while integrated coastal zone development addressed the much wider group of all users of the coastal zone.

USE OF MONITORING, CONTROL AND SURVEILLANCE OF FISHING AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF FISHERIES MANAGEMENT

87. It was explained that many of the technical and economic issues raised with regard to VMS would be addressed in greater depth and at greater length in the proposed VMS Workshops. In view of the numerous reports of IUU Fishing in the region, and the clarifications provided by the Secretariat, there were no objections to the proposal to hold VMS Workshops, as recommended in the paper, in the WECAFC region.

ANY OTHER MATTERS

90. The Regional Project Coordinator, IOCARIBE Large Marine Ecosystem Project, gave an overview of the project "Sustainable Management of the Shared Living Marine Resources of the Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem (CLME) and Adjacent Regions". The project is being developed by IOCARIBE for funding by the Global Environmental facility (GEF). It focuses on governance of transboundary resources and is thus highly complementary to much of the work of WECAFC. It is aimed at addressing the widely recognized need in the region for governance mechanisms for transboundary resources that include processes for generating management advice, decision-making, implementation and review on a regular cycle.

White Water to Blue Water

93. The delegate of the US provided a synopsis of the White Water to Blue Water (WW2BW) initiative which was first proposed by the US delegation at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa, September 2002 and presented it to the Twenty-sixth Session of COFI. WW2BW seeks to promote partnerships among governments, businesses, intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations in the Wider Caribbean in four thematic areas: integrated watershed management; marine ecosystem based management; environmentally sound marine transport and sustainable tourism. The principal objectives of WW2BW include strengthening national and regional institutional capacity, facilitating closer cooperation and good governance and engaging business partners. The WW2BW Conference will be held in Miami, USA, in March 2004 and at least three participants from each country of the Wider Caribbean would be invited to the meeting. The delegate informed the Commission that additional information can be obtained from the WW2BW website.

Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism

94. The CARICOM delegate briefly explained the process of formation of the Caribbean Regional Fishery Mechanism (CRFM), a fishery body of the CARICOM, which was inaugurated in March 2003. He highlighted the goals, structure and functions of the CRFM and its decision-making procedures. The decision to establish this intergovernmental organization was taken by the heads of governments of CARICOM countries. Its focus is to promote the sustainable management and development of the marine and aquatic resources of the CARICOM countries.

BACK COVER

This document is the final version of the report of the eleventh session of the Western Central Atlantic Fishery Commission (WECAFC) and of the eighth session of the Committee for the Development and Management of Fisheries in the Lesser Antilles held in St George's, Grenada, from 21 to 24 October 2003. Major topics discussed during the session were: the state of fishery resources and the situation and trends of fisheries in the WECAFC region, the strategies for increasing the contribution of small-scale capture fisheries to food security and poverty alleviation; the current strategy of WECAFC and its work programme. In adopting the 2004-05 work programme the Commission noted that extrabudgetary resources would be required for its implementation. One of the major recommendations was the establishment of an intersessional working group to explore the feasibility of strengthening regional fisheries management.