6th GFETW, 18 – 22 February 2019. The Setting up of a Global Risk Assessment Framework (Sessions 6 and 11) Interactive process. At the 5th GFETW held in March 2016 in Auckland, New Zealand, initial discussions took place between MCS practitioners concerning setting-up of a global IUU risk assessment exercise. The consensus in Auckland was that the development of an IUU risk framework would be valuable. The present questionnaire is the first step in a follow up of these discussions. In the programme of the 6th GFETW time has been reserved for a thorough discussion on the setting up of a global IUU risk assessment framework and the compilation of an appropriate compliance risk assessment questionnaire. To this end, a first session (Session 6) on this subject is planned on Tuesday afternoon. At this session, the options for the setting up of a global IUU risk assessment framework will be presented and afterwards we propose discussion in break out groups by ocean (Pacific, Indian Ocean and Atlantic). On Friday morning (Session 11) we are planning to present the results of the questionnaire and to have a panel discussion. IUU risk survey We would like to invite participants to the 6th GFETW to complete the survey. Before responding to the questions, we would like to invite you to read first the introduction below.
Introduction to the IUU risk survey I.
Preliminary observations
Why this questionnaire? MCS practitioners, from all over the globe, participating to the GFETW are offering an unique source of expertise on IUU fishing and an opportunity to exploit this expertise in the interest of 1
the International Community. Information on the magnitude, evolution and impact of IUU fishing is necessary to support global, regional and national decision making on combatting IUU fishing. IUU fishing and associated activities overexploit marine living resources, generate excessive rates of fish mortality with consequential negative impacts on conservation of stocks, biodiversity and the ecosystem. Indeed, IUU fishing and associated activities undermine the efforts of States to conserve living marine resources and to ensure sustainable exploitation of those resources Currently, only fragmented information is available on the magnitude, evolution and impact of IUU fishing on living marine resources. Although estimating the overall quantity of IUU is different from an attempt to establish IUU risks, both aspects are complementary pieces of information which, if done in time series, would be extremely useful. The purpose of the survey is to explore whether your expertise on IUU fishing can be captured in a coherent manner in the form of establishing IUU risks based on frequency of compliance incidents and impact on resources, eco system and bio-diversity. Why are you requested to complete this questionnaire? As an expert working in the field of compliance, your expert opinion is a unique source of information on IUU risks. As an MCS practitioner, you are ideally placed to assess the main IUU risks in your area of operations. By responding to this questionnaire, you will support the international community in its efforts to combat IUU activities and associated activities. Therefore, your cooperation with this project really matters. You are requested to provide your expert opinion on the basis of the best information available to you, be that proven facts or information which has not been corroborated but in which you have sufficient confidence to be considered as reliable, particularly if your opinions are shared by your colleagues. Other MCS practitioners will do the same. By evaluating the responses of all MCS practitioners, a global pattern of IUU risks based on the opinions of all respondents will emerge. It is therefore important that there are sufficient respondents by FAO area. Why anonymous? The survey is informal, voluntary and not binding (not based on any agreement). The International MCS Network is collecting and processing the information obtained through the survey in an informal manner. Any conclusions drawn from the survey will not have any formal status, will not be used for formal purposes and will not bind the Network nor any other Party. Any conclusions drawn from this exercise should be assessed on their own merits. For the above reasons we expect participants to the 6th GFETW, to complete the questionnaire on a voluntary basis solely in their personal capacity as an expert in the field of fisheries MCS and compliance.
2
We understand the need for absolute anonymity to allow you to answer each question openly and completely without any possibility of your responses subsequently being visibly to any other individual or organization. Therefore, we guarantee your anonymity to allow you to complete this survey as comprehensively as you can and in so doing, collect as complete a picture as possible of potential and actual IUU risks. Do I have to respond to all questions? We would ask you to complete the questionnaire to the best of your knowledge but when you do not feel comfortable with certain questions or you have no relevant experience concerning the subject, please feel free not to reply to these questions. How will the responses be treated? All responses to the questions will be processed anonymously. The International MCS Network guarantees that any traces to your identity, including country of origin will be destroyed immediately after reception of the responses to the questions. The results will be presented in Session 11 on Friday morning 22 February 2019. Thank you for taking your time to participate
II.
Background and Expectations
How is the questionnaire structured? The questionnaire is seeking information in the following areas: Ø Part A: Information on the respondent Ø Part B: Information on your working environment Ø Part C: Your expertise on matters pertaining to compliance Why do we ask for information on the respondent? The present exercise of assessing IUU risks relies on the expertise of the respondents. Therefore, these questions seek to confirm your expertise as an MCS practitioner. The information on your working environment serves also as reference for the expert opinions collected through the questionnaire. In general, less information available to MCS practitioners will translate in higher risks for IUU activities and associated activities. How do we assess IUU risks? IUU risk is assessed in two steps:
3
Ø The first step relates to the frequency by which certain IUU activities and associated activities occur (for example unauthorized activities, non-reporting of catch and so on). Ø The second step relates to the impact of these activities on stocks, ecosystem and bio diversity. Fishing activities not carried out in accordance with applicable legislation or carried out in contravention of applicable conservation and management measures are considered as a compliance incident. In its area of expertise, each MCS practitioner will be well aware of the most frequently occurring compliance incidents. Unauthorized fishing, non-reporting of catch, catches of juveniles, accidental by-catch of vulnerable species and destruction of ecosystems are obvious examples impacting, stocks, ecosystems and bio-diversity. For example, when a couple of seiners are catching two third of the total catch volume of certain available resources, MCS practitioners may observe only a few cases of illegal juvenile catch (low frequency of incidents) but the potential impact of these cases on the resource would be high (high impact) while, when non-reporting of catches occurs frequently in inshore fisheries with small vessels (high frequency of incidents), the impact of these incidents on the resources may be low (low impact) when inshore fishery counts only for a minor part of the total catch volume the available resource. Why assessing risk by type of fishery? IUU fishing and associated activities overexploit marine living resources, generate excessive rates of fish mortality with consequential negative impacts on conservation of stocks, biodiversity and the ecosystem. Measurement of this negative impact should be based on information on the magnitude, evolution and impact of IUU fishing. Therefore, IUU risks should be related to the relevant resources, ecosystem and bio-diversity. By using the notion fishery as expressed by fishing area, type of vessel/gear and target species, compliance incidents may be related to relevant resources, ecosystem and bio-diversity (as an example: unauthorized fishing in the Mediterranean by tuna seiners operating with purse seine nets and fishing for blue fin tuna will look as follows: FAO fishing area 37; type of vessel/gear FAO code SPT/PS; Target species FAO species code BFT; compliance incident codes in Annex I A.1) In many countries and regions, risk assessment frameworks are more refined but, to start at global level, a simple basic model is proposed.
