FAO Fisheries Reports, No.132 FID/R132 ~)

REPORl1

of the

THIRD SESSION OF THE FAO FISHERY COMMITTEE FOR THE EASTERN CEHI'RAL ATLAHI'IC ( CECAF) Santa Cruz de Tenerife, , 11-15 December 1972

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Rome, January 1973 ii

PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT

This is the final version of the Report as approved by the Third Session of the FAO Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF).

Distribution: Bibliographic entry: Participants Third Session of the FAO Fishery Committee Members of the FAO Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF), for the Eastern Central Atlantic Santa Cruz de Teneriffe (Canary Islands), Other interested nations and 11-15 D~cember 1972 (1973) organizations FAO Fish.Rep., (132): 23 p. FAO Department of Fisheries Report of the••••• FAO Regional Fishery Officers FAO Fisheries Reports - Eastern Central Atlantic. Demersal and pelagic fishery - Pisces, Cephalopoda. Gear selectivity, mesh size regulation. Fishery management and statistics. Fishery resources development. International cooperation. Recommendations and programmes. List of participants and documents. iii

CONI'ENTS Paragraphs

OPENING OF THE SESSION 1 - 3 ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE SESSION 4 STATE OF THE STOCKS 5 - 13 MESH SIZE REX1ULATION IN THE CECAF AREA 14 - 18 ARRANGEMENI'S FOR INTERNATIONAL INSPECTION 19 - 23 CONI'ROL OF THE TOTAL AMOUNI' OF FISHING ON 24 - 27 HEAVILY FISHED STOCKS IN THE CECAF AREA FISHERY STATISTICS 28 - 33 PROJECT FOR THE DEVELOPMENI' OF THE FISHERIES 34 - 45 IN THE EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANl'IC COOPERATIVE INVESTIGATIONS OF THE NORTHERN PART 46 OF THE EASTERN' CENI'RAL ATLANTIC ( CINECA)

JOIN!' VENI'URES 47 - 48 TECHNICAL CONFERENCE ON FISHERY MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT 49 - 51 ELECTION OF OFFICERS 52 - 53 DATE AND PLACE OF NEXT SESSION 54 ANY OTHER MATTERS 55 - 56

Appendix A - List of Participants 10 - 15

Appendix B - Address of Welcome by Admiral L. Boa.do Endeiza., 16 Under-Secretary for the Merchant Navy

Appendix C - Address by Mr. D. La.ya.chi, 17 - 18 Chairman, CECAF

Appendix D - Address by Mr. F.E. Popper, 19 - 21 Assistant Director-General (Fisheries)

Appendix E - Agenda 22 Appendix F - List of Documents 23

* * * * * * *

OPENING OF 'I'HE SESSION

1. The FAO Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central A"Glantic (CECAF) held its 'I'hix'd

Session from 11 to 15 December 1972, at the kind invitation of the Gover:illlleni; of Spsjn 1 a,t the Escue la Oficial de Nautice, at Santa Cruz de Tenerife I Canary Islands. The session was attended by the representatives of 18 nations, members of the Committee, by observers from one nation, and by representatives and observers from four international organizations. A list of par1icipants is given in Appendix A to this report.

2. Mr. D. Layachi {Morocco), elected Chairman at the Second Session of the Committee, was in the Chair at the opening of the session. 3. The Committee was welcomed by Admiral L. Boado Endeiza, Deputy-Secretary of the Merchant Marine. The Chairman of the Committee and Mr. F.E. Popper, Assistant Director­ General (Fisheries), addressed the session. The texts of their addresses are reproduced in Appendices B, c, and D to this repor~.

ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE SESSION 4. The Committee adopted the Agenda given in Appendix E to this report. The documents which were before the Comrni ttee are listed in Appendix F ·to this report.

STATE OF THE STOCKS

5. At its Second Session (Casablanca, May 1971), the Committee had modified the terms of reference of its Working Party on Regulatory Measures for Demersal Stook,g and had renamed it Working Party on Resources Evaluation. The Working Party met in FAO, Rome, in April 1972 under the chairmanship of Mr. E.O. Bayagbona (Nigeria) and its report was made avail­ able to the session (CECAF/72/4). 6. The Committee noted that new data collected since the meeting of the Working Party confirmed the trends already observed. Among the offshore demersal stocks of the northern area, the hake stock remained heavily exploited. The situation was similar for sparids. As far as cephalopods were concerned, there seemed no doubt that both cuttlefish and squid were heavily fished, while an increase in the catch of octopus might still be possible.

7. The Committee took note of the findings of the Working Party regarding the effect of various mesh sizes on catches of ~gellus bellotti and on the st~te of the inshore demersal stocks in the tropical zone. 8. The review of the state of the coastal pelagic resources made by the Working Party was considered by the Committee who was informed that, because of insufficient data1 the Working Party had not been able to assess the potential of the pelagic stocks found in the area between the Spanish Sahara and Guinea. However, preliminary estimatesl/ made since the meeting of the Working Party suggested that in 1972 the stock of round sardinella was being almost fully exploited, the mackerel stock was overfished while the horse-mackerel stock should be able to support a substantial increase of fishing.

9. The Committee discussed at length the difficulties encountered by the Working Party in carrying out its duties. In view of the unavailability or inaccuracy of some statistical and biological data, the Working Party had been unable to assess with precision the state of some stocks and to provide sound advice on regulatory measures suitable for their conser­ vation and management. The Committee recognized that the quality of advice formulated by

J. Elwertowski, P. Gonzalez Alberdi, J. Chabanne and T. Boely (1972). PremHre esti­ mation des ressources p~lagiques du plateau continental ouestafricain. Centre de recherches oc~anographiques de Dalcar, Thiaroye. DSP No. 42 - 2 -

the Working Party depended to a large extent on data collected and studies carried out by member cotU1tries. In this regard the Committee pointed out that the right to fish common resources carried with it a duty to collect and to make available to bodies responsible for joint appraisal of these resources the statistical and biological data needed for this work.

