On behalf of my Minister and myself, allow me to welcome you to my country and express the sincere wish that the work of the following days will contribute to open new ways for a more rational and responsible use of water, maybe the most vital resource for life sustainability.

Production in inland waters, particularly in what concerns aquaculture, has been increasing since the mid 80's, being today the main support for the global increase of fish production - which is, as it is known, one of the most important available sources of animal protein for human nutrition.

This is the situation today and most probably for the following years.

However, we know that the scarcity of water is becoming quite troubling to the extent that it has been turned into a tension focus in certain regions, and it would not be excessive to say that its continuous depletion will tend to worsen social and economic situations and to become an excuse for armed conflicts. North Africa and the Near East are good examples of that risk, but they are not the only ones.

On the other hand, and taking into account that the security alert limit is 2000 m³ per capita, certain projections pointing to figures of about 700 m³ by the end of the first quarter of the next century are highly preoccupying. Considering the last 50 years, other forecasts - not necessarily divergent - indicate, for the year 2000, a breakdown in water availability per capita of around 35% in Latin America and Africa, of 30% in Asia and of 50% in North America.

The misuse that has been made of inland waters, their degradation due to pollution caused by urban, mining and industrial effluents and the increasing use for irrigation purposes are three factors that, together with climate change, help to understand the gravity of the situation we have come to.

Several examples show us how we reached this point. We have only to remember what happened to the Danube and Lake Aral - whose surface has been reduced about 40% in less than 30 years, gradually becoming an immense salty area - or the controversy around plans to divert watercourses between watersheds or the effects of dams' construction or even the absolutely disastrous ecological consequences of deforestation, previously in temperate zones and today in tropical regions.

The excessive growth of cities is also a justified concern, mainly the uncontrolled geographic expansion of urban areas. According to rather recent projections, this trend tends to worsen in the next few decades - the problems being focused mainly in the third world.

Moreover, the combination of factors, such as the excessive density of human occupation and the need to assure survival conditions for those populations, associated to the deforestation of large areas and overgrazing, has contributed to the progress of desertification, being the disappearance of arable land per year estimated in about 6 million hectares. In the beginning of this decade, some 14 million Km² had turned into a desert and more than 30 million were threatened.

Given these facts - and I did not intend to be exhaustive - I believe it is reasonable to conclude that the use of water and aquatic resources should be a major concern both of the State and its citizens, and that its use, either private or public, should be regulated so that it does not jeopardise both the rightful interests of human populations and the delicate ecological balances.

We know today that the concepts that are the base of industrial development and certain classical economics (and the modern systems derived from it - Marxist, Keynesian, welfare and ultra liberal economics) have widely contributed for the implementation of intensive exploitation regimes, with the consequent overexploitation and near exhaustion of certain resources. They all ignore - as Ponting underlined in a recent book - the problem of resource depletion and deal only with the secondary problem of the distribution of resources between different competing ends.

This leads to a second conclusion: the role of the State and its citizens is here particularly relevant in the conception, development and implementation of feedback mechanisms in order to induce compatibility between resource exploitation limits and human needs.

Most of the problems we are facing today cannot be solved unilaterally: on the contrary, they demand a sharper collective awareness and a joint effort, at the national, regional and international levels. This effort should be all the more bigger as we are facing a situation where, in many cases, water and aquatic resources are an each time more rare asset.

Up to this point I have focused on external factors which, while playing a negative role, contribute to strong limitations in water quantity and quality. Now allow me a brief analysis of the problem from another angle.

In fact, while pollution contributes to the impoverishment of fisheries in inland waters, it is of no less importance the introduction of non-indigenous or exotic species, with fatal consequences, in a large number of cases, such as the reduction in biodiversity, the introduction of diseases, the increase in mass mortality, the decline of indigenous communities and the disturbance of the existing balances.

Another aspect - not less relevant - is related to the development of semi-intensive and intensive aquaculture systems, which led to higher pollution levels due to the excess of nutrients.

In general, we could conclude that the quick expansion of aquaculture during the 70's and 80's is not sustainable and requires a joint effort in finding new ways, based on unconventional strategies, such as LISA models (i.e. Low Input Sustainable Aquaculture models based on communities) or, in a wider sense, ecological aquaculture systems based on an integrated production perspective that takes into due account the ecosystem's characteristics and its relative fragility.

