Nauru Agreement

Nauru Agreement

Nauru Agreement Concerning Cooperation In The Management Of Fisheries Of Common Interest
Signed	11 February 1982[1]
Location	Nauru
Effective	4 December 1982
Parties	Micronesia, Kiribati, the Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu
Depositary	Government of the Solomon Islands

The Nauru Agreement Concerning Cooperation In The Management Of Fisheries Of Common Interest, or The Nauru Agreement is an Oceania subregional agreement between the Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, the Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu.^[2] The eight signatories collectively control 25-30% of the world's tuna supply and approximately 60% of the western and central Pacific tuna supply.^[3]

Historically, the Nauru Agreement and other joint fishery management Arrangements made by the Parties to the Nauru Agreement (usually referred to as PNA) have been concerned mainly with the management of tuna purse-seine fishing in the tropical western Pacific.

Institutional arrangements

From its initial enactment in 1982, the implementation of the Nauru Agreement was coordinated by the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA). However a separate PNA Office was created in 2010, in Majuro, Marshall Islands.

Fishing rules

In October 2010, the eight member states Parties to the Nauru Agreement (PNA) extended their prohibition on tuna purse-seine fishing in approximately 4.5 million square kilometers of the Pacific Ocean high seas by purse-seine vessels licenced to fish in their combined Exclusive Economic Zones.^[2] The extension was unveiled at a meeting of the Technical and Compliance Committee of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission.

Other recent actions by the Parties to the Nauru Agreement include a prohibition on setting purse-seine nets around whale sharks, a ban on fishing near fish aggregation devices during the months of July, August and September, and a requirement for retention of all catch on board (no discards).

The range of fishery management measures^[4] implemented by the Parties to the Nauru Agreement includes:

• The Federated States of Micronesia Arrangement: which defines a multilateral licencing arrangement providing annual access to all PNA EEZs by purse-seine vessels which contribute significantly to the enhancement of a PNA country's (the Home Party) economic involvement in the fishery.
• The Palau Arrangement: which formerly set an agreed, binding, limit on the number of purse-seine vessels allowed to operate in PNA waters. The Palau Arrangement, through the Palau Arrangement Purse-seine Vessel Days Management Scheme, now limits the amount of effort (in terms of number of fishing days) that can be exercised by purse-seine vessels in PNA waters during any one calendar year.
• The Implementing Arrangements of the Nauru Agreement: There have been three of these, defining the measures that have been agreed by all Parties that will be implemented in the management of the activities of purse-seine vessels in their own EEZs, either through Regulations or licencing conditions. These include the measures highlighted above, such as the requirement not to licence any purse-seine vessel which also fishes in certain defined High Seas areas.

These PNA-specific measures are also supplemented by the Harmonized Minimum Terms and Conditions for Access to FFA member EEZs by Foreign Fishing Vessels, agreed by all FFA member countries including the Parties to the Nauru Agreement. These terms and conditions apply to all foreign fishing vessels, not just purse-seiners, and include a requirement for an Automatic Location Communicator to be switched on at all times and reporting to the regional Vessel Monitoring System, and a requirement for annual regional registration.

MSC certification

In 2010, PNA applied for certification from the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) which requires an independent assessment of fisheries by a third party before granting seafood sold from that territory permission to carry the blue MSC eco-label. MSC labeled seafood must originate from and be able to be traced back to a sustainable fishery.^[5] In the case of the PNA certification process, the third party was Moody Marine Inc. who has stated the PNA territory meets the guidelines required by MSC. Following the determination, several objections were filed and an independent adjudicator has been assigned.^[6]

Criticism

Critics of the MSC certification of PNA say that while the PNA fisheries have made efforts to ensure that their Western and Central Pacific skipjack fisheries are sustainable, there are still issues that prevent the region from deserving the MSC eco-label. Moody Marine determined that 70% of the skipjack catch falls under management of the PNA nations, however critics argue that because tuna is a highly migratory fish this percentage can be much lower at any given time and a majority percentage of the stock is found in poorly managed neighboring fisheries making it impossible for PNA to manage the entire stock.^[7] One of the MSC certification principles is that a fishery can obtain certification only if the entire fish stock(s) meet the MSC standard; in this case it is the Western and Central Pacific skipjack.

PNA has responded to this criticism in some depth ^[8], pointing out that it is not where the stock ranges, but where the fishing fleets range that is the important factor in fisheries management. And because the vast majority of the total catch of skipjack tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis) is consistently taken in areas subject to PNA management rules, the management measures exercised by PNA nations over the entire heartland of the stock are the key to conserving the status of the stock.