10. The Committee listed the fields where research should be urgently intensified. Among the first priorities it identified:

(a) The refinement of appraisal of coastal pelagic stocks in the northern transitional zone

(b) Foreseeable effects of limitation of fishing effort for the most heavily fished stocks

(c) Assessment and management studies on inshore demersal stocks in the tropical area

(d) Selectivity studies regarding the main demersal species

It was emphasized that the Working Party would be able to provide further advice only if member countries supply the data and information needed for these studies. The Committee therefore urged nations fishing in the area to undertake or to intensify their investiga­ tions in those fields. The Committee requested the non-coastal countries to participate particularly actively in the collection of data.

11. With regard to inshore demersal stocks in the tropical zone, the Committee noted that in certain areas info:rmation available was already sufficient to formulate measures limiting mesh size and/or fishing effort. Considering the relative homogeneity of the zone, it should be possible from a review of existing information provided by local laboratories to determine measures applicable to the whole area. The Committee recommended that such analysis be in­ cluded in the agenda of the next meeting of the Working Party.

12. The Committee stressed that inaccuracy or unavailability of data on the stocks does not lessen the urgent need for implementation of regulatory measures. These should be formulated on the best scientific evidence available even though these measures may need to be modified as soon as it became evident that it was beneficial to do so.

13. Some delegations raised the question of fishing pelagic species for fish meal production and recalled the appeal made by the Committee at its Second Session (May 1971) (paragraph 24 of the Report) .Y

MESH SIZE REGULATION IN ·!'HE CECAF AREA

14. The report of the First Session of the CECAF Sub-Committee on Implementation of Manage­ ment Measures (CECAF/72/5) was presented. In addition to a general discussion of management problems, the Sub-Committee had formulated a specific recommendation (Appendix D of its report) concerning the introduction of a provisional minimum mesh size of 70 mm for use by vessels fishing for hake or sea bream in the CECAF area. This recommendation was endorsed by the Committee. The Sub-Committee recommendation also called on countries to inform the Director-General of FAO of measures taken by Governments in accordance with the terms of the recommendation.

15. The Secretariat informed the Committee that several countries had already formally notified the Director-General of steps being taken. In addition many delegations informed the Committee that their Governments supported the measures, and to the extent that their nationals were engaged in fishing for hake and sea breams, were taking appropriate action.

',gj FAO Fish.Rep., (107) 1971 16. One country,while ensuring that it was talcing action in accordance with the Sub­ Committee's recommendation, reiterated its belief that it was more appropriate for manage­ ment measures to be implemented by a treaty-based body rather than by FAO or its subsidiary bodies.

17. It was noted that quantities of sea breams were caught in fisheries of other species, in particular shrimp and oephalopods. The Committee considered that it was desirable in principle to limit these incidental catches as far as possible and to reduce the allowable by-catch from 20 percent to 10 percent, if the practical difficulties could be overcome. FAO was requested to circulate information concerning designs of shrimp trawls which mini­ mized the incidental catches of fish and the Sub-Committee was requested to examine, on the basis of scientific data submitted to it, the feasibility of recommending that the percen­ tage of allowable by-catch be reduced from 20 percent to 10 percent.

18. The question of a minimum mesh size in the fishery for cephalopods was discussed in some detail. The Committee agreed that, subject to scientific evidence, it was desirable to use as large a mesh size in this fishery as possible and that a minimum size of 60 mm would probably be feasible. The Sub-Committee was therefore requested to formulate a recommendation for the use of a 60 mm mesh, simiiar to that for the provisional 70 mm mesh in the sea bream and halce fisheries. To facilitate the task of the Sub-Committee, countries were requested to submit to it, through the FAO Secretariat, relevant scientific information particularly concerning:

(a) The mesh sizes currently used when fishing for cephalopods

(b) The quantities and sizes of cephalopods talcen

(c) The results of experiments on the selection by trawls of cephalopods including data from outside the CECAF area

(d) The quantities and sizes of other species of fish taken when fishing for oephalopods, in as much detail as possible

ARRANGEMENTS FOR INTERNATIONAL INSPECTION

19. The Committee examined the question of international control of conservation and management measures in the light of the discussions already held on this matter in the Sub~Committee on Implementation of Management Measures and on the basis of the information provided by the Secretariat in document CECAF/72/6.

20. All the delegations that took part in the debate were agreed that coastal States had exclusive authority and responsibility to enforce management measures in waters under their jurisdiction and that the desirability or otherwise of devising an international inspection scheme to supplement national enforcement systems could only be considered with respect to areas of the high seas beyond national jurisdiction.

21. One delegation indicated that it was opposed to any form of international or reciprocal inspection scheme. Another delegation stated that in its view any arrangements for inter­ national inspection should be made on the basis of a treaty. Several delegations of non­ .coastal States fishing in the geographic area covered by the Committee felt that inter­ national inspection of management measures would be essential if these measures were to be fully effective. Two of these delegations considered, however, that it would be premature to pursue this matter at the present time and that it would be preferable to await the out­ come of the forthcoming United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. 22. A number of delegations of coastal States in the Eastern Central Atlantic stressed that I apart from tu:n,a, 1 most of "Ghe stocks exploited commercially were now fished in areas within the jurisdiction of coastal States. Consequently, they considered that an inter­ national inspection scheme would be of limited relevance since it could only apply with respect to fisheries of marginal importance. They feH 1 however, that before expressing definitive views regarding the need for international inspection, it would be desirable to obtain data on the type, magnitude and migrations of fish stocks to be found in areas beyond national jurisdiction. They also emphasized that any international inspection scheme should take due account of the characteristics of the fisheries in the Eastern Central Atlantic. Following a thorough discussion of this matter, the Committee agreed to request its Working Party on Resources Evaluation to collect the necessary data on fish stocks, other than tuna, beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.

23. In the course of the debate, some delegations observed that the responsibilities devol­ ving upon coastal Sta,tes with regard to enforcement of management measures were increasing as a result of both the extension of their jurisdiction and of their greater participation than heretofore in the exploitation of fishery resources off their shores. They also poin­ ted out that the proper discharge of these responsibilities was in the interest of all members of the Committee and that the question of technical and financial assistance to coastal States in this regard would deserve consideration.

