MARINE FISHERIES MANAGEMENT PROJECT

SRL/91/022

Field Document

MISSION REPORT
MARINE FISHERIES MANAGEMENT PROJECT

SRI LANKA

Based on the Work of

Michael Sanders

FAO Consultant Fisheries Management Advisor

(February 18 - April 17, 1998)

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANISATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Bangkok, 1998

1.Introduction

1. Introduction

This government executed project funded by the UNDP commenced in early 1993. Following the recent agreement to an extension, the final termination date has been set as December 31 1998. The Project's objectives are to establish a mechanism for the management of fisheries, to strengthen the capability of the field staff in fisheries management, and to promote fisherfolk participation in management. The consultant Fisheries Management Advisor (FMA) was appointed by FAO, for the purpose of providing technical advice and direction in relation to fisheries management. The current mission of two months is the fourth undertaken by the consultant. The associated terms of reference, international travel schedule, local field trips, and persons met are given in Appendix 1. The earlier missions were for three months (June 23 - 25 September, 1996), two months (October 21 - December 20, 1996), and four months (May 11 - September 6, 1997). Two additional missions totalling five months are scheduled for the remainder of 1998.

2. Report of Activities/Progress

This section provides a brief account of the technical activities involving the consultant, along with a short description of the associated fisheries background. During the current mission, most attention was focused on assisting with the analysis of data collected during the Negombo Lagoon fisheries study. The biological component of this study was commenced on January 1 1997. Another major activity was to advise on the strengthening of the boat registration and fishing operations licensing systems. The requirement to register fishing craft dates back to 1980. The licensing of fishing operations commenced in early 1997. In respect to both the compliance by the fishing communities is poor, and the associated information management systems are largely non-existent.

The consultant prepared additional lecture material to be used with the training courses in fisheries management being given to fisheries officers from the field. There were four five-day courses given by local lecturers during 1997, and four additional courses are slated for 1998. About 20 trainees will attend each course. The consultant was also marginally involved in the preliminary arrangements for one (or two) seminars to be held shortly concerning the offshore survey and assessment of large pelagic (eg. tuna) resources. The survey involving the charter of 3 vessels over two years was completed in October 1997. The consultant undertook the associated assessment work during November-December 1997, while employed within the Asian Development Bank's (AdB) Fisheries Development Project.

Descriptions of the management plans and draft regulations for each of the Negombo Lagoon, south coast lobster, and encircling net fisheries were provided in a previous mission report (see Mission Report May 11 - September 6, 1997). In late 1997, the Minister of Fisheries submitted the plans and draft regulations to the Parliamentary Consultative Committee. As the Committee's considerations are continuing, no further assistance from the consultant was requested during the current mission.

1. Boat Registration and Fishing Operations License

In the case of boat registration, full compliance by the fishing communities would require the registration (and annual renewal) of some 30,000 craft. Similarly, full compliance with the licensing of fishing operations (as defined in the regulations) would necessitate licensing (and annual renewal) for a similar number. In reality, the compliance levels for both are low, possibly less than 20 percent. In providing advice on these matters, the consultant sought to have the fisheries administration focus attention on some of the underlying issues.

The present regulations require that all fishing craft are registered, and that the registrations be renewed annually. The issues (raised by the consultant) include whether to discontinue registration for the smaller craft, and whether to have renewal take place every 2 (or 3, or 4, or 5) years. In raising this, it was suggested that the objectives of registration (recording of ownership, adherence to standards of sea-worthiness, marking of craft, etc.) might be substantially less relevant for the smaller (traditional) craft. Other obvious issues requiring attention by the administration are the motivation of the field staff (to increase their involvement in extension and enforcement), and the use of awareness measures targeted at the fishing communities (e.g. meetings and announcements on radio and TV).

