OPAGAC FIP work plan FINAL v2opagac.org/.../2016/11/OPAGAC-FIP-work-plan-FINAL.pdf · The FIP encompasses all global tropical tuna stocks of ... by MSC Conformity Assessment Bodies

OPAGAC

FisheryImprovementProjectWorkPlan

September2016

FINAL

OPAGACFisheryImprovementProjectWorkPlan

September2016

1 Introduction

ThisdocumentpresentsafinaldraftworkplanfortheglobaltunaFisheryImprovementProject(FIP)byOPAGAC.ThisdocumentincorporatesinitialcommentsbyWWFandOPAGAConthedraft,aswellastheoutcomeofthemeetingoftheFIPAdvisoryGroup,heldinRome,10July2016.AlistofthemembersoftheFIPandAdvisoryGroupwhoattendedthemeetingisprovidedinAppendix1.NotethatparticipationintheAdvisoryGroupandattendanceatthismeetingdonotimplyagreementwiththecontentofthisWorkPlan.

Thedocumentisstructuredasfollows:themainreportprovidesbriefbackgroundintothecurrentsituationineachRFMOandtheoutcomeofthepre-assessmentandscopingphases(updatedtoJuly2016).ItthensetsouttheinitialactionsproposedfortheFIPinfivedetailedworkplanssettingouttheFIPactivities;oneforeachoceanforPrinciple1andPrinciple3andonecombinedforPrinciple2.Thesedetailedworkplansarebasedontheconclusionsof theAdvisoryGroupmeeting.Theworkplans for Principles 1 and 3 (Work Plans 1-4) cover only Year 1 of the five-year project, since thedetailedFIPactionsforYears2-5areclearlysubjecttoprogresswithineachRFMOs(whetherduetothisFIPornot)andhencesubjecttochange,notingthedetailsaretobemodifiedwithintheagreedtimeframeoftheImprovedPerformanceGoaltowhichtheyrelate(seeAppendix2).TheworkplanforPrinciple2(WorkPlan5)coversallfiveyearssinceitislesssubjecttoRFMOprogressandmorewithinthepowerofOPAGACtodeliveritself.

ItwasagreedthattheAdvisoryGroupwillmeetagainattheendofYear1toreviewprogressandconsiderthebestfuturecourse,atwhichitisproposedthattheFIPpreparedetailedworkplansforYear2alongthelinesofthosepresentedherefromYear1–andsoforthastheprojectprogresses.FollowingWWFrequirements,however,apreliminaryworkplanhasbeenpreparedforYear2-5forPrinciples1and3(WorkPlan6).

Appendix2ofthisreportprovidesthemilestones,responsiblepartiesandtimelinesforthefullfiveyearsoftheFIP;asagreedintheFIPScopingDocumentforthehigh-priorityPerformanceIndicators(PIs, those scoring <60) but with medium priority PIs (those scoring 60-79) also added. An MSCbenchmarkingspreadsheethasalsobeenpreparedforeachUoC.

NotethatthisreportshouldbereadalongsidetheotherFIPdocuments–thepre-assessment(MRAG2014),areview/updateofPrinciple2ofthepre-assessment(Gascoigne2015),areviewofthedraftscopingdocument(Gascoigne2016)andthefinalFIPscopingdocument(WWF2016).

2 BackgroundontheFIPandworkplan

2.1 Unitofcertification–species,geographiclocationandgearscoveredbytheFIP

TheMarineStewardshipCouncil (MSC)definestheunitofcertification(UoC)asthetargetstock(s)combinedwiththefishingmethod/gearandpractice(includingvesseltype/s)pursuingthatstock,andany fleets,orgroupsof vessels, or individual fishingoperators thatare coveredbyanMSC fisherycertificate(MSC-MSCIVocabulary,2014).

TheFIPencompassesallglobaltropicaltunastocksofthreespecies:bigeye(Thunnusobesus),skipjack(Katsuwonuspelamis)andyellowfin(Thunnusalbacares).UnitsofcertificationaregiveninTable1.

Table1.Unitsofcertification

Species Bigeyetuna

(BET)

Skipjacktuna

(SKJ)

Yellowfintuna

(YFT)

GeographicLocation

(RegionalFisheries

Management

Organisation)

AtlanticOcean(InternationalCommissionfortheConservationofAtlanticTunas;ICCAT)IndianOcean(IndianOceanTunaCommission;IOTC)EasternPacificOcean(Inter-AmericanTropicalTunaCommission;IATTC)WesternandCentralPacificOcean(WesternandCentralPacificFisheriesCommission;WCPFC)

Gear&

Method

Purseseine:Freeschool,FishAggregatingDevices(FADs),naturallogandothers

UnitsofCertification

(UoCs)13

2.2 ConsiderationsforImprovedPerformanceGoal(IPG)development

ThebasisforthedevelopmentoftheFIPworkplanisapreliminaryscoringofthefisheryundertheMSC standard. The scoring information is used to identify where OPAGAC fisheries will need todemonstrate improved performance in order to meet that MSC Fisheries Standard. ObserveddeficiencieswereusedtoformulateasetofspecificmilestonesindividuallyforeachMSCPIscoringbelow80(giveninAppendix2).ThesearelabelledbyWWFas‘improvedperformancegoals’(IPGs).AnIPGrelatingtoaPIscoring<60israted‘highpriority’andanIPGrelatingtoaPIscoring60-79israted ‘mediumpriority’or insomecases ‘low-priority’ (seebelow).High-priority IPGswereagreedbetweenWWFandOPAGACpriortodraftingthisworkplan,butmedium-andlow-priorityIPGshavebeenadded.

Inthecaseofthisfishery,theinitialscoringwascomplex,becausevariousdifferentsetsofscoresaregivenindifferentdocumentsorsources:

• Theinitialpre-assessment(MRAG2014)providesarelativelydetailedscoringofthefisheryforallthreePrinciplesunderMSCstandardversion1.3.

• Principle 2 of the pre-assessmentwas reviewed and updated to version 2.0 in Gascoigne(2015).

• Someelementsofthepre-assessment(mainlyPrinciple1)arenowsomewhatoutofdateinthe Scoping Document (WWF 2016), so where necessary, updated information has beenprovided in thisdocument (below)andscoringhasbeenupdated forsomePIs (where thescoringissummarisedbelowthisupdatingisindicated).

• Various WWF and other sources (e.g. WWF comments on ongoing and completed MSCassessment,theadjudicationontheEchebastarobjection)indicatethatsomescoresshouldbedifferenttothosegiveninthepre-assessment,aswellasthosethathavebeenharmonisedby MSC Conformity Assessment Bodies (CABs) as part of completed or ongoing MSCassessmentsandthosesuggestedbyMSCinterpretationonthescoringofthePIonharvestcontrolrules(circulatedtoCABs16December2015)(thesearealsoindicatedinthescoringsummarybelow). In the casewhere there is conflictbetweendifferent interpretations,byagreementwithWWFandOPAGAC,theinterpretationfavouredbyWWFhasbeenusedtodefinethescore.PIsscoring<60basedonthisscoringsystemarealwayshigh-priority,but

thosewhere theWWF score is 60-79whileother interpretations suggest a scoreof 80orabovehavebeenrankedaslowratherthanmediumpriority.

WWFinitiallyproposeddevelopinganIPGforeachdeficientPI.However,wherepractical,ithasbeenagreedthatclosely-relatedissuesshouldbecombinedintoasingleIPG.Forexample,thereisoneIPGperstockthatrequiresimprovementforPI1.1.1(stockstatus)andPI1.1.2(rebuilding).IPGswerealsoaggregatedacrossstocksiftheyappliedequallytoallstocksinagivenocean(e.g.developingaharveststrategyforallstocksunderagivenRFMO).UnderPrinciple2,PIswereaggregatedwherethesamespeciesfallsunderadifferentPI indifferentoceans(e.g.somesharksareprotected insomeoceansbutnotothers–hencewouldfallunder2.3.1-3wheretheyareprotected,butotherwise2.2.1-3). Otherwise, the approach towriting IPGs followsWWF guidelines on action plans for FisheriesImprovementProjects(WWF2013).

2.3 Considerationsforworkplandevelopment

TheworkplanshavebeendevelopedbasedonthemilestonessetoutintheIPGs,butfocusontheconcreteactionstobetakenbytheFIPratherthanthemeasureofoverallprogressinthemanagementofeachfishery.ThereisthereforenecessarilysomedisconnectbetweentheIPGsinAppendix2andtheworkplanssetoutbelow,sinceitisnotwithinthepowerofOPAGACalonetodeliverimprovedmanagement(thisisalwaysafeatureofaFIP).Nevertheless,theworkplanscross-referencetoeachIPG,toensurethattheFIPistakingactiontoaddresseachindividualIPG.(Theexceptiontothisisthelow-priorityIPGs,wherenoconcreteactionshavebeendefinedforthemeantime,althoughtheFIPmaychoosetodosoatalaterdate.)

ThedetailedYear1workplansarebasedlargelyontheoutcomeoftheAdvisoryGroupmeeting.ThemoregeneralworkplanforYears2-5assumesthattheprojectwillcontinueinthesamevein,butasnotedaboveitissubjecttoreviewandrevisionafterYear1.

IthasbeenagreedthatYear1willstartwhenthisworkplanisfinalised(i.e.autumn2016).