CONTROL OF THE TOTAL .AMOUNT OF FISHING ON HEAVILY FISHED STOCKS IN THE CECAF AREA

24. The Secretariat presented the document (CECAF/72/7) setting out the problems concerning the control of the amount of fishing. Althou~h the measures being taken to control the mesh size in the fisheries for hake and sea bream tand also, when adopted, for cephalopods) will have beneficial effects, the rational utilization of the resource,and the economic well-being of the fisheries depend on limits being set to the total amount of fishing on each stock, 25. The choice of the correct measures to effect such limitation depends on the availa­ bility of good scientific assessments of the state of the stocks as well as evaluation of the probable economic e,nd social effects of possible management measures. These in turn require the supply of adequate basic statistical and other information, as well as the availability of suitably qualified experts. The need to improve the supply of data was therefore emphasized by the Committee. The importance of increasing the capabilities of national laboratories and other institutions in the region through the supply of equipment, facilities for travel, etc. was also expressed.

26. It was pointed out that since the enactment and implementation of management measures within the jurisdiction of a coastal country were a national responsibility, and since a great part of the fishing activi ti.es in the CECAF area took place within the limits of national jurisdiction claimed by coastal countries, there was a clear need for close con­ sultation and coordination amont these countries in the first place, as well as between these countries and the other members of CECAF, in order to ensure that the measures taken were effective in providing for the conservation and rational exploitation of the stocks as a whole.

27. There was considerable discussion concerning the most appropriate ac"cion to be ·taken by the Committee so as best to integrate and harmonize action taken by coastal countries, as well as to take advantage of the information and expertise available to the non-coastal countries. The Committee decided to set up a Sub-Committee open to all members of the ·committee that are coastal countries in the CECAF area. It agreed that the Sub-Committee, to be known as Sub-Committee on Management of Resources within the Limits of National Jurisdiction, would have the following terms of reference with respect to living :,•esources within the limits of national jurisdiction: (a) To study the various management measures required, as well as their foreseeable effects

(b) To recommend the most appropriate measures for implementation by member countries, taking into account, where required, the need to harmonize the measures taken by individual member countries

(c) To recommend the most effective method of controlling the appli­ cation of measures at the national and regional levels

(d) To advise, as appropriate, on the coordination of such measures with those in effect outside naUonal limits.

The Committee also agreed that the Sub-Committee would report to the Committee.

FISHERY STATISTICS

28. The Committee reiterated the view that the supply of basic statistics and related information is essential to the better understanding of the current state of the stocks, and hence to the identification of opportunities for development or needs for management. It noted, however, that despite this importance the supply of these basic data in the CECAF area was, in many respects, inadequate. The Committee therefore believed that the importance of the supply of basic data should be further emphasized, and adopted the following recommendation:

The FAO Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic,

Recognizing the need for better planning for the development and rational management of the fisheries in the Eastern Central Atlantic,

Noting that such planning cannot be effectively carried out without adequate information concerning the magnitude of the total catch, and related statistical and biological data, Noting further that at present such basic data are not available in a timely and accurate fashion for all the fisheries in the area,

Calls upon all countries fishing in the Eastern Central Atlantic to pledge themselves to collect comprehensive statistics of their fisheries, and to report these to FAO for regional use.

29. In making this recommendation, it was recognized that collection of statistics was not inexpensive, though there was the possibility of diverting resources from areas of lower priority. It was also recognized that developing countries would need technical assistance to enable them to carry out their responsibilities.

30. The activities of the Regional Fishery Statistician in this regard had been most wel­ come, but his work had been, to date, limited to only certain countries, It was noted that the post of the Regional Fishery Statistician had been extended until the end of 1973 but the Committee believed that it was highly desirable that the post should be further extended so that all countries in the region could benefit from this technical assistance and advice. There was also the need for improved training of statisticians working in African countries and in this connection the Committee welcomed the offer by to make facilities avail­ able for such training in Polish institutions. - 6 -

31. Many of' ·the vessels fishing in the area were absent from their home ports for very long periods and this made it sometimes difficult to collect the more detailed data in a timely fashion. Some progress had been made by sending -~echnicians or others on board these vessels or to por--ts o!' transhipment in the CECAF area.

32. The expenses of this could be reduced by close cooperation between the scientists of the different countries concerned, and it was hoped that this cooperation could be inten­ sified. In this connection the Committee accepted with gratitude an offer of cooperation by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas.

33. In addition to the collection of data at the national level, there was also the need for them to be centrally compiled, edited, and made available for use by scientists or others working in the area. Though the cost of these central activities are very small in comparison with the value of the fisheries, and with the benefits accruing from more rational development and management, they are nevertheless large in comparison with the resources currently available, e.g., through the FAO Regular Programme. The Committee therefore urged FAQ to make every effort to identify a.nd 1 on behalf of the Committee appeal to, alternative sources of funds, e.g., through UNDP or a funds-in-trust arrangement.

PROJECT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FISHERIES IN THE EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC

34. The Committee was informed of the status of the draft request for an international project for the development of the fisheries of the Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF/72/9).

35. Although recognizing the importance of the proposed development project, UNDP, due to current limitation of funds, had been unable to finance it on the scale proposed. They were, however, prepared to provide a modest amount of preparatory assistance in 1973, leading to the submission of a revised project to the Governing Council in June 1974 as an inter-regional project. A statement from the UNDP representative, however, reaffirmed that organization's appreciation and continuing support for fisheries development and pre­ investment-oriented projects such as that now under consideration.

36. The scale of assistance to be provided in 1973 would suffice for the assignment of a programme leader and one or two consultants. Their main task would be to provide some ba.sic services of a regional nature, particularly with regard to the collection and evalua­ tion of data and statistics and the identification of development needs in the region which would assist in the formul~tion of the project and prepare the ground for its implementation in June 1974.

37. During the preliminary phase efforts would be made to enlist further financial assis­ tance from various funding sources. The Committee was, however, informed that if such efforts were to be successful it was essential that the coastal countries should, urgently, give their views on the needs and priorities for development within their fishery industries.

38. Several delegations stressed the need for additional support to strengthen their national fisheries institutions.

39. Several delegations also indicated that the developed CECAF member countries presently operating in the region, must give serious consideration to decentralizing their industries and transferring productive capacity to the coastal countries, thus assisting in accelera- ting local development and economic growth.

