Secretariat of the Pacific Community FIELD REPORT No. 10 on DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS AND CONSTRAINTS INCLUDING TRAINING NEEDS AND INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE TUNA FISHING INDUSTRY AND SUPPORT SERVICES IN TUVALU 16 to 27 November 2000 by Lindsay Chapman Fisheries Development Adviser Secretariat of the Pacific Community Noumea, New Caledonia 2001 © Copyright Secretariat of the Pacific Community 2001 All rights for commercial / for profit reproduction or translation, in any form, reserved. The SPC authorises the partial reproduction or translation of this material for scientific, educational or research purposes, provided the SPC and the source document are properly acknowledged. Permission to reproduce the document and/or translate in whole, in any form, whether for commercial / for profit or non-profit purposes, must be requested in writing. Original SPC artwork may not be altered or separately published without permission. This field report forms part of a series compiled by the Fisheries Development Section of the Secretariat of the Pacific Community’s Coastal Fisheries Programme. These reports have been produced as a record of individual project activities and country assignments, from materials held within the Section, with the aim of making this valuable information readily accessible. Each report in this series has been compiled within the Fisheries Development Section to a technical standard acceptable for release into the public arena. Secretariat of the Pacific Community BP D5 98848 Noumea Cedex New Caledonia Tel: (687) 26 20 00 Fax: (687) 26 38 18 e-mail: [email protected] http://www.spc.int/coastfish Prepared at Secretariat of the Pacific Community headquarters Noumea, New Caledonia, 2001 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Secretariat of the Pacific Community would like to acknowledge the Tuvalu Ministry of Natural Resources Development, and in particular Mr Elisala Pita, Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment; Mr Sautia Maluofenua, Director of Fisheries; Mr Satalaka Petaia, Managing Director, National Fishing Corporation of Tuvalu (NAFICOT); Mr Lotoala Metia, Secretary for Works, Energy and Communication; Mr Vale Sinnapati, Acting Director, Marine and Ports; Captain Tito Tapungao, Chief Executive Officer, Tuvalu Maritime Training Institute; Mr Soloseni Penitusi, commercial fisherman; and all the other people who contributed to the project. AusAID provided funding for the fieldwork carried out during this project, and SPC acknowledges with gratitude the support of the Australian Government. iii SUMMARY The Government of Tuvalu is in the process of formulating a National Tuna Development and Management Plan for the country, with assistance from the Forum Fisheries Agency, and input from other regional organisations, such as SPC. The input provided in this report was compiled during fieldwork in November 2000, and focuses on the development of Tuvalu’s tuna fishing aspirations. The general prospect for developing a domestic tuna fishery in Tuvalu is limited at present. The best initial approach will be for the government, through the Fisheries Department and the National Fishing Corporation of Tuvalu (NAFICOT), to compile a specific development plan for the domestic tuna fishery. However, the plan needs to be developed with the input of the different stakeholders in Tuvalu, so that they feel some ownership of the plan and support it. There are major infrastructure needs to be addressed to provide a climate for the private sector to develop. These infrastructure needs include a safe anchorage for vessels, a longer runway so that larger aircraft with greater freight carrying capacity can land in Tuvalu, and the ready availability of electricity and fresh water in reasonable quantities. Land availability is also an issue, which will limit the possibility of processing facilities being constructed for exporting fish or fish products. The single most important issue that will assist development in the tuna fishery is the establishment of export markets for fish in a whole or processed form. However, the markets have to pay a price that will make it viable for NAFICOT, the outer island Community Fishing Centres (CFCs), and the fishermen themselves. This will be very difficult, as the freight costs from Tuvalu to potential markets are very high. This is mainly due to there being irregular shipping, and the limited amount and high price of airfreight. Addressing the infrastructure issue regarding the runway should greatly assist this. An alternative approach could be to focus on value-adding to the tuna catch, especially in the outer island CFCs. This would result in a higher valued product being produced with reduced weight compared to whole fish. Value-adding processes could include salting and drying and the production of tuna jerky. With products like these where they have a longer shelf-life and do not necessarily need refrigeration, sea freight can be used, provided the product can reach the market in a reasonable timeframe. If viable markets can be