3 Currentstatusoffisheries

ThissectionprovidesabriefsummaryofthesituationineachoceanasofJuly2016:statusofeachstock,progresstowardsaharveststrategyframework,MSC-certifiedfisheriesandtheirconditions.Itthenprovidesasummaryoftheconclusionsofthevariouspre-assessmentreportsforthisfisheryintableform.

3.1 Atlantic(ICCAT)

ThemostrecentstockassessmentsforICCATstocksaresummarisedinTable2.Notethatforbigeye,theassessmentpost-dates thepre-assessment (MRAG2014),andtheestimateofstockstatushasdeteriorated since the pre-assessment – it is now considered that the stock is overfished andoverfishingisoccurring(2015stockassessment).ThisistakenintoaccountintheFIPworkplan.

Table2.SummaryofstockstatusinrelationtoreferencepointsforICCATtropicaltunastocks,accordingtothemostrecentassessments(seeMRAG2014,exceptforbigeye–ICCAT2015).Colour-coding:green=stockonright side of reference point; yellow = stock on wrong side of reference point; white = stock has ~equalprobability of above or below reference point. (Note: Don’t confuse this colour-coding withMSC scoring.)Probabilityofconclusioninrelationtoconfidenceintervalsgivenwherepossible(confidenceintervalsnotgivenforskipjack).Note:Breferstospawningbiomass.

ICCATstock Limitref.

point

Targetref.

points

Dateofmost

recentassessment

Conclusionofassessment

relativetoref.point:

FMSY BMSY

SkipjackE. none FMSY,BMSY 2014 SkipjackW. none FMSY,BMSY 2014 Yellowfin none FMSY,BMSY 2011 p<0.9 p<0.9Bigeye none FMSY,BMSY 2015 p<0.9 p<0.9

InRecommendations14-01and15-01,ICCATestablishedamulti-annualmanagementplanfortropicaltunas,updatingcatchlimitsonbigeyeandyellowfinputinplaceoriginallyin2010(Rec.10-01).InRec.15-07ICCAThassetaframeworkfordevelopingaharveststrategyforeachstock,whichincludestheelements requiredbyMSC (i.e. suitable objectives or targets and limits, harvest control rules andmanagementstrategyevaluation).Bothof theseRecommendationspost-date thepre-assessment,butaretakenintoaccounthere.

TherearecurrentlynoAtlanticfisheriesforthesespecieswhichareMSCcertifiedorinassessment.

3.2 IndianOcean(IOTC)

Themost recent stock assessments for IOTC stocks are summarised in Table 3. For skipjack andyellowfin, theassessmentspost-date thepre-assessment (MRAG2014), and theestimateof stockstatusforyellowfinhasdeterioratedsincethepre-assessment–itisnowconsideredthatthestockisoverfishedandoverfishingisoccurring(2015stockassessment).ThisistakenintoaccountintheFIPworkplan.

Table3.SummaryofstockstatusinrelationtointerimreferencepointsforIOTCtropicaltunastocks,accordingto the most recent assessments (MRAG 2014 for bigeye; the others are available here:http://www.iotc.org/science/status-summary-species-tuna-and-tuna-species-under-iotc-mandate-well-other-species-impacted-iotc).Colour-coding:green=stockonrightsideofreferencepoint;yellow=stockonwrongsideofreferencepoint;white=stockhas~equalprobabilityofaboveorbelowreferencepoint.(Note:Don’tconfusethiscolour-codingwithMSCscoring.)Probabilityofconclusioninrelationtoconfidenceintervalsgivenwherepossible(confidenceintervalsnotgivenforbigeye).Note:Breferstospawningbiomass.

IOTC

stock

Limitref.

points

Target

ref.

points

Dateofmost

recent

assessment

Conclusionofassessmentrelativetoref.

point:

Flim Blim

(MSY)

Blim

(B0)

FMSY BMSY

Skipjack 0.4BMSY,1.5FMSYor0.2B0,F0.2B0

FMSY,BMSY

2014 p>0.95 p>0.95 p>0.9

Yellowfin 0.4BMSY,1.4FMSYor0.2B0,F0.2B0

FMSY,BMSY

2015 p<0.9 p>0.9 p>0.9 p>0.9 p>0.9

Bigeye 0.5BMSY,1.3FMSYor0.2B0,F0.2B0

FMSY,BMSY

2013

IOTC’sConservationandManagementMeasure (CMM)15-10 (replacing13-10) sets interimtargetandlimitreferencepointsanda‘decisionframework’whichsetsmanagementobjectives(basedontheinterimreferencepoints)andrequirestheScientificCommitteetoproposeharvestcontrolrulesfor evaluation by the Commission. CMM15-11 (replacing 13-11) requires Contracting Parties andCooperating Non-Contracting Parties (CPCs) to limit capacity, including fish aggregating devices(FADs).The2013versionsofthesearetaken intoaccount inthepre-assessment,andtheupdatedversionsarenotgreatlydifferent.In2016,IOTCadoptedaninterimrebuildingplanfortheyellowfinstock(CMM16-01),recognisingthatthismeasuredoesnotmeettheScientificCommittee’sadviceonthecatchreductionrequiredtorebuildthestock.IOTCalsoadoptedaformalinterimharvestcontrolruleforskipjack(CMM16-02).ThesehavebeenincludedintheFIPworkplan.

TheonlyIndianOceantunafisherywhichhasreceivedMSCcertificationistheMaldivespoleandlinefishery–Maldivesskipjackremainscertifiedfollowingthemostrecentsurveillanceaudit(April2016)buttheiryellowfinfisheriescertificationissuspended.TheEchebastarfishery(forallthreespecies)wasnotcertified,followinganobjectionsprocessrelatingtoPI1.2.2(harvestcontrolrules);theyarenowreportedlyalsoenteringaFIP.

3.3 EasternPacific(IATTC)

Themost recent stock assessments for IATTC stocks are summarised in Table 4. For skipjack andyellowfin, theassessmentpost-dates thepre-assessment (MRAG2014), and theestimateof stockstatusforyellowfinhasdeterioratedsincethepre-assessment–itisnowconsideredthatthestockisoverfished(2015stockassessment);fishingmortalityisapproximatelyattheMSYlevel.ThisistakenintoaccountintheFIPworkplan.Forskipjack,MSY-basedreferencepointscannotbeestimated,butavarietyofindirectindicatorssuggestthatthestockisingoodshape.

Table4.SummaryofstockstatusinrelationtointerimreferencepointsforIATTCtropicaltunastocks,accordingto themost recent assessments (Maunder 2016,Minte-Vera et al. 2016,Aires-da-Silva et al. 2016). Colour-coding:green=stockonrightsideofreferencepoint;yellow=stockonwrongsideofreferencepoint;white=stockhas~equalprobabilityofaboveorbelowreferencepoint.(Note:Don’tconfusethiscolour-codingwithMSCscoring.)Probabilityofconclusioninrelationtoconfidenceintervalsgivenwherepossible.NoteBreferstospawningbiomasswhich IATTCstockassessmentsrefertoasS,but iscalledBhereforconsistencywiththeotherRFMOs.

IATTC

stock

Limitref.point Target

ref.point

Dateofmost

recent

assessment

Conclusionofassessmentrelative

toref.point:

Flim Blim FMSY BMSY

Skipjack B0.5R0,F0.5R0 FMSY,BMSY 2012 Yellowfin B0.5R0,F0.5R0=

0.28BMSY,2.42FMSYFMSY,BMSY 2016 p>0.95 p>0.95 close

toFMSYclosetoBMSY

Bigeye B0.5R0,F0.5R0=0.38BMSY,1.6FMSY

FMSY,BMSY 2016 p>0.95 p>0.95 closetoFMSY

closetoBMSY

Sincethepre-assessment(MRAG2014), IATTChasagreed interimreferencepointsforthetropicaltunastocksandaninterimHarvestControlRule(HCR)(thataimstokeepFatorbelowFMSY)(IATTC-87Minutes,July2014;IATTCRes.C-16-02;paperSAC-07-07g;MaunderandDeriso2016).Therehavealsobeensomemeasuresinplacetolimitcapacitysince2002(Res.C-02-03).Since2004,IATTChasestablishedaseriesofeffort-limitationmeasures,includingvariousareaandseasonalclosuresforthepurseseinefleet(Res.C-02-04,C-04-09,C-13-01).

TherearenoMSC-certifiedEasternPacific tuna fisheriesatpresent.TheNEtropicalPacific fishery(Mexico)foryellowfinandskipjack(purseseinedolphin-associatedandfreeschool)isinassessment(PCDRpublishedFebruary2016;SCS2016)andtheCABproposescertificationwithnoconditionsonPrinciple1,basedlargelyonMaunderandDeriso2016(SAC-07-07g),althoughthisisnotfinal–theCABisrespondingtocommentsattimeofwriting;theFinalReportwasduetobepublishedinAugust2016accordingtothetimelineontheMSCwebsitebutattimeofwriting(September2016)nothingwasavailable.ThreepurseseinecompaniesinEcuadorarerunningaFIP,andithasbeenforeseenthatthisprojectwillworkcloselywiththemintheeasternPacific.

3.4 WesternPacific(WCPFC)

ThemostrecentstockassessmentsforWCPFCstocksaresummarisedinTable5.Thesepost-datethepre-assessment(MRAG2014),buttheconclusionsoftheassessmentshavenotchangedsignificantly.