As Schumacher underlined in the 70s, there is a need for a different approach, looking at the whole rather than the parts, and "... concentrating on questions of the appropriate size and scale for both activities and technology and identifying the real needs of people rather than pursuing absolute levels of production ..."

Ladies and Gentlemen,

This speech is becoming too long, so, allow me to end by stressing what I believe, as a biologist, is more important, among so many other issues that aquaculture faces today:

• the fulfilment of Mankind's growing nutritional needs, in terms of fish consumption, will depend greatly on the development of aquaculture,
• such growth is limited because there is a maximum natural output level for productive systems, and this is one of the reasons why one of today's big challenges is related to the need to balance those limits with consumption needs, bearing in mind, however, that the exploitation regimes are characterised by high levels of energy loss,
• the possible development level for aquaculture and inland fisheries will, however, be reduced if water quality and biodiversity go on being threatened by pollution of anthropogenic origin, particularly the one that results from agricultural and industrial activities,
• the formulation of new strategies in the scope of aquaculture should consider different approaches to the problems, developing new concepts each time nearer ecological aquaculture models,
• the more rational and responsible use of water implies not only the search for balances among different users, but also the application of regulatory mechanisms in order to compatibilize natural production limits with human needs, knowing that those cannot be overreached if we want to assure sustainability,
• the participation of citizens and communities, as well as their co-participation and/or co-responsibilisation should be estimulated and, in due time, assured, as well as effective co-operation at regional and international levels.

Concluding, I shall say that problems concerning water and the sustainable development of fisheries and aquaculture will hardly be solved if we do not seriously face the need to rethink the development models and exploitation regimes for natural resources.

As long as we are driven by purely economic criteria and are not capable of working together in terms of regional and international co-operation, it will be highly probable that today's worries will worsen in the near future.

It is not possible to persist either adopting economic thoughts that fail to take into account humanity's dependence on the natural world or the dominance of reductionist modes of scientific thinking that overlooks the perception of the whole.

In this sense I feel tempted to conclude quoting Hazel Henderson who, with a certain touch of irony, emphasised, exactly 20 years ago:

"... Economics has enthroned some of our most unattractive predispositions: material acquisitiveness, competition, gluttony, pride, selfishness, shortsightedness, and just plain greed ..."

Are we prepared and willing to change this not very sympathetic perspective?

Honourable Secretary of State for Fisheries, honourable representative of the Regional Governor of Faro, Mr Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is an honour for me to welcome you on behalf of the Director-General of FAO, Mr Jaques Diouf, and, in particular, the Fishery Resources Division, the division which is technically responsible for the European Inland Fisheries Advisory Commission.

First of all I would like to thank the Government of Portugal for hosting this Session and providing these excellent meeting facilities.

I am glad that so many delegates and experts have been able to come here and I would like to thank you all in advance for the valuable contributions you will no doubt make to this Session and the Symposium attached to it.

In this connection I would like to acknowledge the support received from the European Community for travel of colleagues from Eastern Europe and from States of the former USSR.

This Twentieth Session of the European Inland Fisheries Advisory Commission marks the forty-first year since the Commission was founded in 1957 by the FAO Council in response to requests by member countries. Since then EIFAC's membership has doubled from 16 founding members to 32, the youngest member being Luxembourg.

Most of the original founding fathers of the Commission have gone now although one looks back with affection at the dynamism and commitment of the earlier member who were opening up new ground in the business of natural resource management.

The Commission has performed an invaluable task in drawing the attention of its members to the problems of the sector, in providing a forum for exchange of information on a wide range of inland fisheries issues and in ensuring a common approach throughout Europe. Indeed for most of its existence there has been no other body charged with the international aspects of inland fisheries.

The achievements of the Commission are the achievements of its members and the voluntary contributions of scientists from every country have contributed to its work. There is no doubt that the Commission's achievements in that time have been significant as reflected by the output of quality publications either funded by FAO or by the member countries. In fact countries outside the region have eagerly sought much of its output and it remains an example for other Commissions to aspire to.

