Joint Standing Committee on Treaties
CHAPTER 5
Environmental Issues
5.1 Overall, the Department of Environment,
Sport and Territories believes that the subsidiary agreement has been
beneficial in relation to environmental issues although they would like
to see a strengthening of some environmental controls. There has also
been general support for the subsidiary agreement from conservation groups
such as the Humane Society International, Australian Marine Conservation
Society and TRAFFIC Oceania. It was suggested that these arrangements
provide an avenue to pursue better conservation arrangements with Japan
and other nations. TRAFFIC Oceania points out that these agreements go
beyond Australian policy in fisheries management.
Environmental impact studies
5.2 The 1989 Policy Statement requires
that when there is a lack of information about the status of the stock,
a conservative approach is required. Government policy in relation to
ecologically sustainable development also requires the precautionary principle
be applied.
5.3 The DEST stressed that the level of
its ability:
|
to advise governments and other departments is constrained by the
fact that we do no have the information that we would like to have
... The biggest factor limiting our ability to provide a proper
policy context for any decisions in the marine environment is that
we do not have sufficient information about what is out there, and
the cost of getting the information through scientific processes
or the incidental information that comes through monitoring programs
... is very high and at some point there is a limit to how much
information you get because of that limiting factor.
|
5.4 The Committee was also told that:
|
the whole challenge ... in relation to fisheries is the difficulty
of trying to do things on an ecosystem basis when it is just so
costly to try to get hold of information necessary to try to make
judgements ... What we [AFMA] have endeavoured to do in terms of
our organisation is to try to establish some reference points which
we can use in the management of the more commercially and recreationally
important species rather than try to allocate very limited research
dollars to try to assess the whole environmental system ... whether
that constitutes an ESD approach is questionable and people will
have varying views about that.
|
5.5 Under the Environment Protection
(Impact of Proposals) Act 1975 there is an obligation for the
Minister responsible for fisheries to refer matters which have the potential
to be environmentally significant to the Minister for the Environment.
The Australian National Audit Office expressed its concern that since
the new fisheries legislation there had been no referrals under the
Act to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It was pointed out
that AFMA's second legislative objective relates to ecologically sustainable
development.
5.6 AFMA defended this by stating:
|
When developing the 1991 legislation, discussions were held with
the then Department responsible for the Environment, and an understanding
was reached that the consultation provisions set out in the Fisheries
Management Act 1991 adequately covered that Department's requirements
in relation to providing public input into the development of Fisheries
Management Plans in particular. In addition it was agreed that formal
referral to the EPA was not necessary. In reaching this understanding,
it was acknowledged that EPA would take the opportunity to comment
as it saw fit.
|
5.7 The Committee also notes that specific
written clearance was provided by the EPA in relation to the Southern
Bluefin Management Plan and such clearances are currently required by
the Minister.
|
Recommendation 14
The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties recommends that the
Commonwealth Government formalises a process in which management
plans relating to international fishing agreements require a specific
written clearance from the Environment Protection Agency if they
have significant potential environmental impacts.
|
5.8 DPIE, AFMA and the Environment portfolio
regularly consult on potential environmental impacts, however, the DEST
commented that it does:
|
not have all the information that comes to the Fisheries Management
Authority for them to make their decisions.
|
5.9 The Committee notes that the summarised
catch and effort data is made available to a range of groups such as CSIRO,
BRS, ABARE, but the list provided in AFMA's submission did not include
the Environment Portfolio. Further, the DEST considers that:
|
the limiting factor from our portfolio's point of view is that
the amount of information available that we are not privy to.
|
|
Recommendation 15
The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties recommends that the
Minister responsible for fisheries requests the Department of Primary
Industries and Energy to provide all relevant information to the
appropriate Commonwealth environmental agencies for consideration
of issues pertaining to the marine ecosystem
|
5.10 The Committee has been told that
the costs of conducting a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) are
prohibitive but it was also pointed out that the loss of an industry or
the loss of a species also have significant costs. Since 1989/90 around
$25 million has been spent improving the scientific understanding of the
global SBT by the CCSBT, governments and industry and this has resulted
in a range of views that make the setting of the quotas a difficult and
protracted process.
5.11 The CSIRO believes the costs and
time involved would indicate that:
|
it would be more effective to mount a properly planned research
investigation, looking at specific causes of concern, rather than
a blanket impact statement.
|
5.12 Mr Evans told the Committee that
there would be little gain in formally assessing the fishery as we are
already aware of the impacts of albatross bycatch and the sustainability
of the fish stocks. The development of a threat abatement planning process
has opportunities for public input.