Applications for boat registration and fishing operations licenses, along with issue and renewal, take place in the district offices (DFEOs). This has relevance to the issues of where to locate the associated databases, and whether they should be computerised. The alternatives in regard to location are separate databases in each of the DFEOs, a central database at DFAR headquarters (in Colombo), or a combination of these. The first has the advantage of spreading the workload. It also puts the databases in proximity to the day-to -day management function.

Of relevance to the above is the observation that there are no computers in the DFEOs, nor is there a culture of computer usage. While computers do exist at DFAR headquarters, the level of computer skill amongst existing staff is modest. Hence, there would need to be training and/or the hiring of extra (trained) staff. In view of the substantial difficulties and cost, proceeding with computerisation would be difficult to justify while compliance levels remain low. The consultant recommended a review of the present compliance levels in each district, along with an examination of how the existing registration and license (paper) records are being manually filed/stored/utilised in the DFEOs. This is expected to proceed shortly.

2. Training of Field Staff in Fisheries Management

A document was previously produced by the consultant titled `Introduction to the objectives and strategies of management' (see Mission Report, October 21 - December 20, 1996). It was used as the lecture material for the four five-day training courses held during 1997 by local language lecturers (Dr. K. Sivasubramaniam, and Messrs. L. Joseph and N. Siripala). The contents included the definition of fisheries management, bio-economic relationships, concepts of over-fishing, socio-economic influences, objectives of management, conduct for responsible fisheries, strategies of management, and strategies of implementation. Examples of fisheries management as applied in Sri Lanka and abroad were also included.

Following a strong indication of appreciation by the trainees, another four of the training courses have been scheduled for 1998. In a review of the comments provided by the trainees during the completed courses, it was decided to add some additional material to the training document. This was prepared by the consultant (see Appendix 2) and concerns the objectives and strategies of boat registration and the licensing of fishermen and fishing units. This was considered relevant to the project's objective to strengthen both the boat registration and fishing operations licensing systems (as discussed in the previous sub-Section).

3. Management of the Offshore Large Pelagics Fisheries

The assessment work based on the offshore survey, and catch and effort data from the logbooks on commercial boats, was completed in December 1997, within the AdB Fisheries Development Project. A summary of the findings and recommendations are re-produced here (see Appendix 3). It had been envisaged in the workplan of the UNDP Fisheries Management Project, that there would be a jointly sponsored seminar at which the findings from the assessments and the implications for management would be presented. In fact there are to be two seminars in April/May 1998, one for fisheries officers and academia, and the other for fishermen and boat owners. The AdB project will be sponsoring both in collaboration with the National Aquatic Resources Research and Development Agency (NARA). The consultant assisted with preparing the draft agenda in respect to the first of these. The extent to which the UNDP Fisheries Management Project might be involved in subsequent management plan formulation, is presently unknown.

4. Progress with the Negombo Lagoon Fisheries Study

This study has included the collection of catch and fishing effort data, costs and earnings data, and sampling to determine (mostly for shrimp) the species, sex, lengths, individual weights and reproductive stages of the individuals in the catches. The collection and initial analysis of these data (e.g. creation of computer files, tables and figures) are largely completed. The annual catch for the lagoon (including entrance) was estimated to be 1,694 t (1997); including 538 t of shrimp. This is from an area of 31.64 km², and hence indicates a productivity of 54 t/km². The value of the catch was determined as Rs. 100 million (_ US$ 1.7 million), and the monthly gross revenue per fisherman as about Rs. 5,000. The frame survey conducted in August 1997 indicated a total of 1,305 craft (1-2 crew/craft) were engaged (almost all non-motorised).

Substantial differences in the shrimp species and size compositions have been found to exist between fishing locations and gear types. The most common species caught within the body of the lagoon are P. indicus and to a lesser extent P. semisulcatus. This arises due to trammel nets being the preferred gear. They are also the main shrimp species caught in association with brush piles, although of smaller sizes (due to the shallow water depth). The stake nets (set at the entrance to the lagoon) catch mainly M. dobsoni and M. moyebi. Smaller sized individuals of the latter are a major component of the catches from drag nets used inside the lagoon. M. moyebi is rarely caught outside the lagoon. M. dobsoni is the only species substantially exploited both in the lagoon (mostly at the entrance) and outside.

