IGFA President Calls for Bluefin Protection / CITES

Comment by Mebachi on February 28, 2010 at 9:23am

"...all recreational fishermen should take notice that a CITES listing does not effect the sport sector."

John, do you actually believe the NMFS/NOAA is going to allow fishing for Bluefin, sport or otherwise, if the species gets an appendix I listing?

Comment by John LoGioco on February 28, 2010 at 7:29pm

Yes I do. I have been in talks with many folks on both sides of the issue (enviros and harvesters) and the recreational sector is not part of the current language. If you have evidence that the language would also effect recreational anglers I would love to see that. That said should the terms change then there would be a new challenge. Should the terms change to release only, then I have a plan in place to deal with that as well. A CITES listing will not prevent sport anglers from the tuna grounds where yellowfin and bluefin mix. Please share your thoughts here if you think otherwise. Thanks for raising the issue as it's top of mind for many folks.

Comment by Mebachi on February 28, 2010 at 8:46pm

John, CITES only deals with the international trade of species. There is no "language" about catch restrictions, fishing effort, etc. It's going to be up to the individual countries to decide on their own how to handle their fisheries if the species gets listed.

Technically, the United States could continue to allow the commercial harvest of ABT, even if the species gets an appendix I listing later this month in Qatar. However, if that is the case, exporting tuna to Japan (or any other country for that matter) would be prohibited. This would be very unfortunate for American fishermen because the domestic US market for sashimi quality Bluefin tends to become saturated after about fifty pieces are absorbed.

Technically, there is no recreational fishery for Giant ABT. There are only 2-3 giants landed annually in the "Trophy" category. Since virtually every single giant harvested is sold to a tuna dealer, anyone fishing for giant tuna is a commercial fisherman.

A CITES listing would only restrict international trade. Both recreational and commercial fishing could continue, however you are very naive if you believe that NMFS/NOAA would allow ABT harvest to continue if the species gets an appendix I listing. Nobody knows what would happen, because those agencies have not even decided wether they plan to support a listing or not. A number of scenarios are possible, including any retention of the species being prohibited.

Unfortunately Japan has already announced that they will be taking an exception at the CITES meeting later this month, along with Malta, Llibya, Turkey, Greece and who knows who else. So a CITES listing is probably not going the help the species recover in the Mediterranean Sea. It will only punish American and Canadian fishermen who have been compliant with reduced and arguably sustainable quotas for decades...

Comment by John LoGioco on March 1, 2010 at 3:42pm

All good points but yes I do hold that the recreational sector will still likely have access to the bluefin fishery - which in most cases are the school fish. The economic impact of this fishery is significant, and can be sustained, even by catch and release that you know I am a proponent of.

As for CITES, keeping a large part of the EU fleet tied to the dock will have a positive net impact on the stocks there. Yes there will be continued illegal fishing,and yes Japan may ignore this listing but fearing these outlying scenarios is not a reason in my mind to not move toward protection. The real issue that I see is enforcement. We need a system that enforces the catching, buying and selling of pelagic fish, so that consumers know what they are buying and markets can source fish that are caught within the system, and as such greatly eliminate or block all other fish that are caught outside the guidelines. ICCAT needs this system to be successful. By its own admission enforcement from member states is the biggest problem. No such system exists and will certainly not be in place by June 1st when the seine nets will go out again.

Regarding US and Canadian fishermen, these are two very different issues. First the Canadians - which yes will have an immediate negative effect should a ban be passed. For these folks I would recommend the drafting of a detailed plan by an independent agency projecting the shortfall and setting upon a process by which fishermen can be subsidized due to abrupt changes in market conditions.

US fishermen are in a different situation. Technically the US is a net importer of bluefin tuna so some of the catch will be absorbed into the market. However the projected price and demand levels needs to be evaluated. As I am recommending from Canadian fishermen, a shortfall scenario report should be drafted and evaluated for US fishermen. The question is what kind of effects will different segments of the US fleet feel. For example here is the 2009 bluefin landings report from HMS;

US fishermen caught 42% of the quota - or ~2500 large/mediums. How many of these 2500 fish can be absorbed into the market? And how many of these commercial folks are dedicated bluefin operations? The answer is almost none. Most of these folks augment their seasons with bluefin tuna. Additionally the rod and reel category is a much different make up than the harpooners right? So the question is how do these different folks get effected? Will the ~500 harpoon fish be absorbed into the US market? So I think the answer is that a ban would effect different US bluefin tuna commercial fishermen differently and most likely keep the highliners and more dedicated to bluefin still fishing, while the ones who dip into the fishery will be pushed out.

Lastly, Japan's food culture needs disrupting. I feel for the Canadian fishermen and some US fishermen who may be negatively impacted and as such I am in favor of subsidizing any losses in the short term. Japan cannot continue to harvest wild stocks from the world's oceans like they are. As such their global consumer perception and reputation is taking a giant nose dive as more and more people are sick over the continued killing of whales, dolphins, fish of all kinds including the bluefin. Should Japan ignore the bluefin protection, this will further create more animosity from the global community and will help to effect change. When I look at the long term perspective, and the need to execute immediate changes in the current system, a CITES listing is the best option as I see it until ICCAT or some other agency can fix the true problem of enforcement.

However a CITES listing is just the start because some fishery agency must manage the harvest, buying and selling and by proxy enforcement of such a system. The faster this system can be implemented and enforced, the faster the bluefin can come out from under a ban in a confident and sustainable fashion.