5.13 Further, the Committee was concerned
that experimental fishing conducted by AFMA, in which large volumes of
fish are taken are not always subjected to an EIS if CSIRO has approved
projects. Whether a full EIS is achievable, practically or financially,
the Committee believes there are a number of steps that can be taken to
allow greater public scrutiny of these decisions.
Endangered or vulnerable species
5.14 The objective of the Convention
on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora 1973
(CITES) is to protect endangered species from over exploitation by means
of a system of import/export permits. The treaty sets down limits in trade
of species which are listed in Appendices I, II and III except where they
accord with provisions of the Convention:
- Appendix I includes all species threatened with extinction which are
or may be affected by trade;
- Appendix II deals with species which may become threatened with extinction
unless trade is regulated so that trade is brought under effective control;
and
- Appendix III includes all species which any party identifies as being
subject to regulation within its jurisdiction for the purpose of preventing
or restricting exploitation, and as needing the assistance of other
parties in the control of trade.
5.15 The Convention provides the opportunity
to control trade through licensing and monitoring but in species threatened
with extinction the convention can be used to regulate trade.
5.16 In 1982 Sweden and in 1994 Kenya,
nominated the SBT for listing under CITES. The CITES Convention would
require the licensing of nations trading in tuna to monitor the global
progress in the species and this would provide the opportunity to include
information from countries such as Korea and Indonesia. The basis of these
nominations was that SBT stocks had declined significantly and that it
was potentially threatened. The nominations were unsuccessful therefore
CITES is unlikely to affect the application or the operation of the subsidiary
agreement, or the operations of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission in relation
to SBT in the short term.
5.17 Whether CITES is the best mechanism
for securing more effective management of SBT needs to be resolved. DPIE
agreed that there would be an improved level of information about catch
levels and product movement in the international trading system, however:
|
There are issues there in terms of the sheer volume and practicalities
of regulating trade through the CITES mechanisms in a large scale
commercially traded product of that sort.
|
5.18 Another area of concern raised with
the Committee was:
|
The criteria used to determine 'endangered' or 'vulnerable' are
quite clearly based on historical data in relation to mammals and
birds, not to fish, and it is very hard to determine with accuracy
whether a species is in fact declining, increasing or stable.
|
5.19 The Humane Society International
also told the Committee that:
|
The fact of life is that right now any nominations for the southern
bluefin tuna, either for the federal act or in Victoria or Tasmania,
will not succeed. They are not geared to deal with nominations for
marine beasties other than whales, or marine mammals, in fact. Fish
will be rejected.
|
5.20 This situation is relevant to those
species which may be fished by Japanese fishing vessels under the subsidiary
agreements such as SBT and some bycatch species, but is also relevant
to the management of fisheries in the Australia Fishing Zone and the Committee's
recommendation is therefore more general.
|
Recommendation 16
The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties recommends that the
Commonwealth Government reviews, as a matter of urgency, Commonwealth
legislation to ensure that the nomination for the listing of fish
as endangered or threatened is based on merit and not impeded by
anomalies in the wording of the legislation or administrative procedures.
|
|
Recommendation 17
The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties recommends that the
Commonwealth Government requests that State and Territory governments
review, as a matter of urgency, their legislation to ensure that
the nominations for the listing of fish as endangered or threatened
is based on merit and not impeded by anomalies in the wording of
their relevant legislation or administrative procedures.
|
5.21 In London in 1995, the World Wildlife
Fund and International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) specialists
groups on threatened species reviewed marine fish globally and concluded
that SBT was a greatly endangered species. The Humane Society International
therefore suggests that the listing of SBT under CITES will enhance the
management of this species.
5.22 There is an opposing view that fish
species cannot be made extinct by commercial fishing because once catch
levels are no longer commercially viable, they will no longer be targeted.
It is noted, however, that even though these species may be no longer
targeted specifically, significant numbers may be taken as bycatch by
long-line vessels and purse seining operations which would continue to
have the capacity to adversely affect residual stocks.
5.23 Although the nomination of SBT stocks
for listing under the Endangered Species Protection Act 1992 was
not successful, the endangered species scientific subcommittee recommended
a watching brief and AFMA has prepared annual stock assessments. Should
the nomination be agreed to by the Minister then the Australian Nature
Conservation Agency would be required to implement a recovery plan or
a threat abatement plan.
5.24 Fishing activities may also be subjected
to obligations under the Biological Diversity Convention in 1992 and
National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1975.