established and a reasonable price paid to the fishermen for their tuna catch, then the Fisheries Department can look at ways to promote the catching side. This could be in several forms. First, a FAD programme could be established to provide specific fishing locations for tuna fishing. The Fisheries Department could then provide training for local fishermen, including the introduction of mid-water fishing techniques used in association with FADs, and better handling practices for the catch including the correct use of ice. Training could also be provided to fishermen in medium-scale fishing techniques, especially tuna longlining, as a means to encourage local fishermen to invest in larger vessels. The government’s policy is to remove itself from commercial activities and to promote private sector development. This is especially needed in fisheries, with both the Fisheries Department and NAFICOT needing to cease certain commercial activities as soon as possible. However, there is a longer-term role for NAFICOT to play, as the wholesaler of fish in Tuvalu, as there is no way this will be taken up by the private sector in the short-term. The government should continue with their aim of privatising NAFICOT, although it will need to be a money-making venture before the private sector will invest in it. v RÉSUMÉ Le gouvernement de Tuvalu est en train d’établir un plan national de développement et de gestion de la pêche thonière, avec l’assistance de l’Agence des pèches du Forum et le concours d’autres organisations régionales telles que la CPS. Les informations reprises dans le présent rapport, recueillies sur le terrain en novembre 2000, portent sur l’évolution des aspirations de Tuvalu en matière de pêche thonière. Dans l’ensemble, les perspectives d’expansion de la pêche thonière nationale à Tuvalu sont limitées pour l’instant. Dans un premier temps, les pouvoirs publics, par le truchement du ministère des Pêches et de la National Fishing Corporation of Tuvalu (NAFICOT), établiront un plan de développement de la pêche thonière nationale. Ce plan devra toutefois être élaboré en collaboration avec les différentes parties prenantes de Tuvalu, de manière à ce qu’elles s’en sentent propriétaires et s’y rallient. Des infrastructures devront être créées pour créer un climat propice au développement du secteur privé, notamment un mouillage abrité, une piste d’atterrissage plus longue permettant à de plus gros porteurs d’atterrir à Tuvalu, et la fourniture d’électricité et d’eau douce en quantité raisonnable. L’exiguïté des terres pose également un problème car elle entrave la construction d’usines de transformation du poisson ou de produits de la mer destinés à l’exportation. Le principal facteur d’expansion de la pêche thonière sera l’ouverture de débouchés à l’exportation pour le poisson entier ou transformé. Or, sur ces marchés, le poisson devra atteindre un prix rentable pour la NAFICOT, les centres de pêche communautaire des îles périphériques et les pêcheurs. Cela sera très difficile car les frais de transport entre Tuvalu et les marchés potentiels sont très élevés, du fait de l’irrégularité de la desserte maritime et du volume limité et des tarifs élevés du fret aérien. L’aménagement de la piste d’atterrissage pourrait remédier à ce problème d’infrastructure. Une autre approche pourrait consister à se tourner vers la valorisation de la pêche thonière, notamment dans les centres de pêche communautaire des îles périphériques. Après transformation par salage et séchage ou préparation de charques, les produits obtenus auraient une plus grande valeur marchande, pour un poids inférieur à celui du poisson entier. Ces produits se conservant plus longtemps et ne nécessitant pas obligatoirement de réfrigération, ils peuvent être transportés par bateau, à condition de parvenir à destination dans un délai raisonnable. Si des marchés rentables peuvent être créés et un prix raisonnable consenti aux pêcheurs thoniers, le ministère des Pêches pourra envisager de promouvoir des techniques de pêche adaptées, par plusieurs moyens. Un programme de mouillage de DCP pourrait ètre mis en œuvre de manière à limiter la pêche thonière à des sites précis. Le ministère des Pèches pourrait dispenser une formation aux pêcheurs locaux, notamment une initiation aux techniques de pêche à mi-eau autour de DCP et aux meilleures pratiques de manipulation de la prise, y compris l’utilisation correcte de la glace. Des pêcheurs pourraient également être formés aux techniques de pêche semi-artisanale, en particulier la pêche de thon à la palangre pour inciter les pêcheurs locaux à investir dans de plus gros bateaux. Le gouvernement a pour politique de se désengager des activités commerciales pour promouvoir l’expansion du secteur privé. C’est une démarche particulièrement nécessaire dans le secteur de la pèche, où le ministère des Pêches et la NAFICOT devraient cesser dès que possible certaines activités commerciales. La NAFICOT devrait en revanche jouer un rôle à plus long terme comme grossiste de poisson à Tuvalu, le secteur privé n’étant pas en mesure d’assumer cette tâche à court terme.