By J. Brock (SARTMA)

A Poacher at work.  It's up to us to stop them.

Laws to protect seabirds such as Albatross and Petrels from getting snared on longline hooks do not, in many cases, affect those fishing companies and operatives who are engaged in fishing piracy. Information on the COLTO website, for example, tells us that only half of the total Patagonian Toothfish catch is legal The other half of the Toothfish catch is illegally caught. It is the legal entity that bares the brunt of the law when caught ignoring these laws but Toothfish pirates don’t have to report anything.

Licensing regimes such as those around the Falkland Islands, as well as South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands have stiff policies attached to each longlining licence they issue that are meant to help protect seabirds at sea. One recent case involving 27 Black-Browed Albatross deaths cost the legal fishermen and their companies approximately £14,500.00 in fines and court costs. Chances are that, only when caught poaching, will pirates be penalised for the seabird deaths they have caused.

Another sad consequence is that poaching takes food from the birds, who rely on the fish while spending many months at sea. There is a direct correlation between the increase of longline poaching activity and the numbers of seabirds killed. When wholesale poaching goes on there are two immediate losers: the fish stocks and the seabirds that rely on those stocks. Subsequent losers are the governments and therefore the people of those areas where the resource is being taken.

It stands to reason that there needs to be co-operation between adjacent fisheries regimes, such as that of the Falklands and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, in order to stem poaching and therefore seabird mortality.

An article on the COLTO website dated 14 August 2003 suggests that Uruguayan poachers are sending false satellite reports to their home ports, thus violating CCAMLR regulations. Perhaps this method of tracking needs to be tightened up so that false reports are immediately detected. That centralised satellite vessel (more than one may be needed) for the South Atlantic and Southern Ocean seems to be an excellent step that pooled resources could manage.

There needs to be better co-operation between the ports where fish are off loaded and governments reporting flagged ships that have been poaching. The answer "I only know about it from your newspaper" is a shallow one from an FCO desk officer responsible for St. Helena.  Action needs to be taken when the theft of valuable resources is reported. Just noting a report in a newspaper (St. Helena Herald) rather than looking in the "IN" trey, or acting on the story won’t benefit the people who are victimised.

When fisheries patrol vessels are available, it helps to know where the fish are. Like it or not, where there are fish, there will be poachers. It would move things along if a patrol boat was sitting above the fish instead of in port. A good scientific cruise will map out the migration patterns of the commercial species so that protection can be provided.

Genetically and/or parasitically tagging your resources is a must if you are to track its origins. If you know it comes from your fishing grounds and it was caught illegally, then there is a better chance to catch the entity that poached it. Toothfish from one area may have different genetic markers than that of another area and a better spot check along with an accurate data base could identify the differences.

High fines do make people more clever when it comes to being caught in the act of poaching. It takes an even more clever patrol to find them out. More communication between small islands with rich fisheries would help plug up the drain on the resource. If one Island doesn’t have the money for a boat, then perhaps one could be leased by all of them for a limited period until a proper boat can be confiscated from a poacher.

Poachers could care less whether an island needs a new hospital or school. They aren’t concerned about whether a government has resources to upgrade infrastructure or to send pupils away to university. Further to this, they haven’t a clue about environmental damage caused by the killing of seabirds. They want the resource and will take extraordinary risks to get at it. Some companies even have a space in their operating budgets for the payment of fines should any of their employees go through the Court system. Authorities need to have an equally tough attitude towards those who are engaged in poaching. When Toothfish pirates are caught, for example, it is hoped that seabird deaths are also investigated and acted on and prosecuted in due course.

Our congratulations to organisations like the Coalition of Legal Toothfish Operators (COLTO) fir the inroads made to ensuring sustainable Toothfish resources and subsequently the decline in seabird mortality.

By Dr. Sue Dowling

The Cast of Characters

Over the week of 30 April to 7 May, we had a hectic time here at King Edward Point, when three fishing vessels ran aground and 86 mariners needed to be rescued and housed. All this on an island with a current mainland population of just 13 people. Here’s how we coped….

The Falkland Islands registered long-liner, Lyn on the rocks at Discovery Point.