Environmental research funding
5.25 The access fee funds a substantial
amount of research on tuna stocks in Australian waters. In 1995-96, $680 000
was provided for research into SBT stocks and related species.
5.26 The Japanese Overseas Fisheries Co-operation
Foundation also provides funding for the experimental farming of SBT in
South Australia and a number of co-operative research programs with Japan.
Bycatch
5.27 The bycatch of marlin, swordfish
and sailfish has been largely covered in Chapter 3 and is only dealt with
briefly in this section.
5.28 The work conducted by CSIRO largely
targets SBT but little is known about the bycatch and the impact of long-line
fishing on the bycatch populations. The research program based on observers
on fishing vessels has confirmed and quantified the bycatch problem.
5.29 The life-status of billfish caught
by Japanese long-line vessels on the east coast from 1982 and 1995 found
that 70 per cent of black marlin, 61 per cent of blue marlin, 46 per cent
of striped marlin, 49 per cent of broadbill swordfish, 80 per cent of
sailfish and 76 per cent of spearfish were dead when brought on board.
5.30 It was suggested, however, that catches
of non-target species are higher when observers are on board Japanese
vessels. The Western Australia Government believes that the raw data suggests
that this is the case in relation to the take of billfish. It was point
out that further statistics will need to be collected to determine if
this variation is statistically significant.
5.31 Some Japanese licenses permit the
landing of Ray's Bream and Blue Whaler Sharks. Purdon and Featherstone
land and process the blue whaler shark and Ray's Bream which are bycatch
by Japanese long-line vessels. DEST is also concerned about the incidental
capture of other marine life such as cetaceans, turtles and marine mammals.
Shark
5.32 The compliance with the Shark Code
of Conduct is monitored through the observer program and is taken into
account and the reporting of catches has been incorporated into the VMS
monitoring system. The Committee was told that the finning and other practices
have now been eradicated from operations.
5.33 TRAFFIC Oceania fully support the
implementation of the shark by-catch code. The Humane Society International
believes that sharks are a major conservation issue. The Committee was
told that there is evidence of stock declines in all shark species off
Tasmania except Tiger sharks.
5.34 The Humane Society International
expressed its concern in relation to the paragraph in the Subsidiary Agreement
1996 that states that:
|
The Japanese delegation stated that the Japanese tuna long-line
fishing industry is to continue to make its best efforts to identify
possible markets for shark in cooperation with the Australian tuna
fishing industry.
|
5.35 The status of some shark species
has been brought to the attention of the CITES convention. The Conservation
Council of Western Australia also expressed concern that the Southern
Shark fishery is not adequately protected as sharks are slow to mature,
bear live young and have low reproductive potential which makes them vulnerable
to over-exploitation.
Seabirds
5.36 DEST considers the most significant
environmental concern is the bycatch of particular species of seabirds.
The 'incidental catch' of seabirds by long-line vessels was declared a
key threatening process on 24 July 1995 under the Endangered Species
Protection Act 1992 (ESP Act) and 14 species of seabirds are considered
potentially at risk. It is the only activity added to the ESP Act since
it was enacted in 1992 and it is the first key threatening process to
be listed that relates to marine areas.
5.37 Globally there are 44 000 albatross
killed annually through long-line fishing. Another three albatross species
have been nominated for listing under the Endangered Species Protection
Act 1992.
5.38 Wandering albatross can live to be
60 years old. Most of the wandering albatross killed by long-line vessels
are young birds. The estimated bykill of wanderers is about the same as
the number of chicks reaching fledgling stage so there is no recruitment.
Wanderers do not breed until they are 11 years old and need to live to
30 years on average to replace themselves in their breeding population.
5.39 Currently the albatross is considered
the most seriously under threat although it is not known to what extent
the other species can sustain the current level of bykill.
5.40 For wandering albatross populations
the female birds forage in regions with high levels of long-line fishing
which has resulted in populations in which the males outnumber females
by 2 to 1. ATBOA has agreed to the listing of the albatross under the
Convention on Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals 1979
(Bonn Convention). Proposals have been made to nominate several other
albatross species under the Bonn Convention.
5.41 The Australian Nature Conservation
Agency is consulting with industry, regulatory bodies and other interested
parties in relation to mechanisms to reduce the risk to birds.