Comment by Mebachi on March 3, 2010 at 8:49pm

Sure seems unlikely that NMFS/NOAA are going to allow sportfishermen to kill 10,000+ juvenile individuals of a species they now consider endangered!

Right now Spanish, Libyan, Maltese, Turkish and Greek tuna fishermen and exporters are celebrating the fact that the US government is punishing its fishermen for decades of compliance with reduced quotas, while the Taiwanese are diverting extra freezer vessels to Cartagena, Tripoli, Istanbul and Valeta. Rather naive to think countries taking exception to a CITES listing (if it happens) wont be capitalizing on the opportunity to harvest more tuna...

Comment by John LoGioco on March 3, 2010 at 9:24pm

I understand you might be upset by today's decision on behalf of NMFS to side with protecting the bluefin, however you keep calling me naive, as this is your right, but I do disagree and dedicate my efforts to helping solve the global problem of tuna management. I do not excuse any nation(s) for not helping to protect these great tuna. ICCAT has failed to conserve the stocks and needs to be fixed. Enforcement is the real issue as you state in your comments and I continue to preach. The US should not damn the bluefin because rogue nations will not obey international policy. If you are watching any trending sources in the last few days you will see Japan's reputation is in a further nose dive as predicted. Between ignoring the bluefin conservation and Toyota's problems they have a PR nightmare on their hands. This trend will continue and with a proper enforcement system in place, which needs to be implemented regardless of a CITES listing or not, rogue nations will become the vast minority.

To give you a little insight, I started this site and have poured in countless hours in an effort to simply help. I want an Atlantic ocean fishery for my kids that supports a healthy and sustainable bluefin population for both commercial and sport anglers. Need you forget that I have spent thousands of hours on the ocean, both as a commercial fishermen and sport angler. I have come face to face with more bluefin, bigeye, yellowfin, longfin and countless other fish from Alaska to Maine than most of the human population, commercials included - so on these subjects naive I am not!

Now to your point on recreational fishing, should NOAA ban sport anglers then we will deal with that seperately. You probably have not noticed, but my bluefin tagging program called the Atlantic Tuna Project, now addresses bluefin and yellowfin. So this naive host of yours also knows that yellowfin is a huge concern and is by many accounts the monster in the room that few are addressing. To help these causes I have enlisted major companies like West Marine and RPMS to help, again all from a naive point of view!

So before you continue name calling on my site, do some research (www.jerseylines.com, www.savethebunker.ning.com, www.johnlogioco.com) and look at who you are calling naive. At the end of the day I will fight for commercial and sport anglers fairly as I have proved, and folks like yourself will only measure my efforts by progress. So I welcome you to probe and test the naiveity of your host and the progress I continue to forge ahead with or without your name calling.

I welcome any input on this site for debating issues but being called naive on matters of the ocean, the fish that live in it, my future vision of how I would like to leave these oceans to my kids and frankly the progress I have made is not welcome.

I look forward to your continued comments and blog posts now that you know a little bit more about me. Should you want to chat on the phone I am happy to get a call on the calendar.

Best Regards,
John - Founder Save The Bluefin / Atlantic Tuna Project

Comment by Mebachi on March 4, 2010 at 8:41pm

Upset? I have absolutely no reason to be upset.

By naivete, John, I was referring to your knowedge of how the Mediterranean fishery works, and to your misconception of what a "lame duck" CITES listing would accomplish.

In the Mediterranean Sea, spawning giants are bloated with eggs and ripe testes. They mill around on the surface in the gyres off of the Balearic Islands and South of Lampedusa. These tightly packed schools are very vulnerable to capture. The way European seine fishery works, one or possibly more vessels will make a set around an entire school, however all of the other vessels standing by in the area are entitled to a percentage of the catch, regardless of whether they deploy their nets or not. So countries that take reservations to a CITES listing, could potentially harvest just as much or more tuna than they have in the past. In fact it is quite probable that Saif al-Islam Gaddafi will capture as much tuna as possible, as will the Turks who only marginally recognize ICCAT, the Maltese, etc. The Taiwanese will be quite happy to divert their freezer vessels to Tripoli and Valetta so that Mitsubishi can continue to stockpile Mediterranean Bluefin in cold storage.

You mentioned your opinion that enforcement was the key to the future of the stock in the Med. With a CITES listing, ICCAT, as benign as they may have been in the past, now becomes completely impotent. With a CITES listing, whatever potential enforcement ICCAT might have had, is replaced by a free for all black market for the countries that take reservations to a CITES listing. Without ICCAT, there is no more quota, no more closed season for eleven months, etc. Whatever potential there was for compliance and enforcement with ICCAT, as unreliable as it had been in the past, will be replaced with what John? Do you really think the rest of the world has the stomach for trade sanctions against Japan?

A CITES listing without the participation of Japan is a recipe for potentially even more devastation to the species in the Mediterranean Sea...

Comment by John LoGioco on March 10, 2010 at 1:37pm

You make some good points that need addressing in terms of enforcement. If a group of nations move to protect the bluefin, then part of that move will be enforcing the protection. As I said before, fearing the actions of rogue nations (Japan included) is not a reason to allow the status quo to continue. An agency like ICCAT is the answer, but the folks currently running ICCAT are not the people to make the changes and enforce them long term. Every nation that votes to protect these fish should also vote in favor of enforcing the agreed upon measures. Should the US, England, France, Spain and others do this, the black market should be contained.

Comment