Table5.SummaryofstockstatusinrelationtoreferencepointsforWCPFCtropicaltunastocks,accordingtothemostrecentassessments(Daviesetal.2014,Harleyetal.2014,Riceetal.2014).Colour-coding:green=stockon right sideof referencepoint; yellow= stockonwrong sideof referencepoint;white= stockhas~equalprobability of above or below reference point. (Note: Don’t confuse this colour-coding withMSC scoring.)Probabilityofconclusion in relationtoconfidence intervalsgivenwherepossible.NoteBrefers tospawningbiomass.

WCPFC

stock

Limitref.

point

Target

ref.point

Dateofmost

recentassessment

Conclusionofassessment

relativetoref.point:

LRP TRP BMSY

Skipjack 20%BF=0 50%BF=0 2014 p>0.95 p<0.95 p>0.95Yellowfin 20%BF=0 FMSY 2014 p>0.95 p<0.95 p~=0.95Bigeye 20%BF=0 FMSY 2014 p~=0.5 p>0.95 p<0.95

InCMM2014-06WCPFChavesetaframeworkfordevelopingaharveststrategyforeachstock,whichincludestheelementsrequiredbyMSC(i.e.suitableobjectivesortargetsandlimits,harvestcontrolrulesandmanagementstrategyevaluation).WCPFChasalsoagreedaworkplanforCMM2014-06foreachofthemaintargetspecies.NotethatthisCMMandworkplanpost-datethepre-assessmentofthisfishery(MRAG2014),buthavebeenincludedhere.Theagreementofatargetreferencepointforskipjack(CMM2015-06)wasincludedintheworkplanfor2015andaninterimtargetwasadoptedasscheduled.WCPFChasalsohadvariousmeasures inplace for limiting capacity since2013 (CMMs2013-01,2014-01and2015-01).

Forskipjack,therearethreecertifiedfisheries(PNAandTriMarinepurseseinefree-school;SolomonIslandspurseseineanchoredFADandunassociated,andpoleandlinefree-school)andonefisheryinassessment (Japan pole and line). At the recentMSC pilot harmonisationmeeting for Principle 1assessmentofWCPFCstocks,itwasagreedamongtheCABsthatallretainconditionson1.2.1and1.2.2,withPNAallowedtorolltheseconditionsoverintore-assessmentfollowingMSCguidance,andthattheconditionmilestoneswouldbealignedwiththeCMM2014-06workplan.

Foryellowfin,therearefourcertifiedfisheries(PNAandTriMarinepurseseinefree-schoolandWalkerSeafoodsAustralialongline;SolomonIslandspurseseineanchoredFADandunassociated,andpoleandlinefree-school)andoneinassessment(CookIslandslongline).Thepilotharmonisationmeetingcametothesameconclusionforyellowfinasforskipjack,i.e.thatcertificationshouldbesubjecttoongoingconditionson1.2.1and1.2.2.

There are no MSC certifications with WCPFC bigeye as the target species. None of the certifiedfisherieshaveconditionsonbigeyeunderPrinciple2.

3.5 Summaryoutcomeofpre-assessmentsforOPAGACfisheriesineachoceans

Thesummaryoutcomeofthepre-assessmentsforthisfishery(MRAG2014;Gascoigne2015)aregivenbelow (Tables 6, 7 & 8). Note that the outcome for Principle 1 has been updated based on theassessment above of progress since the pre-assessment by the various RFMOs. Principle 2 andPrinciple 3 have not been updated (although Principle 2 ismore recent). The FIP IPGs have beendevelopedbasedontheseoutcomes.Asnotedabove,wherethescoringofPIsissubjecttodifferentinterpretations,theWWFinterpretationhasbeenusedhere.

Table6.Outcomeofpre-assessment(MRAG2014,updatedasnotedabove)foreachstockforPrinciple1(P1),asupdatedfollowingtheaboveevaluationofprogresssincethepre-assessmentbyeachRFMO.

PerformanceIndicator Scoringissue ICCAT IOTC IATTC WCPFCSKJ-E SKJ-W YFT BET SKJ YFT BET SKJ YFT BET SKJ YFT BET

1.1.1 Stockstatus a.StockstatusrelativetoPRI b.StockstatusrelativetoMSY

1.1.2 Stockrebuilding a.Rebuildingtimeframes n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a b.Rebuildingevaluation n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

1.2.1 Harveststrategy a.Harveststrategydesign b.Harveststrategyevaluation c.Harveststrategymonitoring d.Harveststrategyreview

1.2.2 Harvestcontrolrulesandtools

a.HCRdesignandapplication b.HCRrobustnesstouncertainty c.HCRevaluation

1.2.3 Information/monitoring

a.Rangeofinformation b.Monitoring c.Comprehensiveness

1.2.4 Assessmentofstockstatus

a.Appropriateforstock b.Assessmentapproach c.Uncertainty d.Evaluation e.Peerreview

Highpriority

Mediumpriority

Lowpriority

n/a–notapplicable

Table7.Outcomeofpre-assessmentforPrinciple2(P2)foreachocean(MRAG2014asrevisedinGascoigne2015),withsomeexplanatorycomments–furtherdetailsaregivenbelow.

Component PI Scoringissue ICCAT IOTC IATTC WCPFCPrimaryspecies

2.1.1 Outcome

a.Mainprimaryspp AssumingP1IPGsinplaceforallstocks b.Minorprimaryspp 2.1.2

Management

a.Strategyinplace AssumingP1IPGsinplaceforallstocksb.Evaluation c.Implementation d.Sharkfinning e.Alternativemeasures

2.1.3

Information

a.Infoformainspp AssumingP1IPGsinplaceforallstocksb.Infoforminorspp c.Infoformanagement

Secondaryspecies

2.2.1

Outcome

a.Mainprimaryspp Issueswithvariousspecies(seebelow)b.Minorprimaryspp

2.2.2

Management

a.Strategyinplace b.Evaluation c.Implementation Issueswithvariousspecies d.Sharkfinning e.Alternativemeasures Evaluationofcodeofpractice

2.2.3

Information

a.Infoformainspp Silkysharkentanglement b.Infoforminorspp c.Infoformanagement

ETPspecies

2.3.1

Outcome

a.National/Internationallimits b.Directeffects Issueswithvarious

species

c.Indirecteffects FADentanglement2.3.2

Management

a/b.Strategyinplace FADentanglement,cetaceansc.Evaluation FADentanglement,codeofpracticeevaluationd.Implementation Codeofpractice

e.Alternativemeasures Evaluationofcodeofpractice2.3.3

Information

a.Forassessingimpacts Evaluationofobserverdata,FADentanglementb.Formanagement CodeevaluatedatICCATonly;evaluationatIOTC

underwayHabitats 2.4.1 Outcome all Nohabitatimpacts

2.4.2 Management all 2.4.3 Information all

Ecosystem 2.5.1 Outcome a.Status EcosystemimpactofFADs

2.5.2

Management

a.Strategyinplace FADmanagementplans/closuresb.Evaluation ImpactofFADmanagementunclearc.Implementation ImplementationofFADmanagementunclear

2.5.3

Information

a.Informationquality EcosystemimpactofFADsb.Fisheryimpacts c.Componentfunctions d.Informationrelevance e.Monitoring

Highpriority

Mediumpriority

Lowpriority

Table8.Outcomeofpre-assessment(MRAG2014)foreachRFMOforPrinciple3(P3),asupdatedfollowingtheaboveevaluationofprogresssincethepre-assessmentbyeachRFMO.Key:*=PIswithIPGsdesignatedaslow-priorityratherthanmedium-priority(seeSection2.2above).

PerformanceIndicator Scoringissue ICCAT IOTC IATTC WCPFC

3.1.1 Legalframework a.Lawsforeffectivemanagement b.Disputeresolution c.Respectforrights

3.1.2 Consultation,rolesandresponsibilities a.Rolesandresponsibilities b.Consultation c.Participation

3.1.3 Long-termobjectives a.Objectives

3.2.1 Fishery-specificobjectives a.Objectives *

3.2.2 Decision-makingprocesses a.Processes b.Responsiveness * * * *c.Precautionaryapproach * d.Accountabilityandtransparency *e.Approachtodisputes

3.2.3 Complianceandenforcement a.MCSimplementation b.Sanctions *c.Compliance * *d.Systematicnon-compliance

3.2.4 Managementevaluation a.Evaluationcoverage b.Review

Highpriority

Mediumpriority

Lowpriority

4 FIPYear1workplans4.1 Year1workplanfortheAtlanticOcean(ICCAT)–Principle1andPrinciple3

Issuestobeaddressed

ForICCATstocks,forPrinciple1therearefourhighpriorityIPGs(1.2.1and1.2.2forallfourstocks,1.1.1+1.1.2foryellowfinandbigeye)andtwomediumpriorityIPGs(1.2.3forE.andW.skipjack)(seeTable6).ForICCATstocksforPrinciple3therearefourmedium-priorityIPGs(3.1.1,3.1.2,3.1.3and3.2.3)andonelow-priority(3.2.2)(seeTable8).

ThekeyissuesforICCATstocks(Principles1and3)aresummarisedinTable9,basedonTables6and8above.