5.42 The Committee was told that:
|
As a consequence of the ESPAct listings, the Southern Bluefin Tuna
Management Plan prepared under ss.17-20 of the Fisheries Management
Act, and statutory fishing rights to fish for tuna in the AFZ
(ss. 21-22), must now be revised.
|
5.43 The Southern Oceans Seabird Study
Association (SOSSA) believes that:
|
changes in long-line procedures, quotas or methods should always
be evaluated for effect on effort. More hooks set translate to more
by-kill. Quota increases should be granted conditional to a demonstrated
decrease in effort.
|
5.44 The Committee was told that:
|
It is not possible to overstate the significance of the global
approach to management of the fishery and in particular Australia's
role in fostering adoption of measures to mitigate bycatch of seabirds.
The bycatch problem is in fact greatest on the high seas ... There
is, however, considerable progress yet to be made before the future
survival of many species is secured.
|
5.45 Long-line fishing intensified in
the early 1960s but the albatross effects were not detected until the
mid 1980s. The point was made that 11 years later there has been very
little progress. SOSSA believes that the only way to achieve an adequate
reduction in seabird death is to set a zero target for bykill.
5.46 Evidence to the Committee indicates
that none of the existing technologies can prevent the seabird bykill
and that a number of techniques may need to be applied simultaneously
to reduce the level of bycatch. Albatross are very aggressive and fearless
so it is difficult to stop them attacking the bait. However, there appears
to be a culture of minimisation rather than elimination of the albatross
kills although the Committee appreciates this is a complex and difficult
problem to deal with.
5.47 Australia is actively seeking action
on seabird bycatch through the Commission on the Conservation of Southern
Bluefin Tuna but this relies on Japan's agreement. Fishermen are also
given publications such as Japanese cartoons on Catch Fish Not Birds
and the Tasmanian National Parks and Wildlife have been working to change
the overall culture towards seabird catches.
5.48 The point was made that if the Japanese
do not continue to utilise the EEZ then they will increase the activity
on the high seas thus there will be a greater chance of catching birds.
5.49 The CCSBT has established an ecologically
related species working group to enable consultation on technical details
of bird mitigation measures in the high seas environment. The group comprises
scientists and conservationists from three sides in the hope of finding
some agreement on behaviour on the high seas.
5.50 Such consultation provides the opportunity
to change behaviour on the high seas by consensus as it is appreciated
that the EEZ is only a small part of the territory which is inhabited
by the albatrosses. The Japanese and the Taiwanese now use seabird mitigation
measures on the high seas because it makes good economic sense. Negotiations
for the subsidiary agreements have facilitated this process.
5.51 Any bycatch of seabirds has an economic
impact on the industry because every hook taken by birds is not available
to catch fish, by reducing the efficiency of the catch and potential economic
benefits. The financial costs of bird bycatch can be significant if viewed
in terms of failing to catch a $5 000 tuna on that hook. The Committee
was also told that birds can pull the fishing gear so that it is not set
correctly.
(i) Role of observers
5.52 One of the main problems is getting
adequate statistics on bird bycatch. Information is obtained from the
Japanese vessels fishing in the EEZ in relation to the ways in which seabirds
are being caught. The monitoring of the seabird catch on Japanese vessels
provided the first comprehensive data the Japanese fishing industry has
allowed some monitoring on the high seas.
5.53 The observer program cost $800 000
in 1995 and it was suggested that observers undertake additional research
while on board such as the use and effectiveness of mitigation measures.
ATBOA suggests the use of specialist seabird observers to accelerate technological
and education solutions.
5.54 DEST also believes that bycatch requirements
could be strengthened by broadening observer coverage on long-line vessels
and the use of additional observers to report exclusively on bycatch issues
would provide information for future environmental management. It was
brought to the Committee attention that long-line fishing observers had
been trained in some aspects of bykill data collection but that this needed
upgrading to improve date quality.
5.55 The Committee was told that observers
are trained to identify seabirds and that all seabirds caught on Japanese
long-line vessels while the observers are on board are retained and taken
back to the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service for identification.
5.56 Participants in the workshop on the
Incidental Mortality of Albatrosses Associated with Long-line Fishing
proposed the establishment of national and international observer programs
to quantify the extent of seabird interaction with long-line vessels.
|
Recommendation 18
The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties recommends that a specialist
observer training program be introduced with additional emphasis
on seabird research, the collection of data on seabird bycatch and
the effectiveness of seabird bycatch mitigation methods.
|
|
Recommendation 19
The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties recommends that the
Commonwealth Government produces an "easy to use" guide
to the identification of seabirds which is to be issued to Japanese
vessels including Joint Venture vessels at the time of the pre-fishing
inspection.
|
5.57 A co-operative approach to the elimination
of seabird bycatch may be the best approach. It was brought to the Committee's
attention that taking an albatross 'knowingly' and 'recklessly' is illegal
but it is difficult to obtain evidence to take someone to court. Therefore
enforcement is the issue. There is also some doubt as to the effectiveness
of mitigation devices currently available. The best options appear to
be tori poles, bait throwers, night setting and bait thawing.
