Upload
shanta
View
23
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
CMM-2008-01 Evaluation WCPFC6-2009/IP17 WCPFC6-2009/IP18. SPC Oceanic Fisheries Programme Noumea, New Caledonia. Objective of the Analysis. To conduct an evaluation of CMM 2008-01 to see if the measures it specifies are capable of achieving the stated objectives of the CMM - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
CMM-2008-01 Evaluation
WCPFC6-2009/IP17WCPFC6-2009/IP18
SPC Oceanic Fisheries ProgrammeNoumea, New Caledonia
Objective of the Analysis
• To conduct an evaluation of CMM 2008-01 to see if the measures it specifies are capable of achieving the stated objectives of the CMM
• Not necessarily what will happen, but what the CMM could allow, and how that relates to the CMM objectives
CMM-2008-01 Objectives
• Bigeye and yellowfin tuna stocks are maintained at levels capable of producing their maximum sustainable yield
• A minimum 30% reduction in bigeye tuna fishing mortality from the annual average during the period 2001-2004 or 2004
• No increase in fishing mortality for yellowfin tuna beyond the annual average during the period 2001-2004 average or 2004
Approach
• Estimate levels of catch and/or effort allowed under CMM 2008-01
• Estimate the impact of allowed catch and effort on bigeye and yellowfin stocks
• Evaluate impacts against the CMM objectives– F/FMSY and SB/SBMSY indicators
Effort and Catch Allowed by CMM
• Purse seine– Limits on vessel days for EEZs and high seas 20N – 20S– FAD closure of 2 months in 2009, 3 months 2010,
2011– High seas pockets closure
• Longline– Reduce catch to 70% of 2001-2004 (or 2004 for US,
CH, ID) levels• Various exemptions or exclusions for both
measures
Purse Seine Effort
• PNA EEZs collectively limited to 2004 effort– Excludes archipelagic waters (PNG, Solomons)– Assumed to include domestic, FSMA, bilateral effort
• Non-PNA members to take “compatible measures” for their EEZs– Interpreted as max (2001-2004, 2004) level of effort
• Flag States to individually limit effort on the high seas to max(2001-2004, 2004) level
Purse Seine Exemptions/Exclusions• Archipelagic waters not included in EEZ, PNG, SB, ID,
PH– assume continuation of 2007 effort
• High seas limits – do not apply to SIDS– assume continuation of 2007 effort
• “2004 level of effort” – includes rights in place under registered regional or bilateral fisheries agreements– US Treaty is the most important– Only 4,194 days in 2004– 40 full-time vessels require 9,172 days
Purse Seine Effort AllowedCategory of purse seine effort Effort (days
fishing)Allocation for 40 US vessels at 229 days fishing per year (average for full-time US vessels in 2004)
9,172
PNA EEZs 2004 (excluding archipelagic waters and US-flagged vessels)
27,954
Allowance for archipelagic waters (AW) in PNG and Solomon Islands (based on 2007 effort)
5,508
Other FFA EEZs (excluding US-flagged vessels), maximum of 2001-2004 average and 2004
23
International waters, maximum of 2001-2004 average and 2004, by flag (excluding US-flagged vessels)
9,647
TOTAL (domestic ID, PH purse seine fisheries not considered)
52,304
High-Seas Pockets Closure
High-Seas Pockets Closure
• Effort occurring in HS pockets at the expanded total purse seine effort – 7,439 days
• Effort removed from the fishery?• Or relocated to other high seas areas to the
east?– area of higher bigeye tuna catch-ability, so could
result in an increase in fishing mortality
FAD Closure
• Aug-Sep 2009, Jul-Sep 2010 (and onwards)• If effort distributions by quarter remain as per
historical average, FAD closure would result in approximately 20% reduction in PS FAD effort (outside of the domestic fisheries of Indonesia and Philippines) from 2010
• The % of FAD sets in total purse seine effort during the remaining 9 months of the year is a key uncertainty !
Summary of Purse Seine Measures
• Increase in effort to 52,304 days possible– 12% increase over previous record– ~30% in excess of 2001-2004 average
• Effect of HSP closures depends on whether effort is relocated or removed
• FAD effort at best equal to 2001-2004 average
Purse Seine Effort
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
Purs
e se
ine
effor
t (da
ys fi
shed
)
Unassociated sets
Associated sets
2001-2004 average TOTAL purse seine effort
2001-2004 average purse seine FAD effort
Longline Catch
• Phased reduction in longline bigeye catch, such that a 30% reduction is achieved from 2001-2004 levels (2004 for US, China and Indonesia) by 2011
• Reducing longline catch is not necessarily the same as reducing fishing mortality!!– If stock is reduced to a low level, longline catch
may not be limiting and effort and fishing mortality could rise
Longline Exemptions
• Does not apply to CCMs catching <2,000 t of bigeye in 2004. 2007 catches assumed.