Table9.SummaryofkeyissuesforICCATstocksforPrinciple1andPrinciple3

PI Bigeye Yellowfin Skipjack(E) Skipjack(W)

1.1.1 B<BMSY,F>FMSY;catchlimit(Rec.15-01)notlikelytorebuildstock

B<BMSY;catchlimit(Rec.15-01)shouldrebuildstockbuttimeframeunclear

1.1.2

1.2.1 Lackofwell-definedharvestcontrolrulewhichcanacttoadjustfishingmortalityinresponsetochangesinstockstatus;alsolackofagreedlimitreferencepoints(Recs.15-01and15-07areastart)

1.2.2

1.2.3 Insufficientinformationtosupporttheharveststrategy;nogoodproxymeasureofbiomass

1.2.4 3.1.1 ICCATdisputeresolutionframeworkdoesnotmeetrequirementsofbestpractice(e.g.

inapplyingarbitrationorconciliationprocedures)andcaninhibitthefullapplicationofconservationmeasures

3.1.2 Rolesandresponsibilitiesnotclearlyunderstoodbysomemembers–mayleadtofailuresintheapplicationofnecessarycontrolsorsubmissionofdata

3.1.3 ICCATlong-termobjectivesarenotexplicitlyconsistentwiththeprecautionaryapproachandanecosystemapproachtomanagement

3.2.1 3.2.2 Responsivenessandprecautionaryapproachindecision-making3.2.3 Sanctionsmaynotbeaneffectivedeterrenttonon-compliance,takingtheexampleof

thebluefintunafishery3.2.4

WORKPLAN1:Year1workplanfortheAtlanticOcean(ICCAT)–Principle1andPrinciple3Note:ThisworkplanendsattheICCATplenaryinNovember2017;i.e.itoverrunstheendofYear1byasmallamount.Activity(moredetailsgiveninindividualIPGs,Appendix2) Workinggroup EndingdateA.Harveststrategyandcontrolrules,stockrebuildingMSCPIs:1.2.1,1.2.2(allstocks);1.1.1and1.1.2(yellowfinandbigeye);IPGs1-4;highpriorityA1 EnsureasfaraspossiblethattheSCRSprovidesadvicetothe

Commissionasrequiredby15-07OPAGACtoworkontheSCRSwithscientistsfromtheEUandfromcountrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag

SCRSmeeting3Oct.2016,orby2017(Year1)

A2 StartbuildingacoalitiontosupportandlobbyforanimprovedharveststrategyandharvestcontrolrulesforICCATstocks–forminformal‘ICCATharveststrategygroup’toprogressdevelopment.

OPAGACtoapproach:coastalstateswithwhichithasarelationship;otherfisheriesinFIPorunderMSCassessment(ifany);EU;countrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag;WWF

ICCAT2016plenarymeeting14Nov.2016(butalsoongoing)(Year1ongoing)

A3 EvaluateexamplesforthedevelopmentofaharveststrategyandcontrolrulesforICCATtropicaltunastocks:e.g.existingICCATprogressforNorthAtlanticalbacore,IOTCskipjackprocess,WCPFCworkplanforCMM14-06.

MembersofAdvisoryGroup,ISSFor‘ICCATharveststrategygroup’maybeapproachedforadviceandsupport

EndSeptember2016(Year1)

A4 Proposeadraftworkplanandtimetablefortheimplementationof15-07foreasternskipjacktotheAdvisoryGroupandthe‘harveststrategygroup’forreview.Note:TheworkplanshouldbeconsistentwiththemilestonessetoutinAppendix2,ifpossible.

OPAGAC/AdvisoryGroupmembers/‘harveststrategygroup’/ISSF

October2016(Year1)

A5 Proposeaworkplanandtimetabletothe2016ICCATplenaryfortheimplementationof15-07foreasternskipjack

OPAGAC/EU ICCAT2016plenarymeeting14Nov.2016(Year1)

A6 Ifeasternskipjackworkplanandtimetableagreedinplenary,developdraftstrategyforimplementation;ifnot,startworkonrevisedversionbasedoncommentsreceivedinplenaryandbyotherstakeholders

ICCATharveststrategygroupwithotherlikemindedstakeholders

Startinginearly2017(Year1);ongoing

A7 StartdiscussionswithABNJorothersourcesaboutbudgetarysupportfor

implementationofproposedharveststrategyworkplanforeasternskipjackandtheotherstocks

OPAGACwithsupportandadvicefromABNJparticipants(e.g.WWF,ISSF)

Year1andongoing

A8 StartdiscussionswithABNJaboutworkingwiththemoncapacitybuilding(regardingharveststrategyandcontrolrules)intheinter-sessionalperiod

OPAGACwithsupportfromABNJparticipants(e.g.WWF,ISSF)

Year1andongoingasrequired

A9 RequestadvicefromSCRSonthelimitsrequiredtorebuildyellowfinandbigeyewithintheMSCrequiredtimetable(seeMSCFCRGversion2.0,PI1.1.2)(dependingonoutcomeof2016yellowfinstockassessment);orifnotacceptedrequestsuchadvicefromEUscientists(e.g.AZTI).

OPAGACwithEU,countrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag,ISSFandother‘harveststrategygroup’members

ICCAT2016plenarymeeting14Nov.2016(Year1)

A10 Inter-sessionalmeetings/discussionsofthe‘harveststrategygroup’priorto2017plenary:i)developlobbyingstrategyforimplementationofeasternskipjackworkplanifagreedinplenary;ii)developworkplansfortheimplementationof14-06fortheotherthreestocks,plusrevisedeasternskipjackworkplanifnotapprovedin2016;iii)developlobbyingstrategyfornextplenarytoensureapprovalofalltheoutstandingworkplans.NotethatworkplansforbigeyeandyellowfinshouldbebasedonadvicefromSCRSorelsewhereastomeasuresrequiredforanappropriaterebuildingtimeframe(seeA9);alsothattheworkplansneedtotakeintoaccountthetimetablefordatacollectionandstockassessment(e.g.inrelationtothelarge-scaletaggingprogrammewhichhasjuststarted).

OPAGAC/‘harveststrategygroup’/WWF/ISSF

OngoingfromNovember2016(Year1ongoing)

A11 Worktoenlarge‘harveststrategygroup’priorto2017plenary,basedontheoutcomeofcapacitybuildingwithABNJ,orotherconnections

OPAGAC/‘harveststrategygroup’/ABNJ/ISSF

Year1ongoing

A12 Proposeadraftworkplanandtimetablefortheimplementationof15-07foralloutstandingstocksto‘harveststrategygroup’forreview.Note:TheworkplanshouldbeconsistentwiththemilestonessetoutinAppendix2,ifpossible.

OPAGAC endYear1

A13 Proposeaworkplanandtimetabletothe2016ICCATplenaryfortheimplementationof15-07foreasternskipjack(ifnotpreviouslyaccepted)andtheotherthreestocks

OPAGAC/EU/‘harveststrategygroup’/countrieswhereOPAGAC

ICCAT2017plenarymeeting(startYear2)

member-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag/ISSF

A14 LobbyICCATplenary2017forimplementationofeasternskipjackworkplan,ifagreedin2016

OPAGAC/‘harveststrategygroup’/ISSF

ICCAT2017plenarymeeting(startYear2)

A15 PresentapaperonHCRstoSCRSandworkinggroupsasrequired OPAGAC/‘harveststrategygroup’/ISSF

Year1

B.InformationMSCPI:1.2.3;IPGs5-6;skipjackEandW;mediumpriorityB1 WorkwithmembersofSCRSortherelevantWorkingGrouptoidentify

mostsignificantdatagapsforEasternandWesternAtlanticskipjackOPAGAC/SCRSorWorkingGroup Year1

B2 EvaluatedatagapswhichOPAGACcanhelpfill(e.g.byhostingscientificobservers,takingsamples,supportingaresearchproject,loggingdataonboardorothermeans).Inparticular,identifywhetherOPAGACdatacanprovideasuitableabundanceindicator.

OPAGAC/SCRSorWorkingGroupmembers

Year1

B3 Prepareaworkplanorresearchproposalbasedontheaboveanalysis(datagapsandpossibleOPAGACsupport)

OPAGAC/SCRSorWorkingGroupmembers;AdvisoryGroupmembersmayprovideadvice

endYear1(late2017)

C.ManagementsystemMSCPIs:3.1.1,3.1.2,3.1.3,3.2.3;IPGs7-11;allstocks;mediumpriorityC1 RequesttheEUand/orotherrelevantstakeholderstodevelopastrategy

forimprovingtheICCATmanagementframeworkEU/countrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag/otherrelevantstakeholders

Year1andongoing

C2 RequesttheEUand/orotherrelevantstakeholderstocontinueinter-sessionaldiscussionsonimplementingthestrategybetweenlike-mindedICCATmembersandorganizationsandformallyateachICCATmeeting:includingdisputeresolution,rolesandresponsibilities,long-termobjectivesandsanctions

EU/countrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag/otherrelevantstakeholders

Year1andongoing

C3 RequesttheEUand/orotherrelevantstakeholderstoproposeapapertotheICCATSecretariatgivingoptionsforbestpracticeindisputeresolution,includingexamplesfromotherRFMOsifrelevant

EU/countrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag/otherstakeholders

PriortoICCATplenary2017(endYear1)

4.2 Year1workplanfortheIndianOcean(IOTC)–Principle1andPrinciple3

Issuestobeaddressed

ForIOTCstocks,forPrinciple1therearethreehigh-priorityIPGs(1.2.1and1.2.2forallthreestocks;1.1.1+1.1.2foryellowfin)andonelow-priorityIPG(1.2.3allstocks)(seeTable6).ForIOTCstocksforPrinciple 3 there are threemedium-priority IPGs (3.1.2, 3.1.3 and 3.2.3) and one low-priority IPG(3.2.3).

ThekeyissuesforIOTCstocks(Principles1and3)aresummarisedinTable10,basedonTables6and8above.

