Bridges Trade BioRes • Volume 10 • Number 5 • 19th March 2010

CITES Member Countries Strike Down Bluefin Tuna Ban

Discuss this articleShare your views with other visitors, and read what they have to say

Less than a week into the much anticipated 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), member states have voted down a proposal to classify bluefin tuna as an endangered species.

With the momentum triggered by the EU and US support for an Appendix I listing - which would result in an effective trade ban - in the lead-up to the COP, many observers were stunned to see a vote striking down the ban come so early in the two week conference.

Monaco, which spearheaded the campaign, officially tabled its proposal for an immediate listing of bluefin Appendix I on Thursday. Shortly thereafter, the EU tabled a compromise proposal that would have delayed the implementation of a trade ban until May 2011 to conduct scientific testing to confirm whether bluefin tuna stocks are, in fact, at dangerously low levels.

But rather than opening the proposals up to debate, Libya called for an immediate vote. The Monaco proposal was voted down 20 to 68, with 30 abstentions and the EU proposal fell by 43 to 72 with 14 abstentions. CITES proposals require a two-thirds majority to pass.

Momentum stalled early in talks

Shortly before the start of the COP the EU had surprised many observers by announcing its 27 member states had reached a consensus and would vote for a ban at the Doha, Qatar meeting. Because the EU holds more than 50 percent of the total bluefin catch quota and European countries along the Mediterranean play a major role in the industry, a collective position supporting the ban was seen as unlikely by many observers.

The EU decision built on the momentum of an earlier US announcement that it would also push for an Appendix I listing for the fish. Species listed on Appendix I of CITES are considered to be “threatened with extinction,” and are banned from trade among the 175 countries that are CITES members.

Shortly following the US announcement, Japan - the world’s largest importer of bluefin - went on the offensive, warning that it may not comply with CITES if the treaty blocks the country’s access to the fish. Japan had reportedly managed to muster support for its decision in Doha from China and “several Arab countries” in the early days of the meeting.

Those aligning themselves with Japan said the trade ban would be damaging to poor fishing nations and asserted that the proposal is not backed by sound science. Some 80 percent of the global bluefin tuna catch is exported to Japan, where it is sold as a premium dish in restaurants.

In the wake of the vote, it is unclear where alliances were ultimately placed due to a request from Iceland that countries’ votes be kept secret.

Harsh reaction from green groups

With the bluefin tuna issue - the proposal with top billing in Doha - so quickly defeated, reaction by environmental groups appeared to be one of genuine surprise. Once groups such as WWF and Oceana - which had campaigned strongly in the months leading up to COP - had digested the news, their criticism was harsh.

Dave Allison, senior campaign director of Washington-based Oceana called the vote “a clear win by short-term economic interest over the long-term health of the ocean and the rebuilding of Atlantic bluefin tuna populations and fishery.”

Allison also criticised the procedures followed in Doha, calling the secret voting process an “attack on transparency” and arguing that the timing of the vote stifled debate. “Although there were repeated calls from delegates from the EU, US, and Monaco to allow time for parties to meet and arrive at a compromise position, the Libya delegate forced a preemptory vote.” Allison said in a statement.

Sergi Tudela, head of fisheries at WWF Mediterranean concurred, saying “it is scandalous that governments did not even get the chance to engage in meaningful debate about the international trade ban proposal.”

Back to ICCAT

With the defeat of the bluefin proposal at CITES, management for the fishery remains in the hands of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). However, conservationists have argued for years that the regulatory body is incapable of adequately managing the industry.

ICCAT has attempted to help make the bluefin fishery more sustainable in recent years - most recently reeling in catch quotas from 22,000 tonnes in 2009 to 13,500 tonnes for 2010 and decreasing the purse seiner fishing season by one month - but critics argue that the organisation has not done enough to combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing.

Proponents of the Appendix I CITES listing argued that regulations governing trade would be more effective than attempting to regulate fishing fleets. By ICCAT’s own numbers, more bluefin tuna was exported to Japan alone than the total allowable catch for 2007.

“ICCAT…has repeatedly failed to sustainably manage this fishery,” said WWF’s Tudela. “ICCAT has so far failed miserably in this duty so every
pressure at the highest level must come to bear to ensure it does what it should.”

For its part, Japan says it acknowledges that bluefin tuna stocks are under threat, but it argues that reduced catch limits accompanied by stricter enforcement would be a more sensible way to deal with the problem.

“We will intensify our efforts to control these resources and prevent illegal harvesting of these fish,” Japan’s agriculture minister Hirotaka Akamatsu told reporters Friday. “We believe we have the responsibility to show leadership in control over these resources.”

Environmental groups are now hoping to convince consumers to boycott the fish as an improvised means to help reduce demand. “It is now more important than ever for people to do what the politicians failed to do - stop consuming bluefin tuna,” Tudela said.

Other species under the microscope in Doha

The blufin tuna defeat was the first of two major defeats for conservationists on Tuesday. A US led proposal that would stop international trophy hunting of polar bears was also struck down at the meeting. Polar bear habitat is under threat from climate change, which is rapidly melting sea ice.

“While we are disappointed with the votes today … we are heartened by the support around world to up-list the polar bear and bluefin tuna,” Tom Strickland, assistant secretary of the Interior for Fish and Wildlife and Parks told reporters following Thursday’s vote.

Other proposals waiting for a vote at the CITES COP include the addition of eight shark species to Appendix II - where trade is heavily regulated, but not banned - and measures regulating dozens of coral species.

ICTSD Reporting; “Japanese Fish Dealers Welcome Tuna Ban Rejection,” ABC NEWS, 19 March 2010; “U.N. Rejects Export Ban on Atlantic Bluefin Tuna,” THE NEW YORK TIMES, 18 March 2010; “Conference rejects protection for polar bears,” CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, 19 March 2010; “Global conference rejects bans on trade in bluefin tuna, polar bear,” THE WASHINGTON POST, 19 March 2010.