By Pita Ligaiula in Manila, Philippines
The Parties to the Nauru Agreement (PNA) have issued a firm warning to the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC22) in Manila, rejecting any attempt to lock a Fish Aggregating Device (FAD) closure requirement into the design of the future Bigeye tuna Management Procedure (MP).
In a statement delivered by the Marshall Islands on behalf of PNA, the bloc—responsible for the world’s largest sustainable purse-seine tuna fishery said the Commission risks creating an unworkable and unrealistic framework unless it allows flexibility in how future fishing mortality adjustments are applied.
“PNA Plus maintains that the back closure should not be locked into the MP design. We therefore request that SPC also evaluate candidate MPs without the assumption of a back closure built into the design,” the statement said.
PNA said its position reflects the need for a workable MP that can be agreed by next year, rather than a rigid model that would take years to negotiate and is unlikely to be concluded on time.
“PNA Plus supports the adoption of the Big Eye MP, however we have been clear that locking a back closure into the MP design is not acceptable.”
The bloc also questioned the value of creating a highly complex new system when the Bigeye MP would directly control only a small part of the stock.
“We also note that the Big Eye MP would likely only apply to about 20 percent of the stock. It is not clear the value in developing a full-blown separate arrangement if the MP only controls less than a third of the stock.”
PNA said a more efficient and realistic approach would be to align the MP with the Commission’s existing tropical tuna framework.
Noting that most Bigeye catch is already managed through effort limits, PNA said its preferred model is consistent with existing longline Vessel Day Scheme arrangements.
“The PNA Plus preference is of course to have an MP that is effort-based consistent with the operation of the long line BDS effort limits and with the fact that the majority of the stock is already managed through effort controls.”
But the bloc acknowledged that building an entirely new implementing measure as an effort-based MP would require—could delay adoption far beyond 2026.
To avoid gridlock, PNA proposed using the model already applied to skipjack tuna: an MP that generates a fishing mortality “scaler,” allowing the Commission to decide how to adjust catch or effort limits across fisheries.
“Under this approach the output of the Big Eye MP would be a scale on fishing mortality similar to the skipjack MP where the scale-r just the existing suite of catch and effort limits.”
The statement said this would give the Commission flexibility to choose from a “range of combinations” that could achieve the required adjustments in fishing pressure including, but not limited to, altering FAD closure periods.
PNA said any future changes must avoid placing “disproportionate burden” on its members, who host the region’s purse-seine fisheries and depend heavily on access revenues.
The bloc reminded WCPFC members that its proposed approach aligns with the Convention and with CMM 2023-02 on harvest strategies.
“This approach is fully consistent with the principle in CMM 2203 that harvest strategies… shall set out the management actions necessary to achieve defined and agreed biological, ecological, economic and or social objectives.”
PNA stressed the need to adopt a Bigeye MP next year, warning that complex new allocations and implementing measures are “highly unlikely” to be completed in time.
“It seems likely also that an effort-based MP would require the development of a new implementing arrangement…likely to require a lengthened process.”
The bloc urged members to focus on what is achievable.
“Here the flexibility we are proposing is also explicitly anticipated… the Commission may tailor elements on a case-by-case basis to suit the specific requirements of a particular fishery or stock.”
With only two years left to finalise the Bigeye MP, PNA’s intervention signals a looming test of political will and highlights deep divisions over how quickly and how far the Commission is prepared to reform management of one of the region’s most valuable tuna species.