Wednesday 30 April was about two days into the Toothfish licensing period here at South Georgia, always a busy time. The Fishery Patrol Vessel Sigma was alongside the KEP jetty having brought Senior Fishery Officer Roy Summers from Stanley to assist Marine Officer Pat Lurcock with the licensing frenzy. We woke up to find that strong winds (Force 10 to 12) had caused the Spanish longline vessel Viking Bay to drag her anchor and run onto the beach just next to the jetty here. The wind scuppered any plans we had for small boat operations during the day, and hence we spent a frustrating day unable to perform any licensing inspections. With assistance from British Antarctic Survey (BAS) staff and Sigma’s crew, the Viking Bay managed to deploy mooring lines to hold her position during the strong winds and was able to get herself off the beach during the afternoon. She dropped off her MRAG (Marine Resources Assessment Group) observer Tahmores Moslempour, and proceeded to Stanley for a hull inspection. During the late afternoon and evening the wind dropped, and we all breathed a sigh of relief.

The Ship, Viking Bay aground on Genny Beach

Later that evening, we BAS staff were halfway through our evening meal and about to attack a fruit crumble when a message came over the radio from the Korean longliner Moresko 1 to say that she had "hit bottom". The ship’s MRAG observer Marcus Shuttleworth (the only English speaker on board) reported that there was widespread panic amongst the crew, and he thought the ship was taking on water. Pat was already in the communications room and immediately attempted to obtain help from other long line vessels in the area. During the course of these radio transmissions it transpired that another ship, the Falkland Islands registered Lyn, had also run aground and two other vessels were assisting her. The two stranded ships were on the rocks on opposite sides of the entrance to Moraine Fjord, roughly 2 miles away from King Edward Point. We all abandoned the crumble and crowded round the radio in the dining room area listening with shock to what was going on outside, then organized ourselves into taking all the spare duvets and pillows we could find over to Larsen House, our overspill accommodation building – which boasts only 8 bunks.

Crewmembers of the stricken Moresko are rescued and their inflated life rafts towed to safety.

After listening to the radio some more, it became clear that although Moresko 1 was taking in water and the engine room was filling up, she was aground in only 0.5 metres of water so there was little immediate risk to those on board provided they kept calm. Unfortunately the crew were panicking and Marcus had to make valiant efforts to calm down sailors who didn’t share a common language with him. All the life rafts were inflated and lowered over the side and the crew was frantically preparing to abandon ship – the sense of panic increasing when the generators failed and the ship was plunged into darkness. Shifts were organized ashore to man the radio and talk to Marcus every 40 minutes throughout the night, Sigma also organized a listening watch, and the rest of us went off to bed with varied successes in managing to sleep. The Lyn, although suffering her own problems, kept a searchlight on the Moresko 1 to monitor her situation.

We were up well before dawn the following morning and had a briefing shortly after 06:00. At first light, our RIB (Alert) and Sigma’s Delta RIB went out to Moresko 1 along with our small fishing boat (Quest) to start ferrying the fishermen from Moresko 1 ashore. Roy and Malcolm (Sigma’s Chief Officer) went onto the vessel to ensure that the evacuation was conducted safely and to assess the situation of the vessel. The boat crews also collected the life rafts, some personal belongings and a quantity of food – the food having to be sprayed with insecticide spray to kill cockroaches before we allowed it ashore. We had set up a reception area in the boatshed with warm drinks on tap and as many chairs and benches as we could find, and laid on soup, noodles, bread rolls, biscuits and fruit for the rescued mariners. All 40 of them were well, if somewhat subdued, and wearing dry, warm clothes. The plan was for us to house half of them and for Sigma to take the rest, but plans can and do change so we held them all in the boatshed until we knew what was happening with Lyn.