The catches from the linked trawl fisheries conducted outside the lagoon were also determined. The annual catch from non-mechanised trawlers operated north of the entrance was estimated to be 322 t (1997); including 187 t of shrimp. This was from a fleet of 135 craft (4 crew/craft). The catch estimated for the mechanised trawlers operated south of the entrance was 187 t (1997), including 83 t of shrimp. This fleet was comprised of 95 craft (3-5 crew/craft). The value of the combined catches from the two trawl fisheries was estimated to be Rs. 40.3 million (_ $US 0.7 million). This represents a monthly gross revenue per fisherman of about Rs. 4,000. In the case of both fisheries, the catches were comprised almost entirely of M. dobsoni and M. coromandelica. The latter is a marine species which does not occur in the lagoon.

A selection (as examples) of the biological output from the analyses is shown in the appendices. Appendices 4, 5 and 6 provide more detailed catch and effort data for the stake net and trawl fisheries. Catch in numbers data showing the species compositions by gear type are given in Appendix 7. Monthly length frequencies for M. dobsoni caught by non-mechanised trawlers are given in Appendix 8. These length frequencies for M. dobsoni demonstrate two recruitment periods per year, size differences between the sexes, and rates of growth (e.g. 2.3 to 3.5 mm CL in 6 months for females). The relationships between individual weight and each of carapace length and total length, and between total length and carapace length, are shown for several species in Appendices 9, 10, 11 and 12. The substantial differences in the size of shrimp caught by different gears are shown for P. indicus in Appendix 13.

The substantial remaining tasks are to continue with the estimation of the biological parameters (e.g. growth, mortalities, etc.), analyse the revenues and costs data, formulate a mathematical model of the fisheries, and investigate (using the model) if it is possible to improve the performance of the fisheries. In respect to the latter, a main issue will be whether additional fishermen can be accommodated without jeopardising the welfare of the existing fishermen. An additional two months will be required by the consultant and counterparts to complete these tasks, including the preparation of a study report.

5. Progress with the South Coast Lobster Fishery Study

Subsequent to the consultant's previous mission, the proposal from NARA for a bio-economic study was commenced. A Data Collection Supervisor and four Data Collection Assistants started collecting information on species, sex, length, and sexual maturity stage during December 1997. Fishing costs and prices data from interviews with fishermen and boat owners will be obtained during the coming month. This is to involve the project's Biologist, in the absence of the Economist (who is on maternity leave). Data analysis is expected to proceed following the end of the lobster fishing season in May 1998.

3. Recommendations

During the remainder of the project there is to be continuing focus on strengthening the systems associated with boat registration, the licensing of fishing operations, and the collection of fisheries statistics. There is also to be a detailed examination of the institutional aspects of administration (organisation, functions, manpower), particularly as it relates to the management of fisheries. Much of this concerns the performance of the field staff in the DFEO offices. As mentioned, the compliance levels in respect to the registration of craft and the licensing of fishing operations is poor. The recommended actions are

i a substantial improvement in the motivation (i.e. direction/performance monitoring/supervision/accountability) of the field staff in the DFEO offices)

ii establishment of an effective and on-going entity in DFAR headquarters with responsibility for the performance of the staff in the DFEO offices

iii an associated awareness campaign to remind the fishing communities of the requirements under current legislation

iv an ad hoc appraisal of the collective performance of the field staff in each district

The first of these requires a strong direction from DFAR headquarters, accompanied by performance deadlines, the monitoring and assessment of performance, and supervision. These actions should be linked with those envisaged in respect to the second recommendation. The latter could be achieved by establishing an Extension/Enforcement Unit in DFAR headquarters, to which all the DFEO offices are responsible. The third recommendation, to improve awareness within the communities, can be achieved using existing funds remaining within the project. Ultimately enforcement actions will be required in respect to those who continue to disregard the fisheries laws. Concerning the fourth recommendation, a proposal was prepared for a national consultant to examine compliance levels in the districts, and the filing/storage/utilisation of the registration and licensing records in each DFEO office.

