The Australian Fisheries Management Authority's managing director, Richard McLoughlin, claims Japan has been exceeding its quota of southern bluefin tuna for the last 20 years and not just by a few fish. In an article in today's Sydney Morning Herald entiled 'Revealed: how Japan caught and hid $2b worth of rare tuna' he claims they have been catching 3 times their quota.*
But last time I read-up on the issue, it was apparent Japan never agreed to operate within the quote that it had been allocated. This is what I wrote at this blog on 1st June last year:
"I was concerned to learn that the Southern bluefin tuna fishery is shared with Japan, Indonesia, Taiwan, Korea and New Zealand. The total global catch peaked in 1961 at 81,605 tonnes and was then in general decline for three decades. Since 1990 the total catch has ranged from between 13,231 tonnes (1994) to 19,588 tonnes (1999). Stock assessments suggest that the parental biomass is low but stable and unlikely to recover to target levels unless all countries agree to abide by national allocations as determined by the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna. While Australia apparently operates within its allocation, Japan has not agreed to operate within its allocation, and Indonesia does not recognise the Commission."
The Sydney Morning Herald article does not appear to have been properly research and it doesn't look like the Japanese were given an opportunity to tell their side of the story? Furthermore, is it appropriate for Mr McLoughlin to describe the Japanese action as 'fraud' if they never agreed to a quota?
-----------------
*According to the Sydney Morning Herald article: Mr McLoughlin was speaking at an ANU seminar in a speech recorded and posted on the internet and the official findings of an inquiry into the issue were presented at an international meeting in Canberra in July, but kept confidential. I've had a quick look for the speech on the internet but couldn't find it. If you can, please post the url as a comment or send me an email jennifermarohasy@jennifermarohasy.com.
More on the 25% here...
http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200603150187.html
Tagging bluefin tuna to prevent overfishing
03/15/2006
By Yasushi Sato, The Asahi Shimbun
Responding to an outcry over excessive fishing by Japan, the Fisheries Agency says that from April all southern bluefin tuna must be tagged when caught.
Under the requirement, each fish will be given a number along with the fishing boat's name, agency officials said.
In the 2004-05 fishing season, Japanese boats exceeded their quota of 6,065 tons by at least 1,500 tons, agency officials said.
The global quota, set by the Canberra-based Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT), was 14,080 tons.
Japan is allowed to catch the most tuna, followed by Australia at 5,265 tons and South Korea and Taiwan at 1,140 tons each.
Fatty southern bluefin tuna is highly favored as a sashimi dish.
The agency investigated Japan's excessive catch after Australia raised the issue at the annual CCSBT meeting in October.
To tighten control, the agency will allocate domestic quotas to each registered operator, officials said.
All tagged data will be reported to port authorities when ships return home.
The agency says a farm ministry ordinance will impose penalties on violators, a prison term of up to two years or a maximum fine of 500,000 yen.
Businesses that process or sell southern bluefin tuna caught in excess of the annual quota will be punished.
Previously, operators faxed in their total-catch reports to the agency, which instructed them to stop fishing when the international quota was reached.(IHT/Asahi: March 15,2006)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200608/s1720665.htm
Japan reserves comment on tuna catch claims
By Shane McLeod in Tokyo
Japan says it is premature to respond to allegations of over-fishing of southern blue fin tuna.
The Australian Fisheries Management Authority's chief executive, Richard McLoughlin, has accused Japan of repeatedly exceeding its quota of the tuna.
He says Japan has illegally taken $2 billion worth of southern blue fin tuna worldwide over the past 20 years.
Japan's Fisheries Ministry says it is premature to respond to the claims.
An official in Tokyo has told the ABC that research into alleged over-fishing by both Japanese boats and Australian tuna farmers was commissioned last year.
The official says it will be considered by a conservation body at its annual meeting in October.
The ministry announced earlier this year that Japan had exceeded its 2005 quota by 25 per cent.
-------
Seems that they are open about it there - I wonder where the rest of the fish are coming from?
Hi Ann,
I understand the point you are making regarding UNFA.
However the entirety of this Agreement is not universally accepted..
'With respect to the new Pacific convention based on UNFA, this has not yet been adopted into law and may never be adopted, as it is not liked by either Japan or Korea who are lobbying some of the Latin American countries to oppose it.'
It should also be noted that the wording of this agreement..
'the right of States party to the Agreement to monitor and inspect vessels of the other state parties, to verify compliance with internationally agreed fishing rules of regional fisheries organizations such as the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) and the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT)'..
means that if states are not signatories or have registered an objection to a quota limit then they could mount a legal challenge to another state unilateraly enforcing restrictions on their fishing vessels. A fact that the Agreement recognises by allowing for a..