During the day a number of longliners (Isla Camila, Viking Bay, Tierra del Fuego, Magallanes III and Polar Pesca I) had all attempted to tow the Lyn, and at one time three vessels at once had tried to pull her off the rocks. An hour prior to darkness, the Fishing Master of Lyn decided to request that all bar 6 senior officers were evacuated from his ship. The small boats went out again and brought 37 sailors plus the MRAG observer Eugenio Olivares back to us on shore. When we had heard the decision to evacuate most of the Lyn crew we had immediately gathered the Moresko 1 crew together and taken them up to Larsen House, as it was now obvious that the sensible thing to do was for all the Moresko 1 sailors to stay with us and for Sigma to take the Lyn crew. The three observers stayed with us on base. It was difficult to communicate with the Moresko 1 crew who were a mixture of Koreans, Chinese, Vietnamese and Indonesians and spoke no English, so we resorted to drawing pictures of toilets and "no smoking" signs and sticking them on doors. Back in the Falklands, permission was being sought to allow the Sigma to attempt to tow the Lyn, as with her 3600 BHP she has more power than any three of the Longliners mentioned above added together.

From the ground, the next few days seemed to merge together. With only 8 British Antarctic Survey (BAS) people on base, plus Rob Gater (MRAG Observer Co-ordinator), Pat and Sarah Lurcock, and Tim and Pauline Carr at the South Georgia Museum, we were very stretched as we had to juggle continuous daylight boating operations, communications (with and between ships, boats and base personnel, and with the "outside world" in Stanley and BAS Cambridge), looking out for our 43 extra guests, a few minor medical problems, and keeping the base running as normally as possible. Science was of course put on hold for the time being. A rota was drawn up to ensure that two of us stayed in Larsen House round the clock – this gave us a chance to get to know the sailors, not an easy task when none of them spoke English but we soon discovered that dominoes and Connect Four straddle all language barriers! Sigma gave their bar area, the largest open space on board, over to the Lyn crew, who originated from Spain, Chile, Peru and Indonesia. In the rare moments we had to sit down and rest, we slumped in front of episodes of "Friends" and "Cold Feet".

Members of the Moresko Crew inside a crowded Larsen House playing cards.

Through all this, licensing had to continue so Pat, Roy, Rob, Howie the BAS boatman, and the Sigma Delta crew (Frankie and Kev) were constantly moving from here to there and from there to here in the small boats. Over the next couple of days there were a number of attempts by other vessels to pull Lyn off the rocks, which meant lots of ferrying of Lyn crew members on and off the Lyn to prepare towing lines, pump fuel, dump bait, etc. The Sigma had to abandon one attempt on 2 May due to darkness and short tow lines, then things went a little better on 3 May with two good tow lines attaching Sigma and Lyn together (several mooring lines were donated by the Captain of Moresko 1). A diver from the Lyn had discovered that rocks were pinning the ship in on both sides of her stern, so a tow dead astern would be the only solution. Roy and Craig (2^nd Officer on Sigma) were aboard Lyn to co-ordinate the towing attempt and translate instructions and information. With the high tide and all Sigma’s power, the Lyn moved astern a few metres but remained stubbornly aground. The longliner Jaqueline, another powerful ship, attempted a tow the following morning but she also couldn’t make the Lyn budge.

The six senior officers remained on the Lyn to operate the pumps and machinery with the hope that when the tug Typhoon arrived she would be able to remove the fuel, with the extra buoyancy allowing the ship to be towed free. But eventually the poor old ship gave up, the incoming water overwhelmed the pumps, and a Mayday call was received at lunchtime on Monday 5 May. The 6 officers were quickly and efficiently evacuated from their ship by BAS boats and reunited with their crewmembers on Sigma. In a way that was a relief for us here as it meant that we didn’t have anyone remaining on a damaged ship overnight. The senior officers of Lyn should be commended for all their efforts to re-float their ship, whilst always ensuring the safety of their crew. Later that afternoon the Moresko 1 crew departed the cove on the jigger 101 In Sung, after a great deal of discussion and advice from higher authorities about life raft capacity (101 In Sung did not have enough life raft space for her own crew, let alone the 40 extra from Moresko 1!). By placing the inflated life rafts from Moresko 1 aboard 101 In Sung, Pat ensured that there was sufficient life saving equipment on board for all. That night we had an "Emergency Bar Night" with the Sigma guys in the base bar. Roy earned a reputation as someone who enjoys drinking from those strange bottles of unusually coloured alcoholic liquid at the back of the bar that no-one else drinks.