5.58 The Committee has been told that
the Japanese have not been reluctant to put in place bird mitigation measures
but were not previously aware of mechanisms that could prevent bird catches.
Australian boats catch fewer birds because they are smaller and the lines
are released a lot closer to the water and they set fewer hooks.
(ii) Tori poles
5.59 Tori poles are simply poles with
a long line travelling into the water with streamers on it and are now
mandatory on Japanese long line vessels. These are designed to act as
a scarecrow to deter birds from taking the bait until it has sunk.
Figure 8. Diagram of a tori pole
5.60 Early results suggest a 30 - 75 per
cent reduction in seabird bykill and are considered to be effective, reliable
and practical. The results from New Zealand tests indicate that the effectiveness
of tori poles depends on the number of streamers, length of tori lines,
the height above the water and the position relative to where the baits
enter the water.
5.61 The use of tori poles is monitored
by the observer program, surveillance flights and port inspections. It
was pointed out, however, that there is also an education and awareness
process as well as the compliance program. It is important then that Australia
leads by example. SOSSA does not believe that Australian fishermen will
implement bykill threat abatement procedures as readily as the Japanese.
(iii) Night setting
5.62 Night setting is considered the most
effective, reliable and practical mitigation method. Setting the lines
at night avoids catching albatrosses but will catch other seabird species
such as shearwaters and the white-chinned petrel. Night setting is not
always appropriate as some albatrosses and petrels are active on moonlit
nights and lighting on the boat may adversely effect the success of this
technique. Initial results of night setting indicate a 70 to 96 per cent
reduction in seabird bykill.
5.63 Australian vessels tend to set at
night so that bycatch of seabirds is minimal while Japanese vessels set
24 hours a day. It was pointed out, however, that it is not always possible
to set at night as this depended on the target species, the area of water,
the water temperature and other species present in the water.
(iv) Bait throwing equipment
5.64 Bait throwers designed in Australia
are proving effective. The bait is thrown to the side of the vessels to
avoid it being brought to the surface 100 metres aft by the propeller
wash. Over 100 Japanese boats have installed bait throwers and it is being
used increasingly on Taiwanese vessels. Depending on the design, a 60-80
per cent reduction in bykill may be achieved.
5.65 Some countries are conducting research
into mechanisms which will set lines underwater. Work is being undertaken
in New Zealand and Norway on methods of deploying the baits below the
surface including a hydraulic ram which sends the bait down 20 to 30 feet.
A mechanism that shoots the line from the hull so that the hooks do not
appear on the surface is working in some long-liners in the Northern Hemisphere.
(v) Thawed baits
5.66 Early indications are that 50 to
70 per cent reduction in seabird bykill can be achieved by thawing baits.
DEST suggests the use of baits without swimbladders although these tend
to collapse during thawing.
(vi) Monofilament mainlines
5.67 The Committee was told that:
|
at the same time as the bait throwers, the tori poles and everything
came in, the Japanese changed to monofilament tracers on their long-lines.
Monofilament is a lot lighter, so the baits floated for a longer
period on the surface and this virtually offset the effect of the
bait throwers and tori poles. So the bycatch rate did not actually
drop.
|
5.68 The introduction of monofilament
mainlines by Japanese vessels in the 1990s has increased the numbers of
seabirds killed. The use of this type of line is decreasing and should
disappear in a few years.
5.69 DEST also suggested the use of weighted
branch lines. A number of issues need to be resolved including crew safety
before the effectiveness of using weighted branch lines can be determined.
Investigations are being conducted into their use.
(vii) Other mitigation methods
5.70 Other mitigation methods include
not discharging offal during line setting, changes in boat design and
education of fishing vessel operators and area or seasonal closures of
fishing zones. Mitigation measures being developed include colouring the
bait, hook design such as smart hooks, artificial bait and identification
of best setting techniques.
(viii) Threat Abatement Plan
5.71 In 1996 Senator Faulkner announced
$1.13 million over 4 years towards a recovery and threat abatement plan.
The threat abatement plan is looking at a suite of measures to reduce
albatross bykill. The plan will address the plight of 13 other albatross
and shearwater species in addition to the wanderer which are directly
killed by long-line vessels. It was estimated that in 1994 there were
6 500 albatross killed in southern waters of the EEZ.