APPENDIX 1

The Fisheries Management Advisor (FMA) is primarily concerned with providing technical advice and direction in relation to overall fisheries management. He shall operate under the general supervision of the National Project Director (NPD) and will provide technical advice on methodology of fisheries management and on options appropriate to the local situation and in particular:

1. The linkage between biological, economical and social issues in developing fisheries management plans

3. Support with the analysis and reporting of the Negombo Lagoon fisheries study

The consultant undertook six single day field trips from Colombo. These were all to Negombo, principally to guide, supervise and monitor progress with the biological data collection component of the Negombo Lagoon Fisheries Study.

APPENDIX 2

Training Course Material -

Vessel Registration and Fishing Licenses

The registration of fishing vessels can be considered analogous to the registration of motor vehicles. The supporting statutes will specify that a vessel may not be operated unless registered. Registration establishes the formal proof of ownership of vessels. This has importance in relation to the transfer of ownership (e.g. from sale), the insurance of vessels, and whenever there is litigation concerning the vessel or its usage. Vessel registration also provides a valuable mechanism for obtaining compliance concerning sea-worthiness and safety equipment. In such cases the statutes will make compliance a pre-requisite to registration, and provide for registration to be cancelled in the event of vessels ceasing to be sea-worthy.

An additional virtue of registration is in the creation of database information on the number, characteristics and ownership of vessels. Such data can be vital to the planning and implementation of fisheries research and management. Registration can also provide a means of raising revenue for specific purposes through the charging of registration fees. In such cases the revenues would normally be directed towards providing fisheries related services (e.g. maintenance of harbours). Registration will also invariably be associated with the requirement that vessels are readily able to be identified, by having the registration number (possibly also the vessel name) conspicuously visible on the vessel. Registration numbers would normally remain the same for the lifetime of the vessel.

"No person shall use or operate within Sri Lanka waters any fishing boat for the purpose of fishing unless a certificate of registration in respect of each fishing boat has been issued under these regulations by the Director of Fisheries or any officer authorised by him in that behalf.

Every application...shall be made together with....the valid certificate of insurance in respect of such boat obtained by forwarding a certificate of sea-worthiness in respect of the boat ......... Provided, however, that the certificates referred to in this paragraph shall not be required in respect to non-mechanised boats.

If any registered boat is not in a sea-worthy condition, an application shall be made to the Director of Fisheries.... to cancel the registration issued in respect of the boat. ......... On receipt of an application ..... the Director of Fisheries or any officer authorised by him may if .... satisfied that such boat is not sea-worthy, cancel the registration of such boat.

A certificate of registration ..... shall be valid for a calendar year and may be renewed in respect to any calendar year. The renewal shall be made before the 15^th day of January of the relevant year. The relevant steps to have the registration so renewed shall be made by forwarding to the Fisheries Inspector in the area, a valid Certificate of Insurance, the current Certificate of Registration, and on payment of the relevant fee set out in list (B) in the Second Schedule hereto.

On receipt of a Certificate of Registration..... a name board painted with numbers and letters in white and six inches in height shall be fixed at a level six inches below the gunwale......... In the case of a fishing boat with a sail, the registration number shall be painted thereon on both sides in black with letters and numbers the height of which shall be six inches."