The tug Typhoon arrived from Stanley on Tuesday 6 May and although she was unable to perform any salvage due to a lack of sufficient pumps, she took 19 members of the Lyn’s crew on board and eventually headed back to the Falklands on 8 May. Sigma sailed on 6 May taking the two MRAG observers Marcus and Eugenio and the 24 remaining crewmembers from Lyn and eventually left us - nearly a week later than planned, and after some extremely hard graft on everyone’s part. We were very fortunate to have Sigma alongside - it would have been far more difficult to cope with the two wrecked ships and sudden influx of 86 rescued sailors without the huge efforts and good humour of her officers and crew.

Fishermen from the Moresko inside King Edward Point Boat Shed just after being rescued.

So, now we’re back to normal – or nearly there, as we’re still trying to secure the large amounts of rope and other objects on the decks of both vessels, which would be a shipping hazard were the ships to break up. We’re left with two rather unsightly additions to the view from our windows, and a strong smell of diesel when the wind is in the wrong direction. There is approximately 800 tons of fuel on the ships, which is a potential environmental disaster were the ships to break up. An oily sheen has appeared on the water around the wrecks, and as Lyn managed to dump a lot of her bait overboard during the attempts to pull her off, there is a lot of seabird activity round her. Neither ship has functioning freezers any more, so any remaining bait and perishable food is beginning to rot and smell. Moresko 1 is infested with cockroaches and rats, neither of which we are keen to give homes to.

We’re now hoping that the fishing companies will arrange salvage before the bad weather we expect at this time of year hits us in earnest and the ships break up.

At the end of the day, there were no casualties and many heroes: Roy, Pat, Peter Taylor (the Captain of Sigma) and Ian Parsons (our Base Commander) who all managed their resources impeccably; Sarah Lurcock who kept up cheerful and efficient radio communications almost continuously for the duration; Howie, Frankie and Kev the boatmen who kept their boats ready to go and worked non-stop during daylight hours; the rest of us on the ground who laboured hard behind the scenes to look after the extra faces and keep the power on and enough food on the table for everyone; the officers and crew of Sigma for too many things to mention; and Tim and Pauline who had an overnight baking session to relieve us from the task of bread-making and also provided a welcome haven when things got too much at KEP. Everyone pulled much more than their weight and we finished the week very tired but upbeat and confident that we’d all done a good job.

Sue Dowling

BAS Medical Officer

King Edward Point, South Georgia

14 May 2003

(Part 2)

Katherine Ross does fisheries science for British Antarctic Survey and the South Georgia Government in this well equipped lab on King Edward Point.

By J. Brock (SARTMA)

Had South Georgia experienced a red tide such as the one in the Falklands? It's a natural question to ask, seeing that the fisheries are so close to each other. British Antarctic Survey Scientist, Katherine Ross (KR), quickly indicated that there were no problems such as those that affected the Falklands fishery.

KR: I will answer your red tide questions all together. I am not a Plankton Biologist and certainly not an expert on red tides. However, I have talked to several people and the general feeling is that plankton from the Falklands are very unlikely to survive in the cold waters around South Georgia.

KR: From surveys and fishery data we know that mature, spawning toothfish are common within this management zone. Ongoing tagging and genetics work should clarify to what extent toothfish from this area mix with stocks in surrounding waters.

(The objectives of the Toothfish tagging programme are to investigate the spatial and temporal movement of the species in South Georgia and to validate the growth rate estimates.)

Interestingly we have recently caught toothfish in Cumberland East Bay, in only 200m of water. Toothfish were thought to stay in much deeper, offshore water. Their occurrence here is exciting because it means that a section of the stock may be completely protected within the 12 mile no fish zone which surrounds South Georgia.

KR: We check this every year, using toothfish otoliths (ear bones) collected by fisheries observers. After grinding and polishing the otoliths we can count yearly growth rings, a bit like on a tree, and determine age range of fish caught in the fishery. I think the average size is around 90 cm or just under 10 years old. The average size and age of toothfish is very important and we keep quite a strong eye on that to check that the sizes aren't getting smaller, which can be a sign of over-exploitation.

KR: Toothfish mature at about 10 years old. But our fishery is managed in such a precautionary way, with small allowable catches, that the amount taken out, shouldn't reduce numbers of young fish entering the fishery each year. We are very confident that with all the data we've got on the abundance of fish and the age structure and the population that the amount we take out really shouldn't affect future stock levels. Ongoing monitoring also ensures that total allowable catches change annually according to the condition of the stock.