Whilst it is valuable to look back and reflect on past accomplishments, and perhaps the odd failure or two, it is more valuable to look to the future to see how this Commission can continue to discharge its functions. Much has changed in the past forty years.

Firstly, when the Commission was founded government interests in natural resources management were small, the number of players limited and the issues seemed relatively simple. Now public interest in natural resources allocation and conservation is enormous and covered by fora such as UNCED, the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, RAMSAR and many others.

Secondly, sources of funding were usually simple and direct through governmental sources. Now funding is frequently indirect and in the private sector.

Thirdly administration of inland fisheries was located in one governmental authority. Now this authority is delegated to a number of regional governmental and non-governmental organizations and even to the private sector. There are also a number of intergovernmental agency authorities whose work overlaps with the work of the Commission.

In the past few sessions members of the Commission have been asked to give an opinion as to the usefulness of the Commission under these changed circumstances. The answer has always been unequivocal, that EIFAC should continue its work as the only intergovernmental body in Europe to deal with inland fisheries matters. However, many of the changes of recent years imply differences in the way the Commission is going to have to work in the future. The trend for many countries to devolve responsibility for inland fisheries management from central government to regional or local groupings within the nation makes it difficult to obtain representation from all interested parties at the Session and in EIFAC's various activities.

With the decline in funding for all the international agencies, FAO cannot continue funding working parties and publications as much as in the past. To this end, the FAO Conference decided in November 1997 to revisit the structure of its subsidiary bodies, including EIFAC. The financial means for funding at the level of the individual scientist has also changed, reducing the possibility for non-remunerative voluntary contributions to a body such as EIFAC.

All this suggests that for EIFAC to remain effective in its role these problems are going to have to be faced and new methods of working found. Part of this requires a more rigorous identification of problems and needs for the sector and of approaches to resolve them.

With all this in mind I would suggest that some discussion at this Session take place to enable us to frame a programme for the inter-session that is realistic under these changed circumstances. It remains for me to assure you that FAO is willing to allocate funds to continue to support the Secretariat of the Commission.

We from the Secretariat are convinced that EIFAC will continue to play an important role in the management of European inland fisheries, and we will do whatever is possible to facilitate EIFAC's work during this economically difficult period.

At the last Session of the FAO Conference, Governments, when reviewing the role of FAO Subsidiary Bodies, took note of the importance of the work of EIFAC - by the way the only FAO Fisheries Body that received such attention in this context.

I am looking forward to a successful Session and an inspiring Symposium.

Thank you for your attention.

Secretary of State,

Distinguished delegates.

Dear Friends and Colleagues,

It is my great pleasure to welcome you to the Twentieth Session of the European Inland Fisheries Advisory Commission and to the related Symposium on Water for Sustainable Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture in this beautiful setting at Praia do Carvoeiro.

On behalf of all of us, I would like to ask you, Secretary of State, to convey to your government our gratitude for your kind invitation to hold the Twentieth Session here in Portugal and to thank the Director of the Direcção Geral das Florestas for making his staff available to effect all the excellent preparations for our meeting. And I am pleased to welcome the Representative of the Regional Governor of Faro.

As it happens, I have a particular interest in some of the work carried out in Portugal in inland fisheries, through my own speciality of eels. Portugal hosted the Eighth Session of the EIFAC Working Party on Eel in Porto 1992 and I have since had the pleasure of working with colleagues in Lisbon and Porto who are making a very valuable contribution to this subject.

Our hosts have prepared an interesting document on the management of water resources and fisheries. These reflect the concerns of all of our countries, particularly the need for sustainable exploitation and the resolution of conflicts between the different users of the resource. The area of water totals some 150,000 hectares. Sport fishing is deservedly popular and makes a signficiant contribution to tourist income and there are as many as 3,000 professional anglers.

EIFAC was set up in the 1950s and held its first session in Dublin in 1960. In those four decades there have been many changes, some of them already outlined by our Secretary. In the early years, fewer workers were engaged in the field of inland fisheries and its associated disciplines of managemenet of the aquatic resource. The ideals of conservation and the sustainable use of our natural resources were not widely accepted.