• Does not apply to SIDS. 2007 catches assumed.
• Archipelagic waters excluded. This affects in particular Indonesia. 2007 catches assumed.
• China may maintain 2004 catches until 2011.• US has a limit equal to 90% of 2004 catch
(“fresh fish exemption”)
Projected Longline Catch
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
Long
line b
igey
e tu
na ca
tch
(ton
nes)
?70% of average 2001-2004 catch
Average 2001-2004 catch
Other Commercial Fisheries
• All except miscellaneous domestic fisheries in PH and ID have catches of bigeye < 2,000 t
• PH and ID domestic fisheries occur in archipelagic waters (?) and therefore excluded
• 2007 levels of fishing effort assumed
Indonesian and Philippines
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Catc
h of
smal
l big
eye
tuna
(mt)
Indonesia
Philippines
Projections
• 10 year projection 2009-2018• Alternative models with high and standard
purse seine catch• Future recruitment according to stock
recruitment relationship or 1998-2007 average recruitment
• Compute F2018/FMSY and SB2018/SBMSY for all scenarios
• Compare to F2001-2004/FMSY
Projection Scenarios0. 2007 effort continued for all fisheries1. CMM purse seine effort2. CMM longline catch3. HSP closure
a. Effort disappearsb. Effort relocated
4. FAD closure5. HSP closure + FAD closure
a. Effort disappearsb. Effort relocated
6. HSP closure + FAD closure + longline catch limita. Effort disappearsb. Effort relocated
Bigeye F2018/FMSY
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
F/F M
SY
0 1 2 3a 3b 4 5a 5b 6a 6b
Projection scenario - 2018 outcomes
SRR recruit
AV recruit
2001-2004 average
30% reduction objective
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
F/F M
SY
0 1 2 3a 3b 4 5a 5b 6a 6b
Projection scenario - 2018 outcomes
SRR recruit
AV recruit
2001-2004 average
30% reduction objective
Standard purse seine catches
Spill-sample purse seine catches
Bigeye SB2018/SBMSY
Standard purse seine catches
Spill-sample purse seine catches
0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.6
SB/S
B MSY
0 1 2 3a 3b 4 5a 5b 6a 6b
Projection scenario - 2018 outcomes
SRR recruit
AV recruit
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
SB/S
B MSY
0 1 2 3a 3b 4 5a 5b 6a 6b
Projection scenario - 2018 outcomes
SRR recruit
AV recruit
Conclusions – Bigeye• CMM 2008-01 will not achieve its objective of a 30%
reduction in F, and will not maintain SB at or above MSY levels
• The CMM fails because:– Longline catch reductions do not result in the required
reduction in F for adult bigeye– The increase in purse seine effort potentially allowed
under the CMM and increase in catch-ability since 2001 is not sufficiently offset by FAD and HSP closures to result in a reduction in F below 2001-2004 average levels
– The exclusion of archipelagic waters quarantines a large amount of juvenile F
Conclusions – Yellowfin
• F2018 could increase by as much as 15% above the 2001-2004 average level, depending on assumptions
• SB2018 remains above or approaches MSY levels, depending on assumptions
Post-SC5 Evaluations
• SC5 request SPC-OFP:– Further presentation of the outputs of the
projections, in particular spawning biomass trajectories and predicted catches;
– Examination of the impacts of various exemptions and ‘special’ provisions in CMM2008-01;
– Examination of the predicted impacts of additions/ changes to CMM-2008-01 provisions
– Evaluate the effect of the CMM on skipjack catches
Stock Trajectories
Long-term average recruitment Recent average recruitment
Specific Scenarios
OptionProjected F/Fmsy
Long-term av recruit.
Projected F/Fmsy
Recent recruit.
Full Implementation 1.80 2.09
No Exemptions 1.54 ( 32%) 1.49 (55%)
Complete High Seas Closure 1.79 ( 1%) 2.05 ( 4%)
No Foreign Vessel FAD Sets 1.74 ( 7%) 1.95 (13%)
No FAD Sets by Large LL Members 1.74 ( 7%) 2.01 ( 7%)
80% FAD Effort Reduction, 50% LL Catch & ID/PH Effort Reduction
1.00 (100%) 1.01 (99%)
Range of Reductions
Apparent Lack of Impact of PS Measures?
• ID/PH fisheries – If these are not limited, a component of PS reductions flow through to ID/PH
• LL fishery – for many projections, LL catch limit cannot be taken, and needs very high effort to get close. Therefore, gains from PS reductions will tend to get “sucked into” the LL fishery as it attempts to take its catch limit.