Table10.SummaryofkeyissuesforIOTCstocksforPrinciple1andPrinciple3

PI Bigeye Yellowfin Skipjack

1.1.1 B<TRPs,rebuildingplan(CMM16-01)insufficient

1.1.2 1.2.1 Lackofwell-definedharvestcontrolrulewhichcanact

toadjustfishingmortalityinresponsetochangesinstockstatus(CMM15-10providesaframework)

HCRinplace(CMM16-02);implementationnotyetclear

1.2.2

1.2.3 ComprehensivenessofinformationforsomeCPCs1.2.4 3.1.1 3.1.2 Rolesandresponsibilitiesnotclearlyunderstoodbysomemembers–mayleadto

failuresintheapplicationofnecessarycontrolsorsubmissionofdata3.1.3 IOTClong-termobjectivesarenotexplicitlyconsistentwiththeprecautionary

approachandanecosystemapproachtomanagement3.2.1 3.2.2 Responsivenessandprecautionaryapproachindecision-making3.2.3 Compliancewithcatchreportingrequirementsanduseofsanctions3.2.4

WORKPLAN2:Year1workplanfortheIndianOcean(IOTC)–Principle1andPrinciple3Note:IOTCalreadyhasaninternaltimetabletoputinplaceaharveststrategyforeachofthekeystocks,asfollows:MSEunderwaybyCSIROandresultsaredueinMarch2017fordiscussionbytheTechnicalCommitteeonManagementProceduresEvaluation,withtheultimateobjectiveofputtinginplaceaharveststrategywithHCRsforallthestocksby2018(iftheyareadoptedbyplenary).HencetheapproachsetoutforICCATofproposingaworkplanandtimetableisnotrequiredhere.Instead,theAdvisoryGroupconcludedthatthemosteffectivewaythatOPAGACcouldactwithinIOTCtohelppushthisprocessforwardwouldbetobuildengagementbytheEUinthisprocess.

Activity Workinggroup EndingdateA.Harveststrategyandcontrolrules,stockrebuildingMSCPIs:1.2.1,1.2.2(yellowfinandbigeye);1.1.1and1.1.2(yellowfin);IPGs12-14;highpriorityA1 EvaluateoutcomeofManagementProceduresDialoguemeeting(MPD03;

May2016)OPAGAC EarlyYear1

A2 EngagewithEUscientistsanddelegationtoensureasfaraspossiblethattheScientificCommitteeprovidesadvicetotheCommissionasrequiredby15-10

OPAGAC/scientistsfromEUandfromcountrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag

SCmeeting1-5Dec.2016

A3 ScheduleregularmeetingswithrelevantEUstakeholders(delegationmembers)(e.g.3-4timesperyear),withthefollowingpurpose:• continuingtoemphasisetheimportanceoftheharveststrategy

processandyellowfinstockrebuildingtoOPAGACandotherEUfisheriesintheIndianOcean

• proposingpracticalwaysthattheEUcouldsupporttheprocess;e.g.vialiaisontosupportcapacity-buildingwithcoastalstates,orotheractivities

• reportingregularlytotheEUsothatthedelegationiskeptinformedofcurrentideasandproposalsatIOTCandwithincoastalstateswhereOPAGAChaslinks

OPAGACwithmembersofEUdelegationtoIOTC

Year1andongoing

A4 PriortoIOTCplenary2017produceaformalbriefingdocumentregardingthestatusoftheharveststrategy/stockrebuildingforeachstock,theobjectiveofIOTC,thepositionofkeyplayersandlikelyupcoming

OPAGACwithsupportfromstakeholdersincoastalstates,countrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshave

PriortoplenaryMay2017(Year1)

proposals,andtheoutcomepreferredbytheFIP,tobrieftheEUandotherstakeholders

operations/vesselsunderflagAdvisoryGroupmembers

A5 Prepareapositionpapertosubmittoplenaryinsupportofmakingsignificantprogressindevelopingaharveststrategyandcontrolrulesforyellowfinandbigeye,includingrebuildingfortheyellowfinstock,aswellastoolsfortheimplementationoftheskipjackHCRalreadyagreed.WorkwiththeEUdelegationtoobtaintheirsupportforthepaper,aswellasthatofothermemberstatesasfaraspossible.

OPAGACwithmembersoftheEUdelegation,countrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag,andsupportfromAdvisoryGroupmembersandWWFasrequired

PriortoplenaryMay2017(Year1)

A6 PromotethroughtheEUaprocessofconsultationtoinformIOTCmembersaboutbestpracticeforharveststrategyandstockrebuilding,inordertobuildconsensustowardssupportofproposalsofmanagementmeasurespriortoIOTCSessions.

OPAGACwithsupportfromWWFasrequired

Year1andongoing

A7 StartdiscussionswithABNJaboutworkingwiththemoncapacitybuilding(regardingharveststrategyandcontrolrules)intheinter-sessionalperiod,ifthisisconsideredtoberequired

OPAGACwithsupportfromABNJparticipants(e.g.WWF)

Year1andongoingasrequired

B.InformationandmonitoringMSCPI:1.2.3;IPG15;allstocks;lowpriorityB1 EngagewiththeSCandstockworkinggroupstoevaluatekeydatagaps. OPAGAC/scientistsfromtheEU

andfromcountrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag

Year1orYear2

C.ManagementsystemMSCPIs:3.1.2,3.1.3,3.2.3;IPGs16-18;allstocks;mediumpriorityC1 RequesttheEUand/orotherrelevantstakeholderstodevelopastrategy

forimprovingtheIOTCmanagementframeworkEU/countrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag/otherrelevantstakeholders

2016andongoing(Year1andongoing)

C2 RequesttheEUand/orotherrelevantstakeholderstoproposeadraftRecommendationorothersuitablepapertotheIOTCSecretariatwhichwouldincorporatetheecosystemapproachtomanagementexplicitlyinIOTC’slong-termobjectives


BeforeIOTCplenary2017(Year1)

C3 RequesttheEUand/orotherrelevantstakeholderstopresentan

informationpaperforIOTCmemberssettingoutclearlytherolesandresponsibilitiesofIOTCbodies(Secretariat,StandingCommitteesetc.)andmembers


2017(Year1)

C4 RequesttheEUand/orotherrelevantstakeholderstopresentaninformationpapertoIOTContheapplicationoftheprecautionaryapproachinrelationtoIOTCdecision-making


2017(Year1)

D.Decision-makingprocessesMSCPI:3.2.2;IPG19;allstocks;lowpriorityD1 Evaluateresponsivenessofdecision-makingatIOTCandoptionsforaction Year1orYear2

4.3 Year1workplanfortheEasternPacificOcean(IATTC)–Principle1andPrinciple3

Issuestobeaddressed

ForIATTCstocks,forPrinciple1therearefourhighpriorityIPGs(1.2.1and1.2.2forallthreestocks;1.1.1 + 1.1.2 for yellowfin andbigeye) (see Table 6). For IATTC stocks for Principle 3 there is onemediumpriorityIPG(3.2.4)andtwolow-priorityIPGs(3.2.1and3.2.2).

ThekeyissuesforIATTCstocks(Principles1and3)aresummarisedinTable11,basedonTables6and8above.

Table11.SummaryofkeyissuesforIATTCstocksforPrinciple1andPrinciple3


1.1.1 Unclearif1.1.2shouldbescored,butifsonoclearrebuildingplanortimetable

B<BMSY,noclearrebuildingplanandtimetable

1.1.2

1.2.1 Testingandimplementationofharvestcontrolrulewhichcanacttoadjustfishingmortalityinresponsetochangesinstockstatus(aninformalframeworkisinplace)1.2.2

1.2.3 1.2.4 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 3.2.1 Lackoffishery-specificobjectives3.2.2 Aredecision-makingprocessesresponsive?3.2.3 3.2.4 IATTChasnothadanexternalreviewofmanagementperformance

WORKPLAN3:Year1workplanfortheEasternPacific(IATTC)–Principle1andPrinciple3

Note:IATTCrecentlyagreedinterimreferencepointsandharvestcontrolrulesforallstocks,andthesearenowunderscientificevaluation.TheAdvisory

GroupconcludedthatthemosteffectiveactionforYear1wouldbetoensurethatthisevaluationwasprioritised.ThefirstactiontobetakenbytheFIP,

however,willbetoalignscoringandactivitieswiththeEcuadorFIP,sothisYear1workplanissubjecttochangeaccordingtotheviewsandactivitiesofthe

EcuadorFIPcoordinationteamandparticipants.

Activity Workinggroup EndingdateA.Harveststrategyandcontrolrules,stockrebuildingMSCPIs:1.2.1,1.2.2(allstocks),1.1.1and1.1.2(yellowfinandbigeye);IPGs20-23;highpriorityA1 EvaluateoutcomeofScientificAdvisoryCommittee(SAC)meetinginrelationto

evaluationofref.pointsandHCRs

OPAGAC/scientistsfrom

theEUandfromcountries

whereOPAGACmember-

companieshave

operations/vesselsunder

flag

SACmeeting9May2016

A2 EvaluateoutcomeofIATTCplenaryinrelationtoHCRsandref.points OPAGAC IATTC201620June2016

A3 ArrangeameetingwithEcuadorFIPcoordinatortoalignandcoordinatePrinciple1

scoringand(mostimportantly)activitieswitheachotherandtoupdatethembased

onrecentprogressatIATTCandtheoutcomeoftheMSCassessmentoftheMexican

fishery.ReviewandupdateIPGs(Appendix2)asrequired.