As part of CCAMLRS ecosystem approach (which means that all members of the ecosystem and not just target fish stocks are considered in fishery management) we also work on by catch species such as rat-tails and skate. Many of these species are slow growing and produce relatively few young so it is important that their accidental capture is also taken into account by fishery regulations. It makes the job very interesting for us because we get to study lots of different species.

Removing large amounts of immature fish can prevent a stock from sustaining itself. Careful monitoring, strict catch limits and effective enforcement of these regulations mean that this should not be a problem around South Georgia.

KR: I am not sure; perhaps the biologists at Bird Island would be able to tell you. Krill don’t breed around South Georgia but are brought here from the South by ocean currents. Krill supplies can therefore fluctuate widely from year to year and much of the wildlife eats a range of krill-like plankton.

KR: Yes fishing only takes a tiny fraction of the Krill available in these waters and we are confident that it does not deprive other wildlife of essential food.

SOUTH GEORGIA MARITIME ZONE: A SUCCESSFUL MARRIAGE OF MANAGEMENT AND SCIENCE

(Part 1)

By J. Brock (SARTMA)

Renowned fisheries throughout the world have one common thread that binds both management and science to ensure the sustainability of commercial stocks within their maritime zone. That common thread entails strict management, not only of people and vessels but also of the biomass that feeds the fishery. One remarkable example of an efficiently run fishery is that of the South Atlantic Island of South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands. Patrick Lurcock (PL), the Islands’ Marine Officer, (Russ Jarvis is Director of Fisheries until Harriet Hall replaces him later this year) began this interview by explaining what stocks besides Antarctic Krill and Patagonian Toothfish were being taken from the South Georgia Maritime Zone. He began by telling SARTMA about the completed 2001/2002 season, as the 2002/2003 season hasn’t finished.

PL: I will tell you about last year. As you know, the whole Southern Fishery is driven by CCAMLR (The Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Maritime Living Resources). Lots of different nations join in on that. They set the TACs (Total Allowable Catches) and their fishing year runs from the First of December to the end of November. I will talk about 2002. It includes December 2001 but not December 2002.

In 2002, we had three commercial fisheries. There was trawling for Krill, which takes place during the southern winter. Last year we had 8 vessels. Last winter we also had 15 vessels long-lining for Toothfish, and the summer before that we had 5 vessels trawling for Mackerel Ice Fish. We have two other fisheries developing here. One is potting for Crab and in 2002, we had one Japanese potter operating but it has yet to develop into a major fishery. We have also had the occasional Korean Jigger come down looking for Martialia Squid (Seven Star Flying Squid), but not every year. The last time was two years ago but they didn’t do very well. It is a fishery they are interested in but they have not really worked out where the squid are and where to go at the right time of year.

PL: CCAMLR sets a TAC for every species that is caught commercially, as well as setting limits on other vulnerable species that may get caught in the process (by-catch). CCAMLR manages fish stocks by region - using statistical areas defined by the United Nations Organisation for Food and Agriculture. Area 48, for instance, covers the Atlantic sector of the Southern Ocean from the (Antarctic) Peninsula right round past South Africa. This is a big area so is divided into sub-areas, in which fish stocks are managed separately. A different TAC is calculated for each sub-area because each has different stocks of fish and it would not be good stock management to set a single overall TAC which would allow over-fishing in one area and leave another untouched.

South Georgia is in sub-area of 48.3, where CCAMLR allocated a 5,820 tonnes TAC last year. Of this 5,534 tonnes were actually taken within the 200-mile Maritime Zone. So, that is 95% of the TAC taken. As for Ice-fish, 5,557 tonnes of TAC, of which about 48% were taken, so less than half of the allocation was taken. The Crab fishing the year before only took a small percentage of the available TAC.

The toothfish fishery was closed by CCAMLR before the season (1 May to 31 August - set to avoid the breeding seasons of most seabirds that can get entangled in the lines) closed. Every vessel reports their catches to CCAMLR via their flag state as the season progresses. CCAMLR keep a running total of catches and as the total catch approaches the TAC they project current catch rates forward to an estimated finishing date and close the fishery accordingly.

