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
EU/countrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag/otherstakeholders
BeforeIOTCplenary2017(Year1)
C3 RequesttheEUand/orotherrelevantstakeholderstopresentan
informationpaperforIOTCmemberssettingoutclearlytherolesandresponsibilitiesofIOTCbodies(Secretariat,StandingCommitteesetc.)andmembers
EU/countrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag/otherstakeholders
2017(Year1)
C4 RequesttheEUand/orotherrelevantstakeholderstopresentaninformationpapertoIOTContheapplicationoftheprecautionaryapproachinrelationtoIOTCdecision-making
EU/countrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag/otherstakeholders
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
PI Bigeye Yellowfin Skipjack
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
OPAGACandEcuadorFIPs,
ISSFand‘harveststrategy
group’members
SACmeetingMay2017(Year
1)
A8 EvaluatetheoutcomeoftheSACmeetingintermsofinterimHCRsandreference
pointwiththe‘harveststrategygroup’,decideonnextstepstoincorporateinto
Year2workplan
OPAGACandEcuadorFIPs,
ISSFand‘harveststrategy
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
operations/vesselsunder
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
PI Bigeye Yellowfin Skipjack
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
WCPFCplenary2017(endYear1)
A6 WorkwithscientistsandtheEUdelegationtopressforformalMSEtobepartoftheharveststrategydevelopment;andspecificallytorequestthatmembersareabletoasktheScientificCommitteetoevaluatespecificmanagementoptions.
OPAGAC/EUdelegation/scientistsfromtheEUandfromcountrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag
WCPFCplenary2017(endYear1)
A7 Workwithlike-mindedstakeholderstodeveloparebuildingplanforbigeye,basedonthemostrecentstockassessmentandoutcomeofthe2016and2017ScientificCommitteemeetings.
OPAGAC/WCPFCMSCP1group/EUdelegation/scientistsfromtheEUandfromcountrieswhereOPAGACmember-companieshaveoperations/vesselsunderflag
WCPFCplenary2017(endYear1)
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
OPAGAC,AdvisoryGroup EndYear1
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
OPAGAC,AdvisoryGroup EndYear2
andon
A7 Regardlessoftheoutcomeofannual
evaluations,continuetobuildcoalitions
ateachRFMOtosupportandencourage
thedevelopment,approvaland
implementationofharveststrategies
andcontrolrulesandtoolsforeach
stock,andrebuildingplansfordepleted
stocks
OPAGAC,WWF,other
fisheriesinFIPs,EU,
countrieswhereOPAGAC
member-companieshave
operations/vesselsunder
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
OPAGAC,AdvisoryGroup EndYear1
B2 BasedonevaluationinB1,assess
whethertheYear1strategyhasledto
OPAGAC,AdvisoryGroup EndYear1
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
OPAGAC,AdvisoryGroup EndYear2
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
OPAGACwithAZTIorother
suitablescientificinstitute
Year4
C4 SubmitdatatoSCRStosupportstock
assessments
OPAGACwithAZTIorother
suitablescientificinstitute
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
member-companieshave
operations/vesselsunderflag
Year1or
Year2
D2 Evaluatewhichdatagapsneedto
befilledtoimprovestock
assessments,andwhichofthese
couldbefilledwithsupportfrom
OPAGAC
OPAGAC/scientistsfromtheEU
andfromcountrieswhereOPAGAC
member-companieshave
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