OPAGACandEcuadorFIP

coordinators,withsupport

fromWWFifrequired

byend2016(Year1)

A4 CollaboratewiththeEcuadorFIP(andtheMexicanfisherydependingonthe

assessmentoutcome)todevelopaninformal‘IATTCharveststrategygroup’to

supportandpromotethecontinueddevelopmentofaharveststrategy,harvest

controlrulesandtoolsandstockrebuildingforyellowfinandbigeye(ifrequired)

withinIATTC,bybringtogetherscientistsandIATTCdelegatesfromasmany

membersaspossible

OPAGACandEcuadorFIP,

withsupportfromAdvisory

Groupmembers,ISSFand

WWFasrequired

early2017(Year1)

A5 Developandagreeinformal‘termsofreference’forthe‘harveststrategygroup’,

basedaroundongoingcontact(byletter,email,phone,personalmeetingorother

means)betweengroupmembersandmembersoftheScienceSecretariat,IATTC

Secretariatandotherstakeholders(e.g.delegationmembers)toensurethatwork

ontheevaluationofinterimreferencepointsandHCRsisprioritised.

OPAGACandEcuadorFIPs,

ISSFand‘harveststrategy

group’members

2017,priortoSACmeeting

inMay(Year1)

A6 Coordinatelobbyingeffortby‘harveststrategygroup’members OPAGACandEcuadorFIP

coordinators

Year1andongoing

A7 Identifyasuitablescientist(s)fromanIATTCmembercountrytoattendthenextSAC

meeting,withabrieftosupportandencourageworkontheharveststrategy;

requestaninvitationforhim/her/them



group’members

SACmeetingMay2017(Year

1)

A8 EvaluatetheoutcomeoftheSACmeetingintermsofinterimHCRsandreference

pointwiththe‘harveststrategygroup’,decideonnextstepstoincorporateinto

Year2workplan



group’members

endYear1

A9 StartdiscussionswithABNJandISSFaboutworkingwiththemoncapacitybuilding

(regardingharveststrategyandcontrolrules)intheinter-sessionalperiod

OPAGACwithsupportfrom

AdvisoryGroupmembers,

ISSFandWWFasrequired

Year1andongoingas

required

B.Managementsystem–reviewMSCPI:3.2.4;IPG24;allstocks;mediumpriorityB1 RequesttheEUand/orotherrelevantstakeholderstoprepareamotionforIATTC

plenaryaskingforanexternalreviewoftheirmanagementperformance;builda

coalitiontosupportthemotionviathe‘harveststrategygroup’,EU,EcuadorFIPor

otherstakeholders

‘harveststrategygroup’/

EU/ISSF/countrieswhere

OPAGACmember-

companieshave


flag

IATTCplenary2017(Year1)

C.Managementsystem–otherelementsMSCPIs:3.2.1,3.2.2;IPGs25-26;allstocks;lowpriorityC1 Evaluatefishery-specificobjectivesforIATTCwiththeEcuadorFIP;evaluaterequired

activitiesbasedonoutcomeandprogresswithotherP3IPGs

OPAGACandEcuadorFIP

coordinators

Year1-2

4.4 Year1workplanfortheWesternandCentralPacificOcean(WCPFC)–Principle1andPrinciple3

Issuestobeaddressed

ForWCPFCstocks,forPrinciple1therearethreehigh-priorityIPGs(1.2.1and1.2.2forallthreestocks;

1.1.1+1.1.2forbigeye)(seeTable6)andonelow-priorityIPG(1.2.3foryellowfin).ForWCPFCstocks

forPrinciple3therearetwolow-priorityIPGs.

ThekeyissuesforWCPFCstocks(Principles1and3)aresummarisedinTable12,basedonTables6

and8above.

Table12.SummaryofkeyissuesforWCPFCstocksforPrinciple1andPrinciple3


1.1.1 B<LRP,noclear

rebuildingplanand

timetable

1.1.2

1.2.1 Lackofwell-definedharvestcontrolrulewhichcanacttoadjustfishingmortalityin

responsetochangesinstockstatus(CMM14-06andassociatedworkplanprovidea

frameworkandtimetableforimplementation);TRPsforyellowfinandbigeyearealso

interim/informal

1.2.2

1.2.3 NotallCPCsprovide

sufficientinformation

1.2.4

3.1.1

3.1.2

3.1.3

3.2.1

3.2.2 Responsivenessofdecision-makingprocesses;accountabilityandtransparency

3.2.3 Applicationofsanctionsandcompliance

3.2.4

WORKPLAN4:Year1workplanfortheWesternandCentralPacific(WCPFC)–Principle1andPrinciple3Note:ThisworkplanendsattheWCPFCplenaryinDecember2017;i.e.itoverrunstheendofYear1byasmallamount.Activity Workinggroup EndingdateA.Harveststrategyandcontrolrules;stockrebuildingMSCPIs:1.2.1,1.2.2(allstocks);1.1.1,1.1.2(bigeye);IPGs27-29;highpriorityA1 EvaluatewhetherSChasprovidedtheadvicerequiredinthe14-06workplanfor2016

(skipjack:adviceonamonitoringstrategyandperformanceindicators;yellowfin:adviceonacceptablelevelsofriskandmanagementobjectives;bigeye:determinearebuildingtimeframe)

OPAGAC SCmeeting3Aug.2016(Year1)

A2 ApproachotherMSC-certifiedfisheriesandfisheriesinFIPsintheregion(viatheWCPFCMSCP1alignmentgrouporseparately)todevelopand/orsupportalobbyingstrategy

OPAGAC

A3 HolddiscussionsonharveststrategywiththeEUdelegation,like-mindedWCPFCmembersandotherstakeholderspriortoWCPFCplenarytotryandensurethat14-06workplandecisionsaretakenin2016(skipjack:recordmanagementobjectives,agreeacceptablelevelsofrisk,agreemonitoringstrategyandperformanceindicators;yellowfin:recordmanagementobjectives,agreeacceptablelevelsofrisk;bigeye:agreerebuildingtimeframetoLRP,acceptablelevelofriskandmanagementobjectives)

OPAGAC/MSC-certifiedfisheries/otherstakeholders

StartingatorbeforeWCPFCplenary2016;ongoing(Year1)

A4 Evaluateoutcomeof2016plenary.Ifworkplantargetsnotmet,startworkwiththeEUdelegationandotherstakeholdersinter-sessionallytoputforwardproposalforthemissingelementsforYear2.

OPAGAC/WCPFCMSCP1group

WCPFCplenary2017(endYear1)

A5 Startworkwithlike-mindedstakeholdersondevelopingadraftworkplantocontinuefromandcompletethe14-06workplan.AgreeaplanforsubmittingthedraftworkplantoWCPFC.

OPAGAC/WCPFCMSCP1group


A6 WorkwithscientistsandtheEUdelegationtopressforformalMSEtobepartoftheharveststrategydevelopment;andspecificallytorequestthatmembersareabletoasktheScientificCommitteetoevaluatespecificmanagementoptions.

OPAGAC/EUdelegation/scientistsfromtheEUandfromcountrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag


A7 Workwithlike-mindedstakeholderstodeveloparebuildingplanforbigeye,basedonthemostrecentstockassessmentandoutcomeofthe2016and2017ScientificCommitteemeetings.

OPAGAC/WCPFCMSCP1group/EUdelegation/scientistsfromtheEUandfromcountrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag


B.InformationMSCPI:1.2.3;IPG30;allstocks;lowpriorityB1 Evaluaterobustnessoftheinformationavailableforyellowfinstockassessment;evaluate

requiredactivitiesbasedonoutcomeandprogresswithotherP1IPGs Years1-2

C.ManagementsystemMSCPIs:3.2.2,3.2.3;IPGs31-32;allstocks;lowpriorityC1 RequesttheEUand/orotherrelevantstakeholderstoevaluateresponsivenessofdecision-

makingatWCPFCoverthelast5years;evaluaterequiredactivitiesbasedonoutcomeandprogresswithotherP3IPGs

Years1-2

C2 RequesttheEUand/orotherrelevantstakeholderstoevaluatecomplianceandapplicationofsanctionsatWFCPFCoverthelast5years;evaluaterequiredactivitiesbasedonoutcomeandprogresswithotherP3IPGs

Years1-2

4.5 WorkplanforPrinciple2

Note:SincePrinciple2issuesarelesscomplexandmoreinthepowerofOPAGACtodeliver,adetailed

workplanhasbeendevelopedforPrinciple2coveringthewholedurationoftheFIP,ratherthanjust

Year1asforPrinciples1and3above.Thisworkplanisstillsubjecttoannualreviewandrevisionby

theAdvisoryGroupandviaexternalaudit.

Issuestobeaddressed

The variability between the different oceans in relation to the outcome of the Principle 2 pre-

assessment(Gascoigne2015)arisesmainlybecausedifferentspeciesareprotectedbyeachRFMO,

resultingindifferentdefinitionsof‘ETPspecies’;thespeciesnotprotectedweregenerallyincludedin

thepre-assessmentunder‘mainsecondaryspecies’,sotheissuesraisedbythepre-assessmenttend

tobesimilarbutresultinlowscoresfordifferentPIs.Thismakesissomewhatdifficulttoinferthekey

issuesdirectlyfrom

Table7,ashasbeendoneforPrinciple1andPrinciple3.TheIPGshavebeenslightlyre-arrangedto

groupspeciestogetherwherethesameactionsarerequired,regardlesswhetherthespecieshasbeen

classifiedassecondaryorETPinagivenocean.