III.
Meaning of some Notions
What is an MCS practitioner?
4
An MCS practitioner is a person trained as and having recent hands-on work experience in monitoring, control, surveillance and inspection of fishing activities and/or processing, analyzing and verifying vessel and activity data including compliance information. For example: fisheries inspector, FMC operator, monitoring agent, port inspector, verification of imports, observer, data analyst of log books, catch reports, observer reports, compliance reports, etc Definitions and instructions for completing the questionnaire Any fishing activity (including transshipment and landings) not carried out in accordance with applicable legislation or carried out in contravention of applicable conservation and management measures is considered as a compliance incident. (Please use the code(s) for the type(s) of compliance incident(s) (see ANNEX 1) A fishing activity is considered as any activity involving the catching, processing, landing, sales, marketing or transhipping of fish or fish products For the purposes of this survey, a fishing vessel is considered to be any vessel which is capable of catching, processing, transhipping or transporting fish or fish products or supporting fishing activity. For type of fishing vessel please use FAO codes (http://www.fao.org/3/bt983e/bt983e.pdf ) For type of fishig gear please use FAO codes (http://www.fao.org/3/bt987e/bt987e.pdf) A fishery is defined as fishing area where the catch was taken, the type of fishing vessel/gear and the target species (Examples A.: FAO area 37; purse seine (SPT/PS); blue fin tuna (BFT) or FAO area34; long liner (LL); sword fish (SWO)) For target species please use FAO species codes (http://www.fao.org/fishery/static/ASFIS/ASFIS_sp.zip) For fishing area please use FAO areas ( http://www.fao.org/3/a-az126e.pdf )
ANNEX 1
A. Codes for type of compliance incidents A. Fishing activities at sea A. 1
Unauthorized fishing and falsification identity
A. 2
Use of prohibited fishing methods Use of illegal gear and/attachments
A. 3
A. 4
Discards
fishing without a valid license, fishing in prohibited area, incorrect or falsified vessel papers/registration, and similar practices Use of electricity, explosives and/or chemicals for fishing and similar practices incorrect mesh size, obstructed mesh, dimension, unauthorized material, incorrect hook size or shape/form, incorrect marking, duration of immersion, incorrect FAD’s and similar practices Returning catches in the sea or slipping fish caught from gear, high grading and similar practices 5
A. 5 A. 6 A. 7 A. 8 A. 9
Unauthorized retention of catch on board Recording and reporting offences Tampering with monitoring devices Obstructive practices
juveniles, undersized fish, unauthorized species, incorrect storage, excessive by-catch Under, over and misreporting, unreported activities, logbook offences and similar practices non-functioning of VMS, non-functioning of AIS, manipulated signals and similar practices Obstruction observer requirements/inspection on board, and similar practices Other offences Any offences not described above B. Transshipment activities (all vessels involved in operation)
B. 1
Unauthorized and falsification identity
B. 2
Notification offences
B. 3
Reporting offences
B. 4 B. 5
Tampering of monitoring devices Obstructive practices
B. 6
Other offences
C. 1
Unauthorized and falsification identity Notification offences
C. 2 C. 3 C. 4
C. 5
Offences related to catch documentation and other documentation Offences concerning physical quantities on board
C. 6
Tampering with monitoring devices Obstructive practices
C. 7
Offences related to first sale
C. 8
Other offences
Transshipping without permission, incorrect or falsified vessel papers/registration, and similar practices Ignorance and obstruction of notification requirements and similar practices Misreporting, non-reporting of quantities transshipped and similar practices non-functioning of VMS, non-functioning of AIS, manipulated signals and similar practices Obstruction observer requirements/inspection on board, and similar practices Any offences not described above C. Landing in port incorrect or falsified vessel papers/registration, and similar practices No prior notice, incomplete notification information and similar practices Non-reported and incomplete information, absence of required documentation, under, over and mis recording/reporting Catch on board does not corroborates with documentation, prohibited species retained on board, stowage and or presentation of products not in accordance with rules and similar practices non-functioning of VMS, non-functioning of AIS, manipulated signals and similar practices Obstruction observer requirements/inspection on board, and similar practices Absence or incomplete documentation (sales note and transport documents); non-respect of first sale requirements and similar practices Any offences not described above
6