The change in outlook in these matters has been dramatic and one of its side issues has been the proliferation of national and international organizations. One result of this has been that the individual scientist finds it harder and harder to decide on where his priorities should lie and how much time and effort he can devote to any particular organization or project. We must now face the questions: is there still a need for EIFAC and, if there is, what steps must we take to convince our colleagues and those who provide the funds that we are worthy of their time and their money.

As good scientists, we approach any problem first by reviewing its history. At the Eighteenth Session in Rome in 1994, we made a careful study of the breadth of the activities of the Commission and made recommendations for the future. To a considerable extent, we carried on our work according to the traditional plan, holding the Nineteenth Session in Dublin two years later and agreeing on work to be done during the next Intersessional. I will now present the traditional review of that work. You will find it in some ways a matter for heart-searching rather than an impressive report of accomplishments.

First we have Sub-Commision I on Biology and Management:

The Working Party on Eel, which is now a joint group with ICES, had a very successful meeting in the Netherlands hosted by the RIVO laboratory at Ijmuiden. The attendance was 41 and 32 of the participants presented papers. The Eel Working Party is to a great extent a mini-symposium but has served the topic group very well by its practice of publishing most of the papers as journal literature. Recruitment to the fishery has been poor for nearly twenty years, but the Working Party has provided ample evidence that redistribution of the stocks to maintain or even increase the fishing yield is possible. For its next meeting in Denmark in the autumn of 1999, the Group intends to organize a world-wide symposium on the Anguillid eels.

The Working Group on Electric Fishing abandoned its attempts to hold a Workshop on Harmful Effects of Electric fishing but still hopes to publish a literature review on the subject.

The Working Party on Fishing Gear Selectivity has failed to find a convenor and has not met.

The Working Party on Introductions and Stocking has published the Proceedings of its Conference held in Hull in April 1996 and held/but failed to hold a proposed meeting in Trieste in 1997.

The Working Party on Brackishwater Fisheries and Aquaculture has not met since February 1996.

The Synopis on Alosa alosa and Alosa fallax is still a awaited after many years of gestation.

Maps on Fish Distribution and Aquatic Habitat Quality were requested from all 32 member countries and 5 replies were received. A comprehensive database on these subjects for Europe would be of immense value and the project is to be pursued at this Session.

Next, Sub-Commission II - Aquaculture.

The Working Party on Fish Diseases and their Control failed to meet, but their convenor made contact with the European Association of Fish Pathologists and they agreed to hold a joint FAO/EIFAC/EAFP open workshop on Health management of sturgeon and carp fisheries and aquaculture to be held in September of this year.

The Working Party on Fish and Crustacean Nutrition failed to organize a proposed training course because of lack of funding.

We are about to enjoy the outcome of the preparations made by The Working Party on Aquatic Resources Management in Aquaculture in the Symposium which begins later this morning. The very good attendance is a tribute to the work of the Convenor and his colleagues. But I have to say that their work was not easy. In particular, they issued a questionnaire to all 32 member countries and, in spite of many reminders and cajolements, received 15 replies.

Sub-Commission III - Protection of the Aquatic Resource

The Working Party on the influence of management practices on the environment has been preparing a document summarizing the literature on this topic: it will be presented to the Session.

The Working Party on the Effects of Physical Modifications of the Aquatic Habitat on Fish Populations has taken the very important step of publishing a volume on Rehabilitation of rivers for fish. This represents the concerteted efforts of the leading experts. The production of authoritative works such as this is one of the most valuable contributions EIFAC can make to the management of fisheries. A sub-group of the Working Party is engaged in planning a similar document on the rehabilitation of lakes and reservoirs.

Rather than a Working Party, the Sub-Commission has an ad hoc Expert Consultation on Accumulated Toxicants in Fish. Thanks largely to the efforts of its convenor in the Czech Republic, the group is active in coordinating results of work in progress in assessment of a variety of toxicants.

Members of the Working Party on Prevention and Control of Bird Predation contributed to an expert meeting on cormorant management held in Copenhagen in September 1997. This remains an extremely difficult and sensitive problem, with a degree of conflict between fisheries and wildlife lobbies. Documentation was circulated to EIFAC National Correspondents.