40. It was also stressed that artisanal fisheries were of great importance particularly to certain coastal countries and that the proposed project should include the development of this sector in its programme of work.

41. A number of delegations, representing the non-coastal countries, indicated their support for the project and gave a3surances of their continuing assistance for fisheries development in the area. 42. The Committee agreed that du.ring the early stages the project should be located at FAO Headquarters in Rome where the support of the technical divisions of the Department of Fisheries would be readily availa.ble, but that subsequently it should transfer to one of the coastal countries i various loca:tions were suggested. 43. The Committee agreed that the two major spheres of activity of the project would be:

(a) Resource evaluation and managemen·t

(b) Fishery development

44. The Committee noted that, whilst it had established subsidiary bodies for resource evaluation and management, similar machinery for fishery development activities was now required. The Committee therefore agreed to establish a sub-committee, one of whose tasks would be to maintain liaison between the proposed project and the Committee. A resolution to this effect was adopted, the text of which is attached. 45. The proposals for the provision of preliminary assistance and for the eventual sub­ mission of a revised project for the development of fisheries in the Eastern Central Atlantic were approved by the Committee.

SUB-COMMITTEE ON FISHERY DEVELOPMENT

The Committee:

Implementing its conclusion that the setting up of a Sub-Committee on Fishery Development in the CECAF area is essential if it is to carry out its responsibilities toward the coastal countries.

Hereby establishes in accordance with paragraph 4 of its statutes and Rule IX of its Rules of Procedure a Sub-Committee to be known as the Sub-Committee on Fishery Development, the objectives, functions and composition of which are defined below:

(1) Purpose The purpose of the Sub-Committee shall be to examine the problems and prospects of fishery development in the CECAF coastal countries; to provide guidance and assistance to the proposed inter-regional projects for the development of the fisheries in the Eastern Central Atlantic, hereafter called the Project; to maintain the closest liaison between the Project and the Committee in all these matters, and to study and implement the various forms of cooperation between the various countries fishing in the CECAF area.

(2) Terms of Reference

The activities of the Sub-Committee shal, in particular, include the following:

(a) To examine constraints and define needs and priorities for fishery develop­ ment programmes in all sectors of the fishery industries in the CECAF coaGtal countries at regional and national level.

(b) To advise on the formulation of development programmes, both on a regional and national level, as appropriate, which will overcome existing constraints and which will aim at improving efficiency and ensuring economic growth within the fishery. (c) To coordinate all present and planned fishery development programmes in the area and to encourage cooperation and assistance for fishery development between all member countries.

(3) Membership

The membership of the Sub-Committee shall be open to all members of the Committee.

COOPERATIVE INVESTIGATIONS OF TEE NORT.HEHN PART OF THE EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC (CINECA) 46. The Committee was informed about the progress made and the present situation regarding the execution of the multiship surveys which will take place in February and August 1973. For the February cruise, enough vessels will be available to cover the programme on environ­ ment, but no vessel is so far committed to participate in the quantitative acoustic surveys scheduled in the programme. Considering that this element of the whole programme is the one of most direct interest to fisheries, the Committee drew the attention of member countries to this unsatisfactory situation. The interest in collecting, during the multiship surveys, detailed catch and effort statistics - on a short space and time grid - from commercial fleets operating in the area so that relative abundance of various fish stocks can be mapped, and related to the results of the acoustic surveys and investigations on environment, was underlined. Some delegations reported on the recent investigations already carried out by their countries under this cooperative programme, and on their future plans.

JOINT VENTURES 47. At the suggestion of the Chairman of the Committee, who indicated that numerous refe­ rences had been made during the discussion to the need for suitable arrangements for expan­ sion of cooperative efforts in developing fishery industries, the Secretariat outlined a proposed study of joint ventures in the CECAF area. This was in line with recommendation~/ made by the Committee at its Second Session in May 1971 (paragraphs 24-25 of the report) lJ and by the Consultation on the Con8ervation of Fishery Res~u,rces and the Control of Fishing in Africa, also held in May 1971 (pages 6--8 of the report)i/. The study would deal with the economic, technical and legal aspects of the various arrangements, private, national, multi-national and intergovernmental, covered by the expression "joint ventures". Although it would be based on existing arrangements and on the experience gained from such arrange­ ments, the main purpose of.the study should be to provide guidelines and practical sugges­ tions for conclusion of joint ventures agreements.

48. All delegations that took par~ in the debate expressed great interes-t in a study of this nature and offered to cooperate fully in its execution. The Committee agreed that the study should be prepared in draft form by the Secretariat of FAO, in close consultation with the member countries of the Committee, and referred to the Sub-Committee on Fishery Develop­ ment for its consideration before being submitted to the Committee.

TECHNICAL CONFERENCE ON FISHERY MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMEll'I' 49. The Committee was informed by the Secretariat of the arrangements being made for a Technical Conference on Fishery Management and Development organized by FAO at the invita­ tion of the Government of Canada, to be held in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, from 13 to 23 February 1973.

:J/ FAO Fish.Rep., (107) 1971 !t} FAO Fish.Rep., (101) Vol.1 - 9 -

50. The Committee noted with satisfaction that the FAO Council at its Fifty-Ninth Session (November/December 1972) had authorized the Director-General to convene the Conference, and agreed that considerable benefit could be gained from it on matters of fishery management and development. 51. The Committee expressed its appreciation for the generous supply of funds by several Governments to support attendance at the Conference of selected persons from developing countries.

ELECTION OF OFFICERS 52. According to Rule II (1) of its Rules of Procedure, the Committee was required to elect a Chairman, and a maximum of three Vice-Chairmen. A Nominations Committee was appointed, consisting of the representatives of Gabon, Liberia, Mauritania, Poland and Sierra Leone. 53. On the recommendation of the Nominations Committee, Mr. E.O. Bayagbona, the represen­ tative of Nigeria, was unanimously elected as Chairman of the Committee, and the represen­ tatives of Cameroon, Poland and as Vice-Chairmen.

DATE .AND PLACE OF NEXT SESSION

54. The Committee agreed that its Fourth Session should be held at FAO Headquarters, Rome, in principle in mid-1974. The precise timing was left to the Director-General to decide, in consultation with the Chairman of the Committee, bearing in mind the timing of other sessions and the desirability of avoiding any overlap with the United Nations Conference. on the Law of the Sea so as to enable fishery officials to attend that conference, as well as the preceding preparatory sessions.