Nevertheless,itisclearfrom

Table7thatthereisonlyonehighpriorityIPGforPrinciple2–PI2.3.1fortheIndianOcean–which

relatestopossible(althoughunlikely)impactsontheArabianSeapopulationofhumpbackwhalesand

IndianOceanpygmybluewhales,whicharehighlyendangered.

The total number of medium priority IPGs is 12, applying to all oceans, as follows (Table 7 and

Gascoigne2015):

• 2.2.1or2.3.1:silkysharkoutcome–entanglingFADs

• 2.2.2or2.3.2:silkysharkmanagement–entanglingFADs

• 2.2.3or2.3.3:silkysharkinformation–entanglingFADs

• 2.2.1or2.3.1:whalesharkoutcome

• 2.2.2or2.3.2:whalesharkmanagement

• 2.2.3or2.3.3:whalesharkinformation

• 2.3.1:turtleoutcome

• 2.3.1:cetaceanoutcome

• 2.3.2:verification/improvementofcodeofgoodpractice(cetaceans,entanglingFADs)

• 2.5.1:ecosystemimpactsofFADsoutcome

• 2.5.2:ecosystemimpactofFADsmanagement

• 2.5.3:ecosystemimpactofFADsinformation

Inthissection,theseindividualIPGsaregroupedwheretheyaddressthesameissue.Thishasbeen

doneusing thepre-assessment report tounderstandthe logicbehind individual scores foragiven

PI/species/ocean(fulldetailsarenotgivenhere–refertoGascoigne2015).Thisanalysisresultsin4

keyissues(includingbothhighandmediumpriorityIPGs)asfollows:

• TheriskofnegativeinteractionswithpygmybluewhalesandArabianSeahumpbackwhales

needstobeevaluatedandifnecessaryminimised.(Note:theseinteractionsareconsidered

quiteunlikely;thescoringisprecautionarybecausedatawerelacking.)

• Betterdataareneededoninteractionswithsharks,turtlesandcetaceansinalloceans;the

resultsofthedataneedtobeintegratedintomanagementwhererequired,viathecodeof

goodpractice(seealsobelow).

• ThecodeofgoodpracticeneedsverificationinoceansotherthantheAtlantic.Theprocessin

the Indian Ocean has been started; in theWCPFC area it is hampered by a lack of data

(difficulty adding elements to the existing observer programme and difficulty in obtaining

observerdata;althoughWCPFChasreportedlycommittedtoimprovingaccess).Itneedsto

be improved as required to ensure that that impacts on a bycatchpopulation are kept at

acceptablelevels.Specifically,thecoderequirestwoadditions:bestpracticefordealingwith

entanglingFADs,whenencountered,andinteractionswithcetaceansneedstobeincluded.

• TheecosystemimpactofFADsneedstobeevaluatedand,ifnecessary,mitigated.

Note: There are some differences in scoring of P2 between different pre-assessments and FIPs

(Seychelles,Ecuador).P2scoring(asP1andP3)willbereviewedandrevisedannuallyonthebasisof

newinformation(fromthisandtheotherFIPs)aswellasprogressagainstmilestones.

WORKPLAN5:WorkplanforPrinciple2(alloceans)Note:OPAGACincollaborationwithAZTIhaveongoingandfutureplannedworkrelatingtoPrinciple2issues:thisworkplanincorporatesthisplannedworkanditsagreedtimetable,asnoted.Activity Workinggroup EndingdateA.ArabianSeahumpbackwhales;pygmybluewhalesMSCPI:2.3.1;IPG25;IOTC;highpriorityA1 Evaluatespatialoverlapbetweenfisheryandcetaceanpopulations OPAGACandAZTI Year1A2 Supportobserverandskippertraining(includingcetaceanspecies

identification)OPAGACandAZTIwithrelevantauthorities

ongoingprogramme2016-2021(Year1ongoing)

A3 CompileavailabledataoninteractionswithcetaceansintheIndianOcean(observers)

OPAGACandAZTI/IOTCobservers 2017-2018(Years1-2)

A4 EvaluateimpactsonArabianSeahumpbackwhaleandpygmybluewhalepopulations

AZTI 2018(Year2)

A5 Putinplacemeasurestomitigateimpacts,ifrequired OPAGAC 2019(Year3)B.Improveddataonbycatch/discards/interactionswithimprovedmitigationasrequiredMSCPIs:2.2.1,2.2.2,2.2.3,2.3.1,2.3.2,2.3.3.;IPG26,IPG27,IPG28,IPG29,IPG30,IPG31,IPG32,IPG33;allRFMOs;mediumpriorityB1 Supportfordatagatheringprogrammesinalloceans:observertraining,

observersupport,electronicobservationonboardOPAGAC,ISSFandAZTI ongoingprogramme2016-

2021(Year1ongoing)B2 Observerdataconsolidationandqualitycontrol AZTI 2016(Year1)B3 Observerdataanalysis(alloceans;sharks,turtlesandcetaceans)and

disseminationofresultstoRFMOsasnecessary.AZTI 2017-8(Year3)

B4 Otherresearchasrequiredtoevaluateandmitigateimpactsasrequired(e.g.identificationofbycatchhotspots,taggingofwhalesharkstoassesspost-capturesurvival)

AZTI Year1ongoing

B5 Reviewandimprovementofcodeofgoodpracticetoensuremitigationofanyissuesraised(seeActivitiesinC)

OPAGAC Year2ongoing

B6 Implementationofimprovedcodeofgoodpractice(seeActivitiesinC) OPAGAC Year3ongoing

C.VerificationandimprovementofthecodeofgoodpracticeMSCPIs:2.2.1,2.2.2,2.2.3,2.3.1,2.3.2,2.3.3;IPG34,alsoIPG26,IPG27,IPG33;allRFMOs;mediumpriorityC1 Verificationoftheimplementationandoutcomeofthecodeofgood

practiceAZTI Year1ongoing(already

completedinAtlanticandIndian)

C2 Implementationofcode,includingconsiderationoftracking/compliance–100%non-entanglingFADs

OPAGACandAZTI Year3

C3 Crewandskippertraininginthecodeofgoodpractice OPAGAC,ISSFandAZTI Year1ongoingC4 Inclusionofcetaceansinthecodeofgoodpractice:identificationofbest

practiceforavoiding/handlingOPAGACandAZTI Year2

C5 Inclusionofpracticefortheremoval/alterationofentanglingFADswhereencounteredintothecodeofgoodpractice:establishwhatmethodsareeffectiveandpractical

OPAGACworkingwithskippersandexternalstakeholderssuchasISSF

Year2

C6 EvaluationofthecodeinthelightoftheoutcomeofC4andC5andActivitiesA,BandD;improvementasnecessary

OPAGACandAZTI Year3

C7 Implementationandverificationofimprovedcode OPAGACandAZTI Year3C8 Establishaprocessforperiodicreviewofdataandbestpractice,updating

ofthecodeandimplementationandverificationoftheupdatedcodeOPAGAC Year4

D.EcosystemimpactofFADsMSCPIs:2.5.1,2.5.2,2.5.3;IPG35,IPG36,IPG37;allRFMOs;mediumpriorityD1 Commissionanindependentevaluation(viaascientificbodyorconsultant

orothersuitableindependentexpert)ofminimumandbestpracticerequirementsfordataonFADs(deployment,retrieval,tracking,loss,types,catchesandotherrelevantissues)

D2 Commissionanindependentevaluation(viaascientificbodyorconsultantorothersuitableindependentexpert)oftheecologicalimpactofrelevanttypesofFADs,includingananalysisoftherobustnessofthedataavailable,andresearchgaps,aswellasbestpracticeinthemitigationoftheseimpacts

D3 Startworkwithrelevantstakeholdersineachocean(otherpurseseinecompanies;FADworkinggroups)tostartaprocesstowardsmore

OPAGAC,FADworkinggroupsateachRFMO,otherpurseseinefisheries

Year1ongoing

transparencyaroundFADsateachRFMObasedontheevaluationfromD1;andadoptionofmanagementmeasuresbasedontheevaluationfromD2.

D4 MakeaformalcommitmenttopromoteincreasedtransparencybyRFMOmembersonFADs,FADmanagementandFADfate,basedontheevaluationofdatarequirementsfromD1,aspartofaFADmanagementplanorotherwise

OPAGAC ByendYear1

D5 EstablishaframeworkbywhichdataonFADmovementandthetotalnumberofFADscanbeanalysedbyanindependentscientificbodywithoutprejudicetoOPAGAC’scommercialinterests

OPAGAC,AZTIoranothersuitablebody

ByendYear1

D6 ResearchintodifferentdesignsofFADsincludingnon-entanglingandbiodegradable,basedontheevaluationinD2

OPAGAC,ISSFandAZTI Year1ongoing

D7 Researchintoeco-sounder&sonardiscriminationofschoolsbelowFADs–forreductionincatchofjuvenileyellowfinandbigeye

OPAGAC,ISSFandAZTI Year1onwards

D8 ResearchontheimpactofFADsonsensitivemarinehabitats OPAGACandotherstakeholders Year1ongoingD9 Researchandretrievalof‘ghostnets’fromislands OPAGACandAZTI Year1ongoingD10 Evaluationofresults,identificationandimplementationofadditional

mitigationmeasuresifrequiredOPAGACandAZTIwithotherstakeholders

Year3ongoing

D11 Publishand/orpresentatRFMOmeetingstheresultsoftheactionsspecifiedabove,includingrecommendationsonminimumstandardsfordatagatheringandcompilation,andmeasuresputinplacetomitigationimpacts.