There is a little complication in that there is a little bit of subarea 48.3 that is in international waters, outside the South Georgia 200-mile Maritime Zone. CCAMLR and GSGSSI take into account the vessels fishing there as they are still required to report their catches to CCAMLR. The fishing is not so good out there, so we can make a reasonable guess at what will be taken and issue fewer licenses within the MZ accordingly.

PL: There is a TAC for Krill; CCAMLR set a TAC for every target species. CCAMLR set it at a precautionary 4,000,000 tonnes of Krill within the whole of area 48. They then subdivide that so that sub-area 48.3 has a TAC of 1,056,000 tonnes. The South Georgia area is very productive so CCAMLR decided that about a million tonnes could be taken before it starts impinging on the amount of Krill that is available for everything else. At the moment the amount of Krill being taken is insignificant compared to the amount of Krill that is out there. 45,500 tonnes, only 4.5% of this TAC, were actually taken last year, and that was a good year; exceeded only once in the previous decade and then only by a bit. Because the Krill stocks are so super abundant, CCAMLR have set a low precautionary figure and of that low precautionary figure, only 4% were caught last year. So, that means we are pretty confident that there is no significant pressure on the krill fishery so there is not a real urgency to do the fine-scale in-depth monitoring of catch and effort and the biology, though we do know quite a bit about the biology. In contrast with this the Toothfish is in high demand and the TAC is taken fully each year. This makes it more important to concentrate on being vigilant with the stock assessment and monitoring of catch rates during the season as there is not the safety margin with Toothfish as there is with Krill. The other advantage that we have with Krill compared with something like Toothfish is that Krill do not live very long, just like the squid in the Falklands, and so have a fast breeding cycle. If you have a ‘blip’, a bad year, it does not take long to breed back up once conditions get good again, whereas South Georgia’s finfish grow very slowly. If you get it wrong and hammer them too hard, it takes a long time to recover, as has happened with the marbled rock cod, which was fished very heavily in the 1970s by huge soviet fleets and whilst not extinct is still only recovering slowly.

So Krill is being watched. CCAMLR and the Government here have their eye on it, making sure that it’s not endangered and we are confident that the Krill stocks are at a level that can sustain the fishing effort.

PL: Yes. There is research being done. British Antarctic Survey people on Bird Island, and on ships carrying out research cruises, are working on biomass levels and predator-prey relationships. They want to know what stock levels are in all the species - how much krill there is; how many penguins there are; how many seabirds there are; how many seals there are. And, they want to know what they eat and how much. With this knowledge they can estimate the quantities of krill and other food species are needed by the wildlife. The TAC then takes into account how much krill must be left for these other species, and how much must be left to breed. The management strategy works from this ecosystem approach and running it depends on everything, especially when something like Krill is so central to the whole food web. I don’t know the numbers but I know there are people working on it and fine-tuning our estimates of just how much stock of Krill there is.

They do it using the James Clark Ross, sailing up and down doing acoustic surveys of Krill and other species and, with the hands-on studies of the creatures of the beaches. The scientists on Bird Island put satellite tags on seals and penguins and seabirds and see where they go and then they look at the stomach contents and see what they eat. Then, for example, they can estimate how much food a penguin needs over a year. We have got some work with HMS Endurance. They have been taking aerial photographs using their helicopters, of the various penguin colonies, to get a better idea of how many penguins are breeding. The whole idea is that when we fish for Krill we do leave enough for the birds and other wildlife here to eat. That includes whales and other fish, even though we can’t see them. And, the biologists aboard the commercial fishing ships and the biologists here at KEP are looking to see what the fish eat as well. So, we are constantly building up a better picture of the interaction between birds, penguins, fish and seals.

