🚀 go-pugleaf

                        SECOND STRIKE FOR ALBATROSS
                                 Jon Sumby

	(published in the Sea Shepherd Log 3rd-4th quarter 1995)
In the year since the Sea Shepherd story, "The Last Flight of the
Albatross" (4th quarter Log ,1994), there has been an increase in concern
and discussion between government departments, scientists and other groups.

Around the Southern Ocean, albatross are dying in increasing numbers.
Longline fishing effort is increasing and there is little sign of any
proactive effort to employ methods that minimise the incidental kill of
Albatross.

Over the first week of September, the First International Conference on the
Biology and Conservation of Albatross was held in Hobart, Tasmania.
Sea Shepherd was one of the 120 participants from around the world who
attended, a measure of the urgency and importance of this issue. The
Greenpeace delegate did not arrive.

The first few days were taken up by scientific presentations. 
Of great interest to the conference was a paper that redefines albatross
species- there are likely to be about 24 species instead of the current 14
and this has implications for any international conservation agreements.

Beth Flint from the US Fish and Wildlife Service presented preliminary
information that indicates that the Swordfish longlining industry based in 
Hawaii are killing more Black-footed Albatross each year than were killed
by the entire North Pacific high seas driftnet fishery did at its peak.
The industry also has a large sea turtle bycatch also.

Another delegate pointed out the high chick mortality at Johnson and Midway
atolls, apparently due to plastic waste (such as cigarette lighters) being
fed to the chick instead of food material, though the possibility of a
virus was discussed.

The Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources
(CCAMLR) delegate, Steven de Salas, spoke of that bodies efforts but had no
answer when several scientists asked him how these would work given that
CCAMLR has no enforcement power and that they and others often see
international fishing vessels working CCAMLR exclusion and conservation
zones.

Of great interest were the papers given by the people from nations with
developing fisheries, South Africa, Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina.
Longlining industry is expanding in these fisheries and foreign interest is
growing. There is little known about the impact on Albatross but it is
considered to be significant, which was confirmed by the scientists from
the region. 

The Patagonian Toothfish is a rapidly expanding fishery off South America
and its impact is virtually unknown. Off South Africa, longlining set on
spawning Kingclip collapsed that stock inside of seven years and the
fishery is now moving onto Hake, killing large numbers of Petrel and
Shearwater as bycatch.

The second half the conference was where the tensions arose, as the
conference broke into working groups to discuss mitigation methods,
unmonitored fisheries, research and international cooperation.

At this time I was in dire straits. I was staying with a friend who lived a
40 minute walk each way from the conference and this had caused my recent
knee surgery to explode with pain, swelling and tenderness. So from here on
in the conference was as much pain management and hobbling about as
anything else.

In the pre-conference timetables it was clearly on the agenda that there
would be considerable focus on the Bonn Convention and ways to get
albatross listed on this global convention for protecting species that move
across or beyond national boundaries. There are nine signatories and 47
parties to the Convention. If albatrosses are listed, the emphasis for
conservation is put on conservation efforts over the whole of the species'
range rather than on any localised fishery agreements which are subject to
local political interference, and which the birds will fly in and out of.
Th Bonn Convention is also applies to the high seas.

At the 1991 and the 1994 Bonn Convention Conferences, Albatrosses were
adopted as a priority group for conservation attention. The Scientific
Council for the 1994 meeting placed Albatrosses as the first iniative to be
considered by the next Convention meeting and stated that a proposal to
list all albatross species was being developed. The Council hoped that a
potential conservation agreement framework could be discussed  at the
Hobart meeting. This did not happen. 

A discussion paper was prepared and distributed and the conference
timetable had a specific time devoted to the Bonn Convention.
But in the middle of the week a revised timetable was distributed and this
part of the conference was quietly dropped. This was the result of pressure
put on the convenors by Australian government delegates from Primary
Industry (DPIE) and Fisheries Management (AFMA) as well as the New Zealand
fisheries policy people. 

At one stage, sources said the Government representatives would walk out if
any Bonn discussion was raised. The reason given being that two weeks after
the conference, the Tripartite fisheries agreement between Australia, New
Zealand and Japan was up for re-negotiation. If the Bonn Convention was
brought up at this Australian sponsored conference the Japanese would be
deeply upset and could use that as a negotiating tool or even drop out of
the Tripartite and go it alone. Intergovernmental trade balances were 'at
risk'. 


So the first international conference on the threat to albatross, a
conference that the international community and the Bonn Convention looked
to for guidance, failed to even mention the topic. All in the name of a
cosy agreement between Australia, New Zealand and Japan.  

Part of the DPIE attitude can be traced to a 1991 fisheries report where it
was stated that, "the benefits of maintaining current fisheries (with
incidental by-catch levels) to present and future generations through the
creation of human-made capital offset the loss of natural capital".
Albatross are worthless in other words.

It is also in the interest of the trade departments and the industry to
keep conservation efforts "in-house" at the level of local fisheries
agreements as the pace of change and adoption (or not) can be kept under
their control. 

A great fear for all at the conference was the unknown and increasing
fishing industries around South America and the increasing interest shown
by by Chinese and other industries. One of the Brazilian scientists in his
presentation practically begged for a listing of albatross under the Bonn
Convention. He explained that fisheries in his region were so poor that the
currently advocated voluntary changes in gear are beyond the reach or
interest of the indusrty. Change had to come from the top down. He said the
government had to have its "house set on fire" by such a listing to make
change happen. 

Even though Brazil is not a party to the Bonn Convention it does pay
attention to international concerns. This was backed up by others in a
similar position in their own countries.

Concerns were raised at the mitigation methods meeting, as it was noted
that the major changes discussed (such as redesigning boats) were only
really of use to developed, wealthy nations boats, while the big fisheries
off South America and Africa were poor and could not afford even basic
change. It could take a decade or more for these industries to start buying
secondhand boats of any new design, while now they are using 20-30 year old
boats. In the rush to get into longlining industries in these nations are
using "anything" that floats to get out to sea. Dramatic firsthand footage,
taken from a liferaft, of one of these boats as it burned and sank off
Argentina was shown during a lunchbreak. 

The last day was rushed and tense with the final statement being agreed on
by an open forum of the participants. It was then sent out to be typed up
and came back with a paragraph added that thanked the fishing industry for
the major efforts they had made to reduce bycatch. This was added to
'maintain a co-operative and friendly relationship with industry', however,
even the most eager supporters of voluntary, industry driven change were
upset by this and wanted the wording to say "some fisheries" had made "some
effort" a compromise was eventually reached that "some fisheries" had made
"substantial efforts". 

The final statement is very bland and essentially calls for more research,
thanks the efforts of industry and reccommends five useful ways of reducing
bycatch, with the hope that individual nations and their fisheries will
work to adopt these on a voluntary basis.
                                    END