5.72 The effectiveness of the threat abatement
plan may depend on a number of legal issues. The threat abatement plan
must have regard for social and economic impacts (ESP Act section 34(2)(c))
which may limit the effectiveness in protecting albatross species.
5.73 Further, it was pointed out that
Section 71 of the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1975
excuse fishing activities from 'any onerous legal responsibility' to prevent
the incidental take of marine species (r. 55(7)(b)) and few marine species
are listed under CITES.
5.74 It was suggested to the Committee
that the subsidiary agreement should contain mandatory measures. However,
it was argued that conservation organisations including those that have
designed the tori poles and the bait throwers have resisted making these
compulsory as they believe that making them voluntary will promote their
use on the high seas.
5.75 ATBOA expressed its concern at the
lack of progress on the Threat Abatement Plan as the first meeting was
not scheduled until October 1996. The Committee was told that not a lot
of research is being done into mitigation measures to prevent seabird
bycatch pending the development of the threat abatement plan which still
has two years to go.
5.76 The Committee is concerned that this
may slow the progress of this research and urges the Government to ensure
that this does not occur. Mitigation measures developed as soon as possible
would enable their use to be incorporated in the threat abatement plan.
It was suggested to the Committee that the general impression from research
facilities and fishery agencies is that the albatross bycatch could be
greatly reduced 'without a lot of pain and investment in the technology
to reform the fishing methods'.
|
Recommendation 20
The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties recommends that the
Commonwealth Government expedites research into eliminating bird
bycatch as a matter of priority.
|
5.77 The workshops and meetings for developing
the threat abatement plan have now commenced. The Committee supports the
consultation process being conducted with a range of interested parties.
The Committee would like to see this broadened, however, to include representatives
from New Zealand and Japan.
5.78 The Japanese long-line fishing vessels
operating in the Australian EEZ will be required to implement the requirements
imposed as a result of the findings of the threat abatement plan. Research
is currently being conducted in New Zealand into mitigation measures to
avoid seabird bykill. The Committee therefore believes that the participation
of representatives from these two countries could be beneficial to the
process and would further the extent of international co-operation.
|
Recommendation 21
The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties recommends that the
Commonwealth Government formally invites representatives from Japan
and New Zealand to participate in the development of the Threat
Abatement Plan.
|
5.79 Australia is a signatory to CITES
and cannot continue to permit the bykill of an endangered species.
5.80 There are a number of other conventions
and agreements that may have impact on the terms and conditions of the
subsidiary agreements.
(ix) Other Agreements
Convention on Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals 1979
(Bonn Convention)
5.81 The Convention provides a framework
for enhancing the conservation status of rare and threatened migratory
species, including marine species. Under this Convention Australia is
obliged to enter into regional, bilateral and multilateral agreements
to ensure effective conservation of migratory species.
5.82 In May 1993, at the Scientific Council
of the Bonn Convention, Australia supported the development of an International
Agreement for the Conservation of the Albatross in the Southern Hemisphere.
5.83 Japan is not a party to the Bonn
Convention but may become a party to regional agreements for the management
of migratory species. While the Bonn Convention may impose prohibitions
on the direct take of listed species, sovereign states may take out reservations
on listings, exempting them from the Conventions provisions.
5.84 The Australian Nature Conservation
Agency told the Committee that the Bonn Convention would not provide an
alternative for addressing the albatross bykill from long-line tuna vessels
should the subsidiary agreements not be renewed. The Bonn Convention may
assist in that it offers a co-operative mechanism where a number of countries
may participate in determining what is happening to the albatross population
globally. Further, it could provide a international mechanism to seek
co-operation of the those fishing under other conventions to cooperate
in addressing this issue.
Agreement for the Protection of Migratory Birds and Birds in Danger
of Extinction and their Environment between the Government of Australia
and the Government of Japan 1974
5.85 This bilateral agreement reinforces
the Ramsar Convention as well as extending Australia's commitment to protect
migratory birds other than waterfowl, birds in danger of extinction and
their environment. This treaty recognises the international concerns for
the protection of migratory birds under the threat of extinction. Article
III of the treaty states that:
|
each Government shall take special protective measures, as appropriate,
for the preservation of species or subspecies of birds which are
in danger of extinction.
|
5.86 The treaty also discusses the exchange
of data and publications regarding research on migratory birds in danger
of extinction and encourages joint research and conservation ventures.
5.87 Among the birds listed in the annex
to the agreement is the Wandering Albatross (Diomedea exulans)
which is directly affected as a result of Japanese long-line fishing.
