E - Iccat

COMPLIANCE COMITTEE REPORT
Committee agreed that the catches made by small-scale vessels do not fall under the obligations of
Recommendation [02-13] without prejudging any further examination of this question.
The Delegate of the United States agreed with this approach but noted the need to address the issue of
establishing a definition of “artisanal” or “small-scale” fishery for these species. It was agreed that this issue
should be addressed at the 2004 meeting, possibly in Panel 4.
North Atlantic swordfish
The Delegate of Japan expressed his concerns about the high level of catches made by Chinese Taipei during the
last three years and asked what additional measures had been taken by Chinese Taipei to avoid over-harvest in
the future. The Observer of Chinese Taipei agreed to take the necessary measures to adjust their catch quota. The
Delegate of United States concurred with the Delegate of Japan on this concern and asked the Secretariat to add
footnotes on the tables to follow carefully transfers made between catch limitations of North and South
swordfish stocks. He also asked the Delegate of Barbados to explain the figures shown in the table for Barbados.
The Chair indicated that the Secretariat had accomplished its obligations carefully and that the footnotes
requested were included in the version of the tables that had been circulated. He urged those Contracting Parties
that had been asked for clarifications to provide the necessary explanations to the Committee and to the
requesting Contracting Parties.
The Delegate of the European Community did not agree with the figures shown in the table for the United States
and asked for some clarification. The Delegate of the United States explained that some transfers had been made
between Japan and the United States and offered to provide all information available on this matter to the
Delegate of the European Community.
South Atlantic swordfish
The Delegates of Brazil and the United States raised the question of the unjustified carry-over of under-harvests
in cases of autonomous quotas set by the Contracting Parties themselves.
The Delegate of the European Community recalled that the Contracting Parties had undertaken not to carry-over
under-harvests of bluefin tuna but that this commitment did not apply to swordfish, and reiterated that his
interpretation of the Recommendation allows the European Community to carry-over the under-harvest of this
species.
After some discussion, the Chair concluded that there was no agreement in the Committee about the
interpretation of this issue. He invited the Contracting Parties to revisit this matter in the Plenary. He estimated
that this issue merited further discussion at the 2004 meeting and urged the Contracting Parties to review this
issue in the 2004 meeting of the Compliance Committee. He also noted the warning expressed by the Delegate of
Brazil who explained that total catches of swordfish in 2004 could be higher than the catch limits established by
the Commission if the carry-over of under-harvests in cases of quotas set autonomously was accepted.
It was later agreed at the Plenary that no under-harvest of South Atlantic swordfish would be carried over to
2003 except for those specifically mentioned in the Recommendation by ICCAT on South Atlantic Swordfish
catch limits [Ref. 02-3].
East Atlantic bluefin tuna
The Delegate of the United States re-raised the question of the year-to-year treatment of under-harvests in the
case of quotas set autonomously for this stock.
The Chair agreed that for this stock, and due to the peculiar circumstances surrounding the decision-making in
the 2001 annual meeting, the Contracting Parties agreed not to apply the carry-over of under-harvest and invited
the Contracting Parties that had carried over their under-harvests to give some explanations to the Committee.
The Delegate of Cyprus discussed the figures shown for Cyprus in the tables and explained the current situation
with respect to catches and vessels included in the Cyprus register. The Delegate of Japan appreciated this
intervention but recalled that there is an established procedure to change the figures for historical catches via the
SCRS.
219