ANY OTHER MATTERS 55. The observer of the U.S.S.R. expressed gratitude for the opportunity to attend the session and pledged his country's continuing support and assistance in the provision of statistical data, scientific information and training. He also referred to the partici­ pation by his country in the CINECA.

56. At the invitation of the Chairman, the Associate Director for Fisheries of the International Development Research Center of Canada informed the Committee of its relevant current activities in the West African region. In collaboration with the Government of Ghana, IDRC was providing support to a project aimed at identifying constraints and im­ proving performance in an artisanal fishing community in Ghana. The Center hoped that the results of this project would find application in other countries in the CEC.AF area.

* * * * * * * -10-

Appendix A LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

Cameroon DELAIS,. M. Chef de Service EPEE-NOOUBE, Dr. T. Office de la Recherche scientifique Directeur des P8ches maritimes Outre-Mer (ORSTOM) B.P. 121 24 rue Bayard Douala 75-Paris 7e Congo (People's Republic of) Gabon LOUB.AKI, B. OSSINGA, E. Directeur de la Marine marohande Di:recteur des P!ches B.P. 1107 B.P. 2275 Pointe-Noire Libreville

Cuba. Gambia FERRER GUZMAN, R. Director de la Base Canaria.s de la Flota Cubana de Pesca. Cayo Cruz Ghana Habana. CARRILLO CARDENAS, Dra. Elvira Centro de Inveatigacionea Pesqueras (CIP) Greece Calle 26 Miramar Habana

GARCIA JUANTONEVA, M. Guinea Capitan M/D M. Plata Flota Cubana de Pesca Apartado 6214 Habana Dahomey

Ivory Coast France

LABROUSSE 1 B. Sous-directeur des Peches Direction des P@ches maritimes Secr~tariat g~n~ra.l de la Marine marchande Minist~re des Transports MIMURA, K. 3 Place de Fontenoy Counsellor 75-Paris 7e Embassy of Japan Via Virginia Orsini 18 00192 Rome, -11 -

KATAYAMA, M. EL BACHA, M. Chief Inspecteur de Production et de Atlantic Trawl Fisheries Section Comercialisation Second Fisheries Division Office national des P~ches Production Department 13-15 rue Chevalier Bayard Fisheries Agency Casablanca Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry 2-1 Kasuroigaseki, Chiyoda-ku MOUEDDEN, J. Tokyo Directeur adjoint Institut des P3ches maritimes HATANAKA, H. Rue de Tiznit Biologist Casablanca Deep-Sea Trawl Fisheries Resources Section Dernersal Fisheries and Marine AZZOU, M. Mammals Division Directeur des Halles Fal'-Seas Fisheries Research Laboratory 13-15 rue Chevalier Bayard Fisheries Agency Casablanca Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry 2-1 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku COHEN, B. Tok.yo Attach~ de Direction Office national des P~ches HAYASHI, Y. 13 rue Voltaire Adviser Casablanca Hoko Fisheries Company Las Palmas, Canary Islands Nigeria Korea (Republic of) BAYAGBONA, E.O. Director KIM SUNG CHAE Federal Department of Fisheries Fishery AttacM P .M.B. 12529 Embassy of the Republic of Korea Lagos Avenida del General!simo 10 16, Spain Norway Liberia ¢sTVED1', O.J. Fiskeridirektoratets Havforskningsinstitutt KINI-FREEMAN I A.K. Box 2906 Director 504 Bergen-Nordnes Bureau of Fisheries Ministry of Agriculture Poland Monrovia TALARCZ.AK, K. Mauritania Deputy Chief Fisheries and International DHEIRAT, B.O. Cooperation Department Chef Fisheries Central Board Service des P~ches industrielles ul. Odrowaza 1 B.P. 137 Szczecin Nouakchott WLODARCZYK, H. Morocco Repr~sentant de 1 1Union des P~ches maritimes LAYACHI, D. B.P. 3291 Directeur g~n~ral Dakar, S~n~gal Office national des P~ches 13-15 rue Chevalier Bayard Romania Casablanca - 12 -

Senegal LOPEZ AGUIRREBENGOA, P. Secretario de Embajad.a DIA, Dr. I.M. Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores Directeur Madrid Service de l'Oc~anographie et des P~ches maritimes BERMEJO MARTINEZ, V. Minist~re du D~veloppement rural Jefe, 5a Secci6n B.P. 289 Direcci6n General de Pesca Marftima Dakar Ministerio de Comercio Ruiz de Alarc6n 1 BA, Dr. M. Madrid Chef de la Division Recherche et Legislation BAS PEIRED, V. Direction des P~ches Bi6logo Minist~re de l'Economie rurale Instituto de Investigaciones Pesqueras B.P. 289 Paseo Nacional s/n Dakar Barcelona

CHAMP AGNAT, C. G. LOZANO CABO, F. Directeur Catedratico y Director Centre de Recherches oc~anographiques Departamento de Ciencias Marinas B.P. 2241 Universidad de la Laguna Dakar Sc.nta Cruz de Tenerife, Islas Canarias Sierra Leone

FERGUSSON, K.A. Principal Fisheries Officer Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources Freetown JONES, B.W. Principal Scientific Officer Fisheries Laboratory MARCITLLACH GUAZO, F. Lowestoft, Suffolk Direc·tor General de Pesca Maritima Direcci6n General de Pesca Marftima United States of America Ministerio de Comercio Ruiz de Alarc6n 1 BRITTIN, B.H. Madrid Deputy Coordinator of Ocean Affairs and Deputy Special Assistnnt to the OLIVER MASSUTI, M. Secretary for Fisheries and Wildlife Subdirector Department of State Instituto Espafl.ol de Oceanograffa Washington, D.C. 20250 Alcala 27 Madrid 14 LARKINS, H. Fishery Biologist PASTOR RIDRUEJO, R. Office of International Affairs Director de Cooperaci6n Mar:l'.tima National Oceanic and Atmospheric y A~rea Internacional Administration Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores U.S. Department of Commerce Madrid Washington, D.C. 20235