'settlement mechanism to resolve conflicts in a peaceful manner.'
http://www.admiraltylaw.com/fisheries/Papers/unclos.htm
Seems like I'm not the only one thinking something smells about the leak of this allegation:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200608/s1713595.htm
Tuna Boat Owners Association president Brian Jeffriess says there is no hard evidence for them.
"That's a huge amount of fish and a huge amount of money - it's a bit hard to believe frankly," he said.
"Think again - people need to be careful to check some of that facts if they know them before they speculate.
"Pick on Japan happens to be flavour of the month and people need to be very careful about it."
---
I really want to hear more about this report now - but it seems that even once the facts come out they probably don't make as good headlines as such allegations.
I believe if you want to be any wiser on this issue you need a read-up on RFMOs( Regional Fisheries Management Organisations) and be familiar with:
The United Nations Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (in force as from 11 December 2001)
'while also hypocritically selling those catches to the Japanese market.'
Strangely the Japanese market saw no hypocrisy in buying those catches. :o)
Hi Jennifer,
Intoducing stricter quotas because there is a problem with the sustainability of a fishery, always means less fish after the quotas are introduced and that always means less fishermen if the quotas are strictly enforced.
The Minister is putting some coral trout fishers out of business because the industry has over capacity and is threatening the sustainability of the fishery and the Minister is in a position to do something about that to protect the livelyhoods of the remainig coral trout fishers with allocated quotas that can be enforced.
http://www.reef.crc.org.au/research/fishing_fisheries/statusfisheries/statusline.htm
The Minister is 'jumping up and down' about Minke whales because at present there is no IWC agreement about sustainability of the fishery, no guarantee over quota acceptance and no agreement over quota supervision. Until that changes the moratorium ensures that only a very limited number of minke whales are hunted, thus protecting the 'commons'.
Australia has signed up to the CCSBT where the Australian Fisheries Ministry is respecting the internationally recommended quota but the Japanese and Indonesian Fisheries Ministries are not. In the news reports the Minister appears to indicate that the only way to try to pressure the other parties into recognising and enforcing sustainable quotas is to remain in the CSSBT and continue to negotiate; I do not see how that is doing 'nothing' since as far as I am aware he cannot unilateraly declare the fishery protected.
What international agreement are you refering to that will improve on the CSSBT?
If the Japanese and Indonesian Fisheries Ministries will not recognise the CSSBT quotas, what makes you think they will respect any other agreement?
How do you propose the Australian government puts more 'pressure' on them if they ignore the CSSBT and in the case of the Japanese Fisheries Ministry, the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary as well?
There is a document by Masayuki "minke whales = cockroaches of the sea" Komatsu here from 1999 including some criticisms of Australia's SBT activities.
http://www.suisankai.or.jp/iken_e/iken99_e/ik005_e.html
Kind of old history now, but interesting reading.
"stocks declined because Australia's purse-seine vessels caught large numbers of juvenile, small tuna (i.e., those under 2 years of age and weighing approximately less than 10-20 kilograms). In response, Japan actively helped conserve and restore those stocks by providing the Australian fishing industry with massive sums of financial resources and technical support to reduce catches of juvenile and small-size SBT."
"Australia has increased its catches of juveniles and small fish-an approach that has a strongly negative impact in terms of the sustainable use of stocks - while also hypocritically selling those catches to the Japanese market."
Joint statement from the CCSBT after the recent meeting here:
http://www.ccsbt.org/docs/pdf/news/Statement_of_Position.pdf
"No conclusions have been reached and all matters are still under consideration.
Reporting of conclusions is premature and discussions around them will remain confidential until considered again at the October meeting."
Interesting that details of criticism of Japan's market controls were leaked.
One can but wonder what was said at the same meeting about Australia's southern bluefin farming operations. Perhaps this is what Jim Anderton was refering to.
Lamna nasus,
And the text at the link provided suggested:
"Maybe the solution is for the Australian government to put pressure on Indonesia and Japan. So why doesn't Minister Campbell put some efforts in here - rather than jumping up and down over whaling when Minke whales populations (the species the Japanese and Noreweigans want to harvest) are not under threat.
In summary, as I see it, coral trout and minke whales can be sustainably harvested but the Minister opposes whaling and is putting coral trout fishers out of business. The Minister acknowledges problems with the southern bluefin tuna fishery but will do nothing."
So I was suggesting that there is a need for an international agreement to avoid the 'tragedy of the commons'.