Endocrine disrupters are a new problem relating to the welfare of trout stocks in a number of member countries and the Sub-Commission is considering the possibilities of making a contribution to its evaluation and control.

At the Nineteenth Session in Dublin in 1996, we established a fourth Sub-Commission to deal with social and economic issues.

This Sub-Commission's Working Party on Recreational Fisheries was the group behind our last Symposium. I am delighted to report on the appearance of EIFAC's second major publication of the intersessional entitled: Recreational fisheries: social, economic and management aspects. With this as a base, the Working Party will give its attention to the need for a new approach to the topic which is one of ever-increasing importance.

The Working Party on Education in Fisheries Management covers one of the subjects which all members of EIFAC agree to be of prime importance. But the Working Party has not met for many years and the recommendation of the EIFAC Executive Committee has been that it be abolished.

The topic of resolution of conflicts in river basins has been addressed at a Symposium on River Fisheries in Hull, UK earlier this year and will receive further consideration in our Symposium this week.

And finally, I regret to report no progress in the compilation of a database on social and economic information nor in the matter of a synthesis on fisheries legislation

I have spent a considerable amount of time on this outline, but many of you know little more about EIFAC than its function as the Convener of this Symposium and you will leave us on Friday without hearing anything more about the life and functions of EIFAC. You are now aware that members of EIFAC are very actively and effectively engaged in studies of 11 topics, all of them essential to the development of inland fisheries.

Will you Symposium participants please pay less attention to the fact that I listed eight equally important topics on which we have made no progress. This is a serious matter for those of us who will take part in next week's session. That will be the time for us to fulfil our duty of laying down the programme in the first place for the next two-years. But let us remember that the next Session will be the first of the new millennium. Our past has been one of great achievement - but it is quite clear that we must make considerable changes in our outlook if we are to survive far into the future.

In the first place it must be said that many of our resolutions have been aspirations rather than practical advice. Secondly, FAO has less and less funds for our support and has presented us with a document proposing revised Rules of Procedure which will require a degree of streamlining of our operations. Thirdly, the employment situation of most of our members has changed radically, with the effect that few of us have the freedom to devote time to EIFAC because of the pressure on all institutions to achieve tightly focused objectives.

Above all we must remember that inland fisheries are at a crossroads. More and more interest groups are concerned with the better use of inland waters. Much damage was done in the past, most countries are now very actively engaged in repairing that damage. There are differences between the desires of the fishing interests and of other recreational and industrial users of water - even between fishing interests and the anti-fishing lobby. Europe needs an organization which can put the case of the fisheries forward clearly and on a basis of scientific knowledge. That organization is EIFAC - but we must make sure that we are heard.

While we know that EIFAC makes an invaluable contribution to the development of inland fisheries, there is reason to believe that many of our employers and policy-makers need to be convinced of our abilities. At a practical level, we need to identify clearly the cost-effectiveness of our contribution so that contracts for development work will include a provision for EIFAC participation.

What we offer is an unequalled network of expertise which can be fed in to every conceivable national or regional project. The important point is for us to find ways and means of making both our member governments, together with international bodies such as the European Union, aware of our abilities. In the past there was relatively little need for such an approach - but the times they are a-changing.

And on the subject of change, I must give special mention to one individual. Robin Welcomme is here amongst us and will be working so hard that nobody might notice he has retired. In fact Robin did retire formally last year from the post of Secretary of EIFAC which he had filled with such distinction and good humour for the past ten years. I am very happy to say that, as a Visiting Professor at Imperial College in London, he is continuing to make a major contribution to fisheries and fisheries science. Robin's place at the table has been taken by Heiner Naeve whom we welcome to his first Session of EIFAC and who has been busily engaged behind the scenes for many months.

It is usual for the Chairman of EIFAC to end his address simply with good wishes for the success of the Symposium. I would like to compliment the organizers, both the technical planners and the EIFAC and the Portuguese officials, on their excellent progress so far in making us very comfortable here by the seaside. I am sure the Symposium will be a great success. But I have an addition to my good wishes for the Symposium: that is a request to all colleagues to take the opportunity of our presence here to think and talk about how we make sure that EIFAC has a future even more valuable than its past.

Thank you ladies and gentlemen