OPAGAC,AZTIand‘FADgroups’ Year3ongoing

WORKPLAN6:PreliminaryworkplanforYears2-5,Principles1and3,alloceans

Activity Workinggroup Endingdate

A.Harveststrategyandcontrolrules,stockrebuildingALLRFMOsICCAT:MSCPIs:1.2.1,1.2.2(allstocks);1.1.1and1.1.2(ICCATyellowfinandbigeye);IPGs1-4IOTC:MSCPIs:1.2.1,1.2.2(yellowfinandbigeye);1.1.1and1.1.2(yellowfin);IPGs12-14IATTC:MSCPIs:1.2.1,1.2.2(allstocks),1.1.1and1.1.2(yellowfinandbigeye);IPGs20-23WCPFC:MSCPIs:1.2.1,1.2.2(allstocks);1.1.1,1.1.2(bigeye);IPGs27-29A1 EvaluateprogressinYear1againstYear

1milestonesforeachRFMO(Appendix

2)

OPAGAC,AdvisoryGroup EndYear1

A2 BasedonevaluationinA1,assess

whethertheYear1strategyislikelyto

beabletoachievetheYear2milestones


A3 IfyesforagivenRFMO,continuewith

activitiesfromYear1,reinforcingas

requiredareaswhereprogressisbehind

milestones

OPAGACwithother

stakeholdersassetoutin

theYear1workplans

Year2

A4 IfnoforagivenRFMO,re-evaluate

strategywithAdvisoryGroup,develop

andimplementnewstrategyfor

achievingFIPmilestones

OPAGAC,AdvisoryGroup Beginning

Year2

A5 Ensurethatnewstrategyandworkplan

isintegratedwiththeworkofother

stakeholders,e.g.otherFIPs

OPAGAC,FIPliaisongroup,

withsupportfromWWF

Beginning

Year2

A6 RepeatA1-A5attheendofeachyearof

FIPimplementation


andon

A7 Regardlessoftheoutcomeofannual

evaluations,continuetobuildcoalitions

ateachRFMOtosupportandencourage

thedevelopment,approvaland

implementationofharveststrategies

andcontrolrulesandtoolsforeach

stock,andrebuildingplansfordepleted

stocks

OPAGAC,WWF,other

fisheriesinFIPs,EU,

countrieswhereOPAGAC

member-companieshave


flagandotherRFMO

membersandother

likemindedstakeholders

Year2and

on

B.Managementsystem(P3)ALLRFMOsICCAT:MSCPIs:3.1.1,3.1.2,3.1.3,3.2.3;IPGs7-11;allstocksIOTC:MSCPIs:3.1.2,3.1.3,3.2.2,3.2.3;IPGs16-18;allstocksIATTC:MSCPIs:3.2.1,3.2.2,3.2.4;IPGs24-26;allstocksWCPFC:MSCPIs:3.2.2,3.2.3;IPGs31-32;allstocksB1 EvaluateprogressinYear1againstYear

1milestonesforeachRFMO(Appendix

2),aswellasagainstMSCscoring

guideposts


B2 BasedonevaluationinB1,assess

whethertheYear1strategyhasledto


SG80beingmet,andifnot,whetheris

likelytobeabletoachievetheYear2

milestones

B3 IfSG80ismetforagivenPI/RFMO,

stophere

B4 IfSG80isnotmet,butYear1strategy

appearstherightapproachforagiven

RFMO,continuewithactivitiesfrom

Year1,reinforcingasrequiredareas

whereprogressisbehindmilestones

OPAGACwithother

stakeholdersassetoutin

theYear1workplans

Year2

B5 IfYear1strategyisinadequatefora

givenRFMO,re-evaluatestrategywith

AdvisoryGroup,developandimplement

newstrategyforachievingFIP

milestones

OPAGAC,AdvisoryGroup Beginning

Year2

B6 RepeatattheendofeachyearofFIP

implementation


andon

C.InformationandmonitoringICCAT:MSCPI:1.2.3;skipjack(EandW);IPGs5-6C1 Continuedevelopmentofresearch

proposalorworkplanstartedinYear1

OPAGAC/SCRSorWorking

Groupmembers

Year2

C2 Startimplementationofresearchor

data-gatheringworkplantoaddress

datagapsforthesetwostocks

OPAGACwithAZTIorother

suitablescientificinstitute

Year3

C3 Continueimplementationofresearchor

data-gatheringworkplan;startto

analysedata



Year4

C4 SubmitdatatoSCRStosupportstock

assessments



endYear4

C5 Dataincorporatedintoimproved

assessmentsforthesestocks

SCRSandWorkingGroup

members

Year5

D.InformationandmonitoringIOTC:MSCPI:1.2.3;IPG15;allstocksWCPFC:MSCPI:1.2.3;IPG30;allstocksD1 EngagewiththeScientific

Committeeandstockworking

groupstoevaluatekeydatagaps

foreachstock

OPAGAC/scientistsfromtheEU

andfromcountrieswhereOPAGAC


operations/vesselsunderflag

Year1or

Year2

D2 Evaluatewhichdatagapsneedto

befilledtoimprovestock

assessments,andwhichofthese

couldbefilledwithsupportfrom

OPAGAC

OPAGAC/scientistsfromtheEU

andfromcountrieswhereOPAGAC


operations/vesselsunderflag

Year3

D3 Implementorsupportcapacity

buildingorotherrelevantactivities

toimprovedatasubmissionto

IOTCandWCPFCasperthe

evaluationinD2

OPAGACwithothersuitable

stakeholders

Years4

and5

References

Aires-da-SilvaA.,Minte-VeraC.V.andMaunderM.N.2016.StatusofbigeyetunaintheEasternPacific

Oceanin2015andoutlookforthefuture.SAC-07-05a.

DaviesN.,HarleyS.,HamptonJ.andMcKechnieS.2014.Stockassessmentofyellowfintunainthe

WesternandCentralPacificOcean.WCPFC-SC10-2014/SA-WP-04/Rev125July.

GascoigneJ.2015.OPAGACtunapurseseineMSCpre-assessment:updateandexpansionofPrinciple

2.Final–23September2015.

GascoigneJ.2016.WWFandOPAGACFisheryImprovementProject–ReviewofScopingDocument

(version21January2016)

Harley S., Davies N., Hampton J. andMcKechnie S. 2014. Stock assessment of bigeye tuna in the

WesternandCentralPacificOcean.WCPFC-SC10-2014/SA-WP-01/Rev125July.

ICCAT2015.ReportoftheStandingCommitteeonResearchandStatistics(SCRC);Madrid,Spain,28

Septemberto2October2015.PLE104/2015.

MaunderM.N.2016.StatusofskipjacktunaintheEasternPacificOceanin2015.SAC-07-05c.

MaunderM.N and Deriso R.B. 2016. Application of harvest control rules for tropical tunas in the

Eastern Pacific Ocean. IATTC Scientific Advisory Committee, Seventh meeting, La Jolla, California

(USA),9-13May2016,DocumentSAC07-07g

Minte-VeraC.V.,Aires-da-SilvaA.andMaunderM.N.2016.Statusofyellowfin tuna in theEastern

PacificOceanin2015andoutlookforthefuture.SAC-07-05b.

MRAG2014.ScopingstudyoftheOPAGAC/AGACtropicaltunapurseseinefisheryagainsttheMSC

Fisheries Assessment Standard to develop a Fishery Improvement Project. Pre-assessment Final

Report.

RiceJ.,HarleyS.,DaviesN.andHamptonJ.2014.StockassessmentofskipjacktunaintheWestern

andCentralPacificOcean.WCPFC-SC10-2014/SA-WP-05/Rev125July.

SCS 2016. The northeastern tropical Pacific purse seine yellowfin and skipjack tuna fishery. Public

CommentDraft:MSCfull-assessmentreport.

WWF 2013. FIP Handbook: Guidelines for developing a fisheries improvement project. WWF-US

FisheriesProgram,December2013.

WWF2016.WWFandOPAGACFisheryImprovementProjectScopingDocumentforOPAGAC’sbigeye,

yellowfinandskipjacktunafishery.Final–24April2016.

Appendix1–AdvisoryGroupmeetingparticipants

Note:Membershipof theAdvisoryGrouporparticipation inanAdvisoryGroupmeetingdoesnot

implyagreementwiththeFIPworkplan,milestones,activitiesoranyotheraspectoftheFIP.

Attendee OrganizationAntonioLizcano S.G.Fisheries(Spain)

MiguelHerrera OPAGAC

FranciscoAbascal IEO

MartinHall IATTC

TimCostelloe CookIslandsMMR

AmandaNickson ThePewCharitableTrusts

JulioMoron OPAGAC

PhilippeMichaud SeychellesFisheryAuthority(SFA)

SusanJackson ISSF

AlejandroAnganuzzi FAO

JulienMillion FAO

GeraldScott ISSF

GuillermoMoron EcuadorFIPCoordinator,IATTC

JoseLuisGarciaVaras WWF-Spain

RaulGarciaRodriguez WWF-Spain

DanielSuddaby WWF

NicoleBeetle WWF-US

JoGascoigne FIPConsultant

Appendix2–IPGs

Seeseparatedocument

Documents

OPAGAC FIP work plan FINAL v2opagac.org/.../2016/11/OPAGAC-FIP-work-plan-FINAL.pdf · The FIP encompasses all global tropical tuna stocks of ... by MSC Conformity Assessment Bodies