Fishing on the Western and Central Pacific Ocean skipjack tuna stock is currently agreed to be well within internationally-accepted precautionary limits^[9]. Even so, the MSC label is only being sought for skipjack that are caught from free schools, without the use of Fish Aggregation Devices (FADs) or other floating objects (including marine mammals and whale sharks). PNA small island developing states point out that this will provide an additional economic incentive for fleets to move to more sustainable fishing, on top of the conservation measures that have been introduced by PNA countries despite the criticisms emerging from some of the more developed WCPFC member nations.

WCPFC^[10] is a Regional Fisheries Management Organisation that was set up in 2004 with the expectation of managing the previously-unregulated high seas fisheries of the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. The member states of PNA joined WCPFC on the understanding that its primary role would be to develop the management of the high seas in compatibility with the increasingly stringent standards exercised within the Exclusive Economic Zones of the region^[11] , and that it would provide a forum for agreement between fishing states and coastal states on the overall limits that should be adhered to for the conservation of regional highly-migratory stocks of fish. PNA points out that for one particular fishery however - the skipjack purse-seine fishery - the fact that WCPFC does not yet have adequate powers to manage high seas fishing does not matter, since the vast majority of the skipjack catch in this - the biggest single tuna fishery in the world - is taken from waters subject to PNA management measures. WCPFC has a more critical role to play in the management of distant-water longlining^[12] and other fisheries for highly migratory species where fishing effort on the high seas is significant.

Award

The PNA was named the Organization of the Year for 2010 by the regional news magazine Islands Business^[13]

See also

• Niue Treaty

References

1. ^ "Membership Information for: Nauru Agreement Concerning Cooperation In The Management Of Fisheries Of Common Interest". International Environmental Agreements database project. http://iea.uoregon.edu/page.php?query=membership_long_form&mitch_id=2934. Retrieved 6 May 2011. 
2. ^ ^{a b} "Pacific Nations Extend Fishing Ban". Radio Australia (East West Center). 2010-10-05. http://pidp.eastwestcenter.org/pireport/2010/October/10-06-01.htm. Retrieved 2010-10-06. 
3. ^ http://klima-tuvalu.no/2011/04/13/pacific-islands-fighting-for-their-tuna/
4. ^ "PNA Fisheries Management Arrangements". Nauru Fisheries and Marine Resources website Regional Laws section. http://sites.google.com/site/naurufisheries/home/regional-laws. 
5. ^ "MSC Certification Requirements". MSC Scheme Requirements document from msc.org web site date=2011-8-15. http://www.msc.org/about-us/documents/scheme-documents/msc-scheme-requirements/copy_of_msc-certification-requirement. Retrieved 2011-11-19. 
6. ^ "In the matter of an objection to the final report and determination on the proposed certification of the PNA Western and Central Pacific Skipjack Tuna (Katsuwonis Pelamus) unassociated purse seine fishery in accordance with the MSC principles and criteria for sustainable fishing directions by the independent adjudicator". 2011-9-07. http://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/in-assessment/pacific/pna-western-and-central-pacific-skipjack-tuna/assessment-downloads-1/Directions_070911.pdf. Retrieved 2011-11-19. 
7. ^ "ISSF opposes MSC certification of skipjack fishery". 2011-8-10. http://fis.com/fis/worldnews/worldnews.asp?monthyear=8-%20%202011&day=10&id=45088&l=e&country=&special=&ndb=1&df=1. Retrieved 2011-11-19. 
8. ^ "Stakeholder submission from the Parties to the Nauru Agreement". 2011-7-1. http://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/in-assessment/pacific/pna-western-and-central-pacific-skipjack-tuna/assessment-downloads-1/PNA_comments_on_MSC_objections_to_Independent_Adjudication.pdf. Retrieved 2011-10-20. 
9. ^ "WCPO Skipjack Stock Status". http://iss-foundation.org/science/status-of-the-stocks/skipjack-western-pacific-ocean/. Retrieved 2011-10-20. 
10. ^ "WCPFC website". WCPFC Secretariat. http://www.wcpfc.int. Retrieved 20 October 2011. 
11. ^ "Pacific Island Tuna Fisheries: Bold New Steps". Samudra. http://icsf.net/icsf2006/uploads/publications/samudra/pdf/english/issue_58/art05.pdf. Retrieved 20 October 2011. 
12. ^ "Science proves PNA-initiated conservation of bigeye tuna is working". PNA News. 10 October 2011. http://www.pnatuna.com/science-proves-pna-initiated-conservation-bigeye-tuna-working-0. Retrieved 20 October 2011. 
13. ^ "IB Organization of the Year 2010". Islands Business (Islands Business). 2010-12-05. http://www.islandsbusiness.com/islands_business/index_dynamic/containerNameToReplace=MiddleMiddle/focusModuleID=19510/overideSkinName=issueArticle-full.tpl. Retrieved 2010-12-19. 

External links

• Treaty text
• PNA Office website
• FFA page on Parties to the Nauru Agreement
• PNA implementing legislation on the Nauru Fisheries website