GARCIA CABRERA, C. PEASE, N. Director Regional Fisheries Attach6 Laboratorio del Instituto Espa.ffol Embassy of the United States of America de Oceanograffa B.P. 1712 M~ndez Nuf'l.ez 65 4 B Abidjan, Ivory Coast Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Islas Canarias -13-

Zaire ICSEAF LAGARDE, R. Executive Secretary International Commission for the OBSERVERS Southeast Atlantic Fisheries Paseo de la Habana 65

Madrid 16 1 Spain Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

YUROV, V. Fishery Technologist OTHER ORGANIZATIONS Ministry of Fisheries 12 Rozdenstvensky IDRC Moscow

ALLSOPP 1 W.H.L. ZN AMENSKI , Y. Associate Director for Fisheries Fishery Technologist International Development Research Center 12 Rozdenstvensky University of British Columbia Moscow 314 Duke Hall Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS HOST GOVERNMENT UN/mIDP Subsecretaria de la Marina Mercante RIPLEY, Dr. W.E. Senior Technical Adviser BOADO ENDEIZA, Admiral L. Technical Advisory Division Subsecretario United Nations Development Progrannne United Nations TAPIA MANZANARES, J. New York, N.Y. 10017, U.S.A. Secretario General

UN/uNITAR PAZ CURBERA, A. Delegado de la Inspecci6n General CRUTCHFIELD, Prof. J.A. de Ensefianzas Mar!timas y Escuelas Attaclunent Officer UN Institute for Training and Research CABIDO RODRIGUEZ, R. c/o Department of Economics Capitan del buque oceanografico University of Washington 11 Cornide de Saavedra" Seattle, Washington 98105, U.S.A. Escuela Oficial de Nautica ICC AT GIRONA Y BALLESTER, R. RODRIGUEZ-MARTIN, Dr. O. Director Executive Secretary International Commission for the RODRIGUEZ DOMINGUEZ, L. Conservation of Atlantic Tunas Vice-Rector General Mola 17

Madrid 1 1 Spain GARCIA ACOSTA, J. Secretario ICES isTVEIYr, O.J. (see Norway) -14-

F AO DEP ARTMENr OF FI SHERI ES

Headquarters Field POPPER, F.E. EWERTOWSKI, J. Assistant Director-General (Fisheries) Project Manager Survey and Development of CARROZ, J.E. Pelagic Fish Resources Senior Legal Officer P.O. Box 154 (International Fisheries) Dakar, Senegal GULLAND, J.A. BANERJI, S.K. Chief, Fishery Statistics Regional Fishery Statistician and Economic Data Branch P.O. Box 1628 Fishery Economics and Accra, Ghana Institutions Division .ANDERSON, A.M. Chief, Marketing Section Fishery Industries Division AUBRAY, R. Project Operations Officer Operations Service TROADEC, J.-P. Fishery Biologist Marine Biology and Environment Branch Fishery Resources Division

SECRETARIAT

Secretary H. Rosa, Jr. Chief, Fishery Liaison Unit Department of Fisheries

Liaison Officer V. Bermejo Martinez Jefe, 5a Secci6n Direcci6n General de Pesca Mar:l'.tima _Meetings Officer Mary Clare de Freitas Interpreters C.H. Bia.cs (Chief) Sophia Bertelsen N. Hinton F. Piraud A. Sifre Elsa Yndurain Supervisor of Personnel Paz de Mendizabal Yrigoyen -15-

Receptionists and Office Sta.ff Mercedes Bethencourt Garc!a,-Talavera Maria Crunin Yanes Maria Jesus Garc!a Canova.a Leonor Gimenez Pradilla Nieves Ma.ffiotte Carrillo Nieves Palerm Salazar Maria. de los Angeles Ramfrez Pastor Cristina. Rodr!guez La Serna Begor.la. Suarez Alba Sta.ff of the Escuela Oficial de Nautica F. de Armas Mora R. Fern&ldez Suarez J. Gonzalez Perez M. Ocaf:la. Morales E. Palacios Tapia F. Petisco Abeij6n Candelaria Quintero Mesa

* * * * * * * Appendix B

ADDRESS OF WELCOME BY ADMIRAL L. BOADO E1IDEIZA, UNDER-SECRETARY FOR THE MERCHANT NAVY

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Assistant Director-General of FAO, Ladies and Gentlemen,

On behalf of the Spanish Government I wish to express my appreciation for the honour done to us by FAO in agreeing to hold here in Teneriffe the Third Session of the Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic. I extend a hearty welcome to the delegates, experts and advisers composing this committee, as well as to those persons attending as representatives of international agencies or as observers.

The growing world concern to safeguard the fishery resources of the sea as a source of proteins in order to meet humanity's unsatisfied food needs is strikingly evidenced by the proliferation of regional agencies responsible for fisher-J conservation. Among those agencies is this committee which starts its Third Session today. It is only a few years old but a glance at the agenda and at the distinguished personal qualities of all those who have come as delegates provides impressive testimony to its enthusiasm and vitality.

The future development and rational utilization of fishery resources in the area of competence of this committee are undoubtedly in safe hands. You are well aware of the richness of these grounds and of their importance in .the international growth of fisheries. Important scientific studies have been organized in this region. Much remains to be done. Spain has played an active part in these studies and many Spanish scientists have been working on them for years. Our oceanographic vessel CORNIDE DE SAAVEDRA joined the CEX:AF zone immediately after commissioning and over the past two years has collaborated energet­ ically in various cruises, as also have other research vessels belonging to various member countries.

For Spain these fisheries are of vital importance. We note with satisfaction, there­ fore, that the Sub-Committee on Implementation of Management Measures approved a number of measures at its session in Rome in June 1972 designed to assist with the management of the region. A consideration of these measures and the performance of studies to regulate national fishing effort, limit mesh size and arrive at improved statistics so as to safe­ guard stocks of the most highly fished species will form the heavy agenda to be dealt with by this committee over the next few days.