PL: I really don’t know and that is because my job involves going on board the commercial vessels that come here. They are not allowed to start fishing until the licence has been paid for and I have issued it. Before issuing it I inspect the ship to make sure that it is set up to comply with a whole set of conservation measures that are set by CCAMLR. These limit the fishing gear that can be used and other aspects of the fishing process, both to reduce incidental mortality of non-target species including seabirds and to ensure that small fish get the opportunity to escape; we ensure that management of plastic waste is up to scratch; we ensure that they have the satellite transponder that will enable their flag state to monitor their position. I issue logbooks in which the Captain must record details of fishing effort and catch for later detailed analysis by the stock assessment people. I explain the daily reporting that I want - summaries of each day’s fishing operations and positions. And eventually, when I am satisfied that they are ready to comply with all our requirements, they can start fishing.

The research fishing does not require all of this so I do not get involved since there are CCAMLR scientists on board the research vessels who look after it. There is research work that goes on. Not just by the BAS ship JAMES CLARK ROSS and the Falkland Islands research ship DORADA but by other nations, for instance the Russian trawler ATLANTIDA was here last year.

Generally, every two years, we have the Ground Fish Survey, a research cruise with the DORADA, on charter from the Falkland Islands Government. This looks at stock levels of commercial fish species. They come to the same places year after year so they can get a time series of how the various stocks are doing. That is quite an important tool for estimating the stock levels for future licensing levels.

Although we are doing that work, all the information goes back to CCAMLR and gets put into the big picture with the work other CCAMLR members do. We are not working separately from them; all the information gets pooled into one big model. In the past, other vessels have come and I know the South Georgia Government are very happy for properly funded and properly organised research fishing to take place because it all adds up to give us more information for which to run the fishery.

PL: We use a satellite system that can see through clouds and fog, so can spot ships at any time. Every vessel that is fishing in the zone, cruise ships going too and fro, other vessels, all report their positions at certain times. I collate these reports and send the information off to the guys that are receiving the satellite pictures and they correlate the pictures with the positions I sent them. They come up with any targets that don’t match up with the vessels that we know about. When there is a patrol vessel in the area, it means that we can be much more effective in deciding where the patrol ship should go. Another benefit is that when we don’t have a patrol ship in the area, we can still get a better idea of what, if any, illegal fishing is going on, which means we can be more precise when allowing for illegal fishing in the stock assessment.

It has not resulted in any arrests yet, but that is more due to the fact that we don’t have a significant poaching problem. This summer has been very constructive because I have now every vessel reporting their positions to me every day. At the same time, I ask if they have seen any fishing vessels. And, while we had three fishing vessels taking icefish, the cruise ships coming through reported the number of ships that they saw fishing. One reported four, which made me sit up and listen. When I checked my records, I discovered the Research Ship, Dorada had passed through in the night, so, there were four trawlers that she had seen. So, we are certainly getting ships that are passing between here and the Shag Rocks area of the Falklands, which is one of the major fishing zones, tourism vessels coming through and seeing only licensed vessels. But because they are seeing licensed vessels, it means they are looking and they are reporting. They are not seeing any unlicensed vessels, which is good news.

PL: It is important to know where the Toothfish are being caught. It is a CCAMLR requirement that every vessel has a transponder that automatically reports the vessel’s position to the flag state (the country of registration) every four hours. It is up to each flag state to ensure that its vessels are fishing in the subareas that they are licensed to fish in - as well as a licence from GSGSSI they must have a license from their flag state to fish within CCAMLR-controlled waters. Ships must also report their catches and positions to the flag state so the flag state authority can check that catches really do come from the authorised area.

Another CCAMLR requirement is that transhipment or unloading of the toothfish catch may only take place once the flag state has done this checking and issued the vessel with an authorisation code, which is entered in a Catch Document that accompanies the fish to market. In addition to this, CCAMLR member states will not allow transhipment or unloading of toothfish until this Catch Document is properly completed and authorised. That is part of my job here - to verify the quantity that a vessel wishes to tranship as well as ensuring that the flag state has authorised the transhipment and that the Catch Document has been correctly completely. Only then will I allow the transhipment to proceed.

The answer to that one is yes. Not only does this give us confidence but it also demonstrates to the markets when they sell it on that it really does come from this fishery.