Concluding comments
5.88 The Committee is aware of the considerable
progress that has been made in recent years in relation to obtaining information
collected on bycatch species and other environmental issues. There is
obviously still a substantial amount of work to be done and the Committee
appreciates that environmental research is expensive and takes considerable
time.
5.89 There are a number of areas, however,
where the Committee would like to see improvements made in the short term.
The Committee would like to see a greater involvement of DEST in the negotiation
process.
5.90 The Committee is also concerned that
the development of the threat abatement plan may provide an excuse for
not proceeding with research into measures to eliminate seabird bycatch.
5.91 The Committee is aware that there
is considerable research being conducted into the bycatch of marlin and
other species. The Committee would like to see a prohibition on the retention
of marlin species until research has determined the impact of long-line
fishing on the local stocks within the EEZ.
5.92 There were also a number of legal
anomalies raised with the Committee that are believed to hinder conservation
efforts. The Committee urges the Government to review the relevant legislation
to ensure that environmental measures can be implemented when deemed appropriate.
[1] Morvell, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 64
[2] Kennedy, Transcript, 9 September 1996, p. 182-183,
Sant Transcript, 9 September 1996, p. 201; 3 Australian Marine Conservation
Society, Submission No. 20, p. S 97
[3] Sant, Transcript, 9 September 1996, p. 183
[4] Morvell, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 64
[5] Stevens, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 40
[6] Macartney, Transcript, 16 September 1996, p. 211
[7] Ibid, p. 211
[8] Australian National Audit Office, Commonwealth Fisheries
Management , Australian Fisheries Management Authority Audit Report No.
32 1995-96 Performance Audit, Volume 2, p. 48
[9] Ibid, p. 48
[10] Morvell, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 60
[11] Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Submission
No. 25, p. S 118
[12] Morvell, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 60
[13] Kennedy, Transcript, 9 September 1996, p. 198
[14] Tuna Boat Owners Association of Australia Inc,
Submission No. 44, p. S 323
[15] Young, Transcript, 5 September 1996, p. 90
[16] Evans, Transcript, 26 September 1996, p. 266
[17] Ibid, p. 266
[18] Kennedy, Transcript, 9 September 1996, p. 197
[19] Ibid, p. 184
[20] Kennedy, Transcript, 9 September 1996, p. 184
[21] Ibid, p. 184
[22] Harwood, Transcript, 10 October 1996, p. 409
[23] Ibid, p. 409
[24] Ibid, p. 184
[25] Ibid, p. 185
[26] Ibid, p. 184
[27] Ibid, p. 185
[28] McNee, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 58
[29] Ibid, p. 59
[30] Department of Environment, Sport and Territories,
Submission No. 36, p. S 213
[31] Harwood, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 13-14
[32] Stevens, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 26
[33] Ibid, p. 26
[34] Young, Transcript, 5 September 1996, p. 91
[35] Premier of Tasmania, Submission No. 39, p. S 232-233
[36] Billfish Assessment Group (1996) Synopsis on the
Billfish Stocks and Fisheries within the Eastern AFZ, September 1996,
p. 32
[37] Stone, Transcript, 27 September 1996, p. 366
[38] Millington, Transcript, 26 September 1996, p.