As the purpose both of formulating and of applying management measures is to arrive at suitable regulations, it is absolutely essential to have increasingly close coordination among member countries. We hope that such regulations will lead to a rational exploitation of resources, that is, to a maximum sustained yield which will have no adverse effects on the biological balance of population dynamics. I am pleased to say that on our side this collaboration alread,y exists; our desire is to increase it as much as may be necessary. However, our aideshould not be confined to this aspect but should also embrace our resear­ ches and our fishery schools, the oceanographic vessel CORlHDE DE SAAVEDRA, the owners and crews of our fishing vessels, and administration. We also wish to collaborate wholeheartedly on the implementation of the fishery development programme which undoubtedly constitutes a significant part of your agenda: the International Project for the Development of Fisheries in the Eastern Central Atlantic. In this connection, and as we happen to be in one of our schools, I extend a serious offer to all developing countries: our schools, of which there are two in the Canaries, the one we are in now, and another on the island of Lanzarote, are at your full disposal and stand ready to assist you as far as possible. I wish you great success with the meetings of this committee and hope you will consider yourselves at home here in Teneriffe. * * * * * * * ApPendix C

ADDRESS BY MR. D. LAYACHI, CHAIRMAN, CECAF

On behalf of this committee, I wish first of all to express my thanks to the Spanish Government for its kindness in extending its hospitality to us and acting as host to the debates of this Third Session of the FAO Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic.

This will be the third time that the committee has met and that the different nations which exploit the biological wealth of this region of the Atlantic have compared their experiences, needs and points of view concerning their common basic problem in this field, namely, the management of fishery exploitation in the interests of all.

That is the goal set by the Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic. Already, despite its relative youth (a little over three and a half years) some results have been achieved.

The first requirement was to specify needs, to arrange problems in order, and to define objectives and the means of attaining them. For this purpose two working parties were set up, the first responsible for resources evaluation and the second for working out conser­ vation measures. This procedure is logical and conventional in that it entails carrying out an inventory before attempting to intervene and influence exploitation by means of measures and regulations.

These working parties, composed of technical experts, have met in Rome.

By pooling their ideas and the available data, they have been able to make a first approach to the most important topics. Some initial hypotheses on the state of stocks have been advanced, particularly working hypotheses, which have led to a clarification of ideas and to proposals concerning orders of magnitude but which have also revealed gaps in the collection of data. Logically these gaps should now be filled, and even better results can be expected in the years to come.

As regards management measures, there too a highly useful inventory has been performed. Current regulations have been listed and an overall policy concerning desirable management measures is beginning to emerge.

All in all, it has been possible to state a nwnber of key problems and constructive proposals which we will be discussing here together in the next few days. A step forward can therefore be said to have been taken.

Another positive side of CECAF action has been to act as a catalyst for international cooperation and to channel it toward the study of fishery resources through the medium of projects fina,nced and technically supported by UNDP, whether such projects be special ones like that due to start shortly in Morocco or a broad regional programme such as the one whose study appears on our agenda.

These CECAF meetings have provided an opportunity for numerous fruitful bilateral and multilateral contacts and will continue to do so.

Generally speaking then, CECAF seems to have made a good start. However, it is only a start and we are still far from our goal. To reach it, much further effort will be needed. -18-

First of all, the results obtained are still rather sporadic. Our technical experts are well aware of this. Many data are lacking, and many results are still too fragmentary and imprecise for us to assume. We now possess the solid foundations with which to support our resource management system. Moreover, the measures proposed or envisaged are almost always based on purely technical or scientific studies. It should not be forgotten that, particularly for riparian states, such measures will have economic and social implications that are not to be under-estimated. And in the end it is economic and social development that should be the primary concern of our leaders, the rational management of marine re­ sources being a means of achieving that aim.

Here some urgency can be said to exist. For while the data collected by our techni­ cians are extremely valuable and represent a solid and stable groundwork, it will be noted that their background is evolving very rapidly in two very definite directions:

First, the legal aspect will change as a result of the present and future expansion of the areas of sovereignty of riparian states. This expansion is producing profound changes in the study of management measures.

Second, the technical aspect will alter as a result of the increased size and effec­ tiveness of the equipment which is, or soon will be, employed by the industrially very advanced states.

These two trends call for a general review of the problems involved. The solutions proposed should make the greatest possible allowance for the trends if they are not to become quickly put of date.

Increasingly reliable and numerous data are therefore going to be collected and made available to us; the framework to which they apply will continue to change in its technical, economic, legal and social aspects. It is therefore necessary to record and integrate all these factors so that their consequences can be analysed and conclusions drawn.

* * * * * * * -19 -

Appendix D

ADDRESS BY MR. F.E. POPPER ASSISTANT DIRECTOR-GENERAL (FISHERIES)

Mr. Chairman, Excellencies, Distinguished Delegates, Gentlemen,

It is with pleasure that I address, on behalf of the Director-General, this Third Session of the FAQ Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic. I wish, first of all, to express our sincere gratitude for the generous hospitality of the Government of Spain which is hosting this meeting and has made such effective preparations for the Committee's work on this occasion.

Although this is only the third session of the Committee, its work is already \'lell advanced and has reached the stage where one can begin to review the implementation of specific recommendations. This in itself must be a cause for satisfaction since in many international fishery bodies it has taken much longer to reach this point.

The recommendations made at your last session concerned on one side the management of the fishery resources of your area and on the other fishery development. On management we have, I think, made good progress and if we can keep it up we will be doing very well, at least in comparison with similar efforts elsewhere. On development, I feel, we are moving rather more slowly than we should and I believe could and we need to see what should be done to speed matters up.

Let me elaborate a little:

First, management. At its Second Session, this Committee established a Sub-Committee on Implementation of Management Measures which was entrusted with the task of formulating draft regulations on mesh sizes limitation in a fonn suitable for implementation by governments. FAO was re­ quested to submit the draft regulations, as soon as they had been fonnulated by the Sub­ committee, to the governments concerned for adoption.