While the registration of vessels relates principally to ownership, fishing licenses (or permits) provide the authority to operate a vessel and/or fishing gear for the purpose of catching fish. Fishing licenses may be issued in respect to the fishermen themselves. Most often the licensing of fishermen is confined to those who are in charge of fishing operations (e.g. the skippers of vessels). This would be particularly so where there are large numbers of itinerant crew (e.g. those part-time or seasonally engaged in fishing). The licensing of fishermen-in-charge (e.g. Master Fishermen) is somewhat analogous to licensing the drivers of vehicles. It provides a mechanism for ensuring those persons are sufficiently competent. The statutes in this event will specify that vessels and/or fishing gear may not be operated unless the person-in-charge is suitably licensed, with the re-requisite for obtaining a license being proof of competence (e.g. certificate of seamanship).

The other important group of fishing licenses are those issued for the purpose of controlling the amount of fishing. They are issued in respect to fishing units. Where fishing requires the use of a vessel, the fishing unit can be considered as the combination of vessel, fishing gear, and crew. In this event the license would normally be issued in respect to the vessel, and the applicant for the license would be the owner of the vessel. The associated statutes would enable controls on the number of licenses issued, and for the licenses to be endorsed with conditions as appropriate. These conditions might include limits on the type, quantity and size of gear able to be used, the number of crew, and the areas and seasons for fishing. Where the fishery management regime involves controlling the quantity of catch, the quota entitlement of each license holder may be reflected as a condition recorded on the license.

"No person shall engage in, or cause any other person to engage in, any fishing operation specified in Part I of the Schedule hereto, in the sea, estuaries or coastal lagoons of Sri Lanka except under the authority of a license issued under these regulations and otherwise than in accordance with the terms and conditions attached to such license.

Every application for a license .... Shall be sent by registered post to the Licensing Officer of the Administrative District in which the relevant fishing operation is to be carried out, ...... . Application shall be made by the owner of the boat (if such boat is used in the fishing operation) or by the owner of the fishing equipment, as the case may be. Where a license officer has not been appointed ..... applications may be addressed to the Director of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources... .

Every license granted under these regulations .... shall be in force for a period of one year from the date of the license unless it is cancelled earlier under Section 10 of the Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Act. .... A license granted under these regulations may be renewed upon application made to the Licensing Officer or the Director as the case may be not less than 30 days before the expiry of the license.

(b) there is no threat to the sustainability of fish or other aquatic resources as a result of renewing the license; and

Where the Director or the Licensing Officer ... refuses to grant or renew a license .... He shall communicate such decision and the reasons therefor to the applicant or the licensee ... by registered post ... The applicant or licensee .... who is aggrieved .... may appeal against such decision to the Secretary of the Ministry of the Minister in writing, within thirty days ..... . The Secretary may either .... allow the appeal .... or .... disallow the appeal. The decision ..... shall be final and conclusive."

APPENDIX 3

Offshore Fisheries Survey Findings and Recommendations

Executive Summary

Three survey vessels selected from the commercial fleet were engaged for a two year period commencing in September 1995. During 1,032 fishing days they caught 132 t of fish from using gillnets, and 84 t from tuna longlines. The average catch rates were 209 kg/fishing day from gillnets, and 158 kg/fishing day from longlines. The catches per quantity of gear were 70 kg/10 net pieces from gillnets, and 65 kg/100 hooks from longlines. The gillnet pieces were 83 m long and 15 m in depth (as rigged). The longlines were rigged with 14.3 hooks/1000 m. Skipjack and yellowfin tuna contributed 77 % (by weight) to the gillnet catches. Bigeye and yellowfin tuna were 38 % of the longline catches. Marlin, swordfish, sailfish and shark were important components from both gears. The average size of the fish caught by gillnets was 4.7 kg. Much larger fish, averaging 33 kg, were caught by longlines. Catch rates, species compositions, and fish sizes indicated a generally uniform distribution of the resources throughout the three study areas (together totalling 454,040 km²). Detailed records of gross revenues and fishing costs were provided in respect to each fishing trip.