It is important for us that the vessels are able to reliably demonstrate that their catches came from the South Georgia fishery. There are consumer groups who have recognised that longlining for toothfish can be fatal to seabirds, particularly the vulnerable albatrosses, and are applying pressure on consumers not to buy the product. In order to continue the level of protection that we are succeeding with at the moment we need a strong market for South Georgia toothfish so that we can continue to charge enough for licenses to be able to afford all the stock assessment and surveillance that this protection takes. More consumer demand for responsibly caught toothfish, and an equally important drop in demand for IUU (Illegal, unregulated and unreported) fish will encourage fishermen to fish within the CCAMLR framework, saving birds.

One last thing of importance is the fact that South Georgia’s albatrosses often feed outside the 200-mile maritime zone. If they are to be protected from fatal fishing practises, operators of fishing vessels all around the Southern Oceans need to implement the same comprehensive protection measures that we require inside the MZ. We have shown that it is possible for a fishery to remain commercially viable even if the protection measures are all observed. It is now up to those who care, to apply appropriate pressure on the international fishing community. Fishing is a business so the most effective pressure is economic pressure - don’t buy fish unless you are sure that it comes from a responsibly run fishery.

By J. Brock (SARTMA)

Small Fishing Boats go out each day to catch bait and fish for the Fisheries Corporation.

GB: We don’t have any joint ventures with seafood companies at the present time. The fishery here is a local fishery run by a Fisheries Corporation set up in 1977 who buys their fish from the local fishermen. The boats range from 8 to 13 metres in size and do fishing on a daily basis. Each morning about 0300, they go out to catch their bait and then out to the fishing grounds and catch fish for the day. They meet EEU standards and carry ice with them. All of the catch is landed within 12 hours. We are continuing with the daily trips and don’t have any joint ventures on the Island.

GB: I am not sure to a specific answer to this one but in the past we have brought in quite a few pounds – a million pounds plus - from the offshore fishing licences. The answer well could be that the resource itself has diminished over the years, which I think it’s a world wide problem anyway. The resource isn’t as strong as when we first took up licensing in 1988. Companies have found it more economical for them to consider other more fruitful fishing grounds. So, instead of fishing in the south Atlantic in our grounds, they are considering the Pacific or other areas. The other factor might be that ICCAT (The International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas). Because of the problems they are having with Tuna world wide, the Far Eastern ships that we deal with are having to reduce vessels catching Tuna by over 50%. In some cases, some countries have had to reduce from 600 vessels to 125 vessels. A reduction in the fleet could be part of the cause as well because the vessels that were taking up licences here are now looking for a more valuable resource. That could be part of the reason that we have lost this revenue.

GB: Up till now, we haven’t had any scientific stock assessment done locally. But we are a member of the ICCAT Commission and they carry out all scientific analysis and assessments within the Atlantic Ocean anyway. All the scientific information comes from them.

If we had better management of the resource it probably would have helped us. The only way of managing the resource is to have some sort of patrol or some sort of surveillance within our waters. This is what is lacking with us at the moment. The reason for this is because of the cost of a patrol vessel. We have been trying to contact other persons or other countries to see about the cost. I believe that in the Falklands, it’s something like £5,000.00 a day. That’s something that we cannot afford, as we would never get a return from the number of licences sold.

GB: We have just recently installed a satellite system here but I don’t feel it’s as good as having a patrol vessel. I think we need some sort of patrol which could enhance the income from our fishery.

EG: There are 10 species endemic to St. Helena but none of these are commercial. They are all really tiny fish. So, the fish that we take commercially are more general in the South Atlantic.

EG: Fish that stay in the area are like Rock-hind, or Grouper and then you get the Tuna, which are migratory. We find this out from the catch data received.

GB: Our main species, the Tuna, breed off the West Coast of Africa and they migrate from there towards the coast of South America. We are more off that route but Ascension Island is more on that route than St. Helena. So, we are just getting the spin-offs from that migration.

EG: No. We don’t have that species here.

GB: We don’t do squid fishing here.

EG: We are starting to measure the general length of the species that are caught so we can get a far better idea about the population structures. Again, not much is known but we had a study done on the Grouper. The growth rate is much less than any place else in the world. It’s lower here than Ascension. It means that Grouper here would be more susceptible to over fishing.

GB: Grouper, is the main commercial inshore species that we have.

EG: For the migratory species, if the water temperature gets too cold, they will leave.

GB: The Grouper is a resident species. It’s only the Tuna that moves through other waters.