The Sub-Committee met la.st June and after reviewing scientific evidence provided by working parties adopted the text of a recommendation containing draft regulations on minimum mesh sizes of nets w:,ed in the hake and sea bream fisheries. These were brought to the attention of the governments by the Director-General and several of them have already res­ ponded and indicated the action being taken. Details will be reported to you under your relevant agenda item and I hope that some delegations will be able to give the Committee additional information on action taken or being prepared by their governments. The choice of mesh sizes to be used in these fisheries is, to several of the countries in the area, perhaps not a matter of very high priority. It is however, I think, a matter of very considerable significance in this important fishing region that the first definite step toward positive management of the resources is being taken. In regarding this action in this way I am following the lead given by your Sub-Committee, which has stated that while mesh regulations are useful and should be actively implemented, there is perhaps also need for the enforcement of other important measures such as the limitation of the amount of fishing if the resources are to be rationally utilized. This, of course, is a matter that comes up in your agenda and which you will certainly wish to examine carefully. I have spoken, Mr. Chairman, of good progress on the management side. Let me add 1 at once, that these moves toward the rational management and utilization of the resources can­ not proceed very far without better information on the state of the fish s·tocks, and inci­ dentally I should stress that this information es equally necessary for good development planning. Your Working Party on Resources Evaluation has pointed out very clearly that the better and more accurate assessments needed for both purposes cannot be made until the supply of statistics is considerably improved. For both the coastal countries and those engaged in distant-water fisheries, information on even such matters as the volume of total catch is still incomplete. I have no doubt that this Committee will have to pay particular attention to ways in which the supply of this essential basic data. can be improved.

Let me now turn to the problems of development and review the action we have taken in FAQ on your recommendation concerning the planning and implementation of a regional develop­ ment programme under the aegis of the Committee. A draft request to the UNDP for assistance in an International Project for Development of Fisheries in the Eastern Central Atlantic was prepared in FAO and distributed through the proper channels to the sixteen coastal member countries of the Committee. The response of these countries has been very encouraging. Eleven of them have endorsed the proposal and we understand that others will soon follow suit. Perhaps some will be able to announce their intentions at this session. However, as stated in one of your working documents, the UNDP cannot fully support the proposed project at this juncture but has made provisions for a small-scale preparatory project to be initiated in 1973. This matter will be further dis­ cussed during this session, and we are fortunate to have with us a Senior Technical Adviser of the UNDP who I hope will take part in the discussiorui of this very important matter.

The draft request was also sent to the non-coastal Member Nations of CECAF suggesting their participation in the project. The response, I regret to say, Mr. Chairman, has not yet been very encou.raging but I hope that during this session further progress can be made in this direction.

In this regard, Mr. Chairman, I would like to refer to the resolution, adopted by the la.st session of the CECAF, on Cooperation Among the States Interested in the Fisheries of the Eastern Central Atlantic and also to that adopted by the Consultation on the Conservation of Fishery Resources and the Control of Fishing in Africa which many of you may remember was convened immediately after the last session of this Committee. They both call for assistance from the developed countries fishing in the area of this Corrunittee and for their cooperation with the coastal countries. I hope that the intent of these resolutions will be generally acceptable in carrying out our joint efforts of developine equitably the fishery resources of the waters surrounding us.

It would be appropriate to mention here that in discussing the problems that regional bodies in general have in securing financial and technical support, the FAO Committee on Fisheries at its Seventh Session last April referred to the desirability of the developed countries contributing in both these respects to the work of the regional bodies in the areas in which these countries are active. This matter was recently considered by the Indo-Pacific Fisheries Council, a counterpart body of CECAF in the Indo-Pacific area, which recommended that its Member Nations consider the possibility of the establishment of a regional voluntary fund by way of contributions from developed 1.fomber Nations and others for the purpose of undertaking appropriate projects under the auspices of the IPFC within the region. - 21 -

I am informing the Committee of these recommendations of COFI and IPFC because they are of relevance to the future activities of the Committee in helping its coastal Member Nations to develop their fisheries. Although FAO will continue to the best of its ability to support the work of CECAF, I must point out that the financial resources available to the Organization are strictly limited. Limitations also exist regarding funds from multi­ lateral sources. It seems I therefore, thai; it remains to the Member Nations of the Committee, in particular those extensively fishing in the region, to contribute further to the work of CECAF and here, to conclude my brief remarks, I would like to refer again to the Resolution on Cooperation Among the States Interested in the Fisheries of the Eastern Central Atlantic which clearly outlines cooperative actions that may be taken to pursue successfully the very important work of this Committee.

Thank you Mr. Chairman.

******* -22 -

Appendix E

AGENDA

1. Opening of the session 2. Adoption of the agenda and arrangements for the session 3. State of stocks (a) Demersal stocks

(b) Pelagic stocks 4. Mesh size regulation in the CECAF area (a) National enforcement and international inspection of mesh size regulations for hakes and sea breams (b) Mesh sizes to be used for cephalopods

(c) Optimwn mesh size for other species 5. Arrangements for international inspection 6. Control of the total amount of fishing on heavily fished stocks in the CECAF area 7. Fishery statistics (a) Catch and effort statistics (b) Biological data 8. International project for development of fisheries in the Eastern Central Atla.ntio 9. Cooperative investigations of the Northern part of the Eastern Central Atlantic (CINECA)

10. Any other matters

(a) Technical Conference on Fishery Management and Development 11. Election of officers 12. Date and place of next session

13. Adoption of the report

* * * * * * * -23-

Appendix F

LISI' OF DOCUMENJ:IS

CECAF/72/1 Provisional agenda

2 Provisional annotated agenda

3 Provisional timetable 4 Report of the CECAF Working Party on Resources Evaluation Sup.1 Swnmary of catch statistics for the CECAF area

5 Report of the First Session of the CECAF Sub-Committee on Implementation of Management Measures 6 Arrangements for international inspection 7 Control of the amount of fishing in the CECAF area 8 Provision of basic data (fishery statistics and biological data) for the CECAF area

9 International project for development of fisheries in the Eastern Central Atlantic

10 Summary report of the activities of the Cooperative Investigations of the Northern Part of the Eastern Central Atlantic (CINECA) 11 Technical Conference on Fisheries Management and Development

CECAF/72/Inf.1 List of documents

2 Information for participants

3 Report of the Second Session of the FAO Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF)

4 Report of the Second Session of the CECAF Working Party on Regulatory Measures for Demersal Stooks

5,Rev.1 List of participants 6 Regional Fishery Statistician, West Africa: Report

* * * * * * *