During the same period, a logbook system enabled the collection of catch and effort data for the commercial vessels. The offshore fleet now comprises about 1,760 vessels, almost all used with gillnets and to a lesser extent shark longlines (only 3 vessels are presently engaged in tuna longlining). The effort in 1996 was estimated as 266,000 fishing days. The associated catch was about 55,000 t, mostly from gillnets. The estimated catch rates were 192 kg/fishing day from gillnets, and 8.5 kg/fishing day from shark longlines. The catches per quantity of gear (CPUE) were 46 kg/10 net pieces from gillnets, and 100 kg/100 hooks from longlines. The monthly CPUEs for gillnets ranged from a low of 32 kg/10 net pieces in April, to highs of about 50 kg/10 net pieces in May, August and January. Skipjack and yellowfin contributed 71 % (by weight) in the gillnet catches. Shark were 47 % of the longline catches, with bigeye and yellowfin contributing another 30 %. The average size of fish caught by gillnets was 4.2 kg. The average for longlines was 13.4 kg.

Mathematical assessments were made of the likely catches in future years, in the event of further expansion of the offshore fleet. These were in respect to yellowfin and skipjack caught by gillnets, and bigeye and yellowfin caught by tuna longlines. It was concluded that the annual catch from gillnets could be increased, probably by several thousands of tonnes. This would be associated with a modest decline in catch rates (and hence profits). In the extreme case of doubling the fishing effort, the estimated decline in CPUE (kg/10 net pieces) was 20 %. The CPUEs at the commencement of the fishery were estimated as 20 - 25 % greater than at present. The assessment in respect to tuna longlining indicated about 6,700 t as an upper limit for the potential yield (all species). This would require a fleet of some 160 vessels (each using 600 hooks/fishing day). The estimated decline in CPUEs from this number of vessels was about 40 %. As CPUEs are a principal determinant of profitability (along with fish prices and fishing costs), their estimation was seen as crucial to deciding how much of the potential yield might be realised.

Projections of financial performance (from the viewpoint of the current investor) were undertaken in respect to the purchase and operation of a hypothetical vessel considered typical of those in use. The inputs to the analyses included the estimated CPUEs from the yield assessments, and fish prices and fishing costs based on the results from the offshore survey. The chosen indicators of financial performance were the internal rate of return (IRR) and the net present value (NPV). In the case of the hypothetical gillnet vessel, the estimates of IRR and NPV (relative to a 10 year investment period) were indicative of poor financial performance. Only when the assumed fleet expansion rate was less than 2 % (i.e. about 35 vessels/yr) was the IRR greater than the 14.5 % presently available from investing in a fixed interest commercial loan. At higher fleet expansion rates, the estimates of annual profit (before interest and tax) were shown to decline substantially over the investment period. In contrast, the projections in respect to a hypothetical tuna longline vessel were much more favourable. The estimates for IRR and NPV were indicative of good financial returns. Future performance, nevertheless will be highly dependent on the price for bait. Commercial longlining with (relatively inexpensive) local baits subsequent to the offshore survey has been encouraging. Boat builders are receiving orders for the construction of tuna longline vessels.

Bio-economic analyses were undertaken to determine how fleet performance might change in the event of increased numbers of vessels. The chosen indicators of performance were the annual fishery profit, profit per owner, remuneration per crew, and total number of crew. The method was an extension of the financial analyses, and utilised the estimated CPUEs from the yield assessments, and fish prices and fishing costs determined from the offshore survey. In the case of the gillnet fishery, it was concluded that substantial further expansion of the fleet should be avoided. This was in the sense that additional vessels would result in reduced economic profit, due to the increased gross revenue (with each new vessel) being less than the additional fishery costs. While there would be increased employment, and hence benefit to those who might previously have been unemployed, this would be at the expense of all the other fishery participants. The remunerations to the existing crew members would be reduced, as would the returns to the vessel owners. The conclusions were substantially different in respect to tuna longlining. This fishery is in its infancy, and economic profit can be expected to increase continuously during the early years of expansion, in association with good returns to both the owners and crews. The potential to expand is nevertheless limited, with the most optimistic interpretation of the results suggesting that the fleet should not be allowed to expand beyond a maximum of 160 vessels. Having in mind the uncertainties about future fish and bait prices, and the rate at which the catch rates might decline (with increase in fleet size), the fishery performance will need to be closely monitored.

Recommendations

1. No further encouragement (e.g. subsidies) for the construction of offshore gillnet vessels. This is consistent with the finding that the fishery has already achieved maximum economic profit. It also recognises the need for a precautionary approach. It does not intend to preclude the use of subsidies targeted at encouraging the use of improved fish storage facilities on vessels.

2. Declare an intention to prevent any further substantial increase in the number of gillnet vessels. It is unclear whether a proportion of the gillnet vessels will be re-deployed as tuna longliners. In this event the gillnet fleet may not expand further (in the short term). Ultimately, active measures (e.g. license limitation) will be necessary.

3. Provide encouragement (e.g. subsidies) for the construction of a limited number (perhaps 20) tuna longline vessels. This recognises a need for government to play a catalytic role in the early development of the fishery. The expectation is that normal (i.e. unassisted) private sector investment will follow, once the potential returns from longlining become more widely known.

4. Declare an intention to constrain the size of the tuna longline fleet to a maximum of 160 vessels. The most optimistic interpretation of available data gives the potential yield as less than 7,000 t (c.f. with the present catch from gillnets of 55,000 t). This would require a fishing effort of no more than 16 million hook (sets); equivalent to a fleet of no more than 160 vessels (using 600 hooks/fishing day). If the fishery develops with larger vessels, the maximum fleet size would need to be reduced.

5. Strengthen the capability within the fisheries administration to monitor the performance of the offshore fishery, including an expansion of the logbook system for collecting catch and effort statistics. This recognises the intrinsic need for continual re-appraisal of fisheries performance, as an essential component of proper management. It also recognises the many uncertainties in the analyses undertaken, particularly about future fish and bait prices, and the rate at which catch rates will decline with increase in the number of vessels.

6. Provide consultancies for the development of prototype vessel designs and specifications suitable for use by local boat builders. This seeks to achieve improvement in the efficiency and seaworthiness of the offshore fleet. It will be essential that boat builders produce vessels designed for the specific purpose (e.g. longlining). This has been made difficult by the absence of locally based naval architects. The offshore survey revealed great differences in fuel consumption between vessels (unrelated to the age and size of the engines) suggesting substantial mis-matching of hulls with engines. Breakdowns and loss of vessels (and life) at sea are common.

7. Provide consultancies for export market development, a review of commercial fish handling practices, to examine the need for on-board processing, and identify means to improve on-board fish storage. This recognises the potential to increase foreign currency earnings, particularly in association with the expected development of a tuna longline fishery. A requirement is for fish handling practices and on-board storage facilities to be improved, in order that locally caught fish comply with the high quality standards of overseas buyers.

8. Strengthen the existing fisheries management related systems, including the registration of fishing vessels, and the licensing of fishing operations. The benefits of vessel registration are in providing a legal record of ownership, a source of information about the number and characteristics of the vessels, a means of ensuring compliance with seaworthiness and safety standards, and as a potential means of raising revenue (for research and management). The licensing of fishing operations provides the instrument for limiting access to fisheries (as required).

9. Encourage stakeholder participation in the management of the offshore fisheries, and a strengthening of the stakeholder organisations. While several organisations presently exist at the national and local level (e.g. Multi-day Boat Owners Association) these are poorly coordinated and unable to present a collective view. There is the need for a strengthened umbrella organisation, and its formal incorporation within the management process (including the identification of the research needs).

10. Commission the conduct of a joint government/industry seminar on the future management/development of the offshore fishery, at which recent findings, experience and future management options are presented. The concept is to disseminate current knowledge, provide a forum for discussion of the issues, and identify the management needs. This could be followed by the formulation of a draft management plan, and ultimately a final plan for the consideration of government.