247
[39] Ibid, p. 247
[40] Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Submission
No. 25, p. S 116
[41] Purdon & Featherstone, Submission No. 17,
p. S 90
[42] Department of Environment, Sport and Territories,
Submission No. 36, p. S 212
[43] Exel, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 37-38
[44] Ibid, p. 38
[45] Sant, Transcript, 9 September 1996, p. 183
[46] Kennedy, Transcript, 9 September 1996, p. 200
[47] Goadby, Submission No. 7, p. S 23
[48] Kennedy, Transcript, 9 September 1996, p. 199
[49] Department of Primary Industries and Energy, Submission
No. 33, p. S 177
[50] Conservation Council of Western Australia, Submission
No. 29, p. S 153
[51] McNee, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 57
[52] Evans, Supplementary Submission No. 38.1, p. S
435
[53] Kennedy, Transcript, 9 September 1996, p. 193
[54] Department of Environment, Sport and Territories,
Submission No. 36, Attachment 1, p. S 217
[55] Battam H and Smith L (1994) Report on Review and
Analysis of: Albatross Banding Data held by the Australian Bird and Bat
Banding Schemes Other Relevant Data, Australian National Parks and Wildlife
Service Research and Surveys Consultancy Agreement No. 138, Volume 1.1,
31 January 1994, p. 16
[56] Battam, Transcript, 15 October 1996, p. 432
[57] Ibid, p. 433
[58] Southern Oceans Seabird Study Association, Submission
No. 45, p. S 346
[59] Tuna Boat Owners Association of Australia Inc,
Submission No. 44, p. S 335
[60] Department of Primary Industries and Energy, Submission
No. 33, p. S 177
[61] McNee, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 61
[62] Evans, Supplementary Submission No. 38.1, p. S
436
[63] Southern Ocean Seabird Study Association, Submission
No. 45, p. S 347
[64] Premier of Tasmania, Submission No. 39, p. S 233
[65] Battam, Transcript, 15 October 1996, p. 434
[66] Ibid, p. 434
[67] Southern Ocean Seabird Study Association, Submission
No. 45, p. S 346
[68] Romaro, Transcript, 26 September 1996, p. 320
[69] Harwood, Transcript, 10 October 1996, p. 407
[70] Exel, Transcript, 10 October 1996, p. 407-408
[71] Smith, Transcript, 15 October 1996, p. 435
[72] Hermes, Transcript, 15 October 1996, p. 436
[73] Ibid, p. 436
[74] Jeffriess, Transcript, 27 September 1996, p. 348
[75] McNee, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 62
[76] Romaro, Transcript, 26 September 1996, p. 321
[77] Pike, Transcript, 27 September 1996, p. 362; Puglisi,
Transcript, 27 September 1996, p. 362
[78] Battam, Transcript, 15 October 1996, p. 427
[79] Harwood, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 22
[80] CSIRO Division of Fisheries, Submission No. 10,
p. S 33
[81] Jeffriess, Transcript, 27 September 1996, p. 357
[82] Tuna Boat Owners Association of Australia Inc,
Submission No. 44, p. S 335
[83] Department of Environment, Sport and Territories,
Submission No. 36, p. S 215
[84] Battam H and Smith L (1994) Report on Review and
Analysis of: Albatross banding Data held by the Australian Bird and Bat
banding Schemes Other Relevant Data, 31 January 1994, Australian National
Parks and Wildlife Service Research and Surveys Consultancy Agreement
No. 138, p. 14
[85] Ward, Transcript, 15 October 1996, p. 430
[86] Ribertson G, Gales R and Brothers N (1996) Report
on the Workshop on the Incidental Mortality of Albatrosses Associated
with Long-line Fishing, Preliminary Draft, October 1996, p. 8
[87] Kennedy, Transcript, 9 September 1996, p. 194
[88] Pike, Transcript, 27 September 1996, p. 363; Jeffries,
Transcript, 27 September 1996, p. 363
[89] Battam, Transcript, 15 October 1996, p. 430-431
[90] Exel, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 33
[91] Report of the first meeting of the Commission
for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna Ecologically Related Species
Working Group, Wellington, New Zealand, 18-20 December 1995, p. 26
[92] Ibid, p. 26
[93] Exel, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 32
[94] Stevens, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 32
[95] Southern Ocean Seabird Study Association, Submission
No. 45, p. S 347
[96] Report of the first meeting of the Commission
for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna Ecologically Related Species
Working Group, Wellington, New Zealand, 18-20 December 1995, p. 26
[97] Romaro, Transcript, 26 September 1996, p. 320;
Exel, Transcript, 10 October 1996, p. 408; Battam, Transcript, 15 October
1996, p. 427
[98] Battam, Transcript, 15 October 1996, p. 427; Report
of the first meeting of the Commission for the Conservation of Southern
Bluefin Tuna Ecologically Related Species Working Group, Wellington, New
Zealand, 18-20 December 1995, p. 27
[99] Report of the first meeting of the Commission
for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna Ecologically Related Species
Working Group, Wellington, New Zealand, 18-20 December 1995, p. 26; Jeffriess,
Transcript, 27 September 1996, p. 359
[100] Lister, Transcript, 5 September 1996, p. 171
[101] Rowley, Transcript, 16 September 1996, p. 234
[102] Jeffriess, Transcript, 27 September 1996, p.
359-360, 362
[103] Kruimink, Transcript, 5 September 1996, p. 174
[104] Tuna Boat Owners Association of Australia Inc,
Submission No. 44, p. S 329
[105] Report of the first meeting of the Commission
for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna Ecologically Related Species
Working Group, Wellington, New Zealand, 18-20 December 1995, p. 26
[106] McNee, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 61
[107] Smith, Transcript, 15 October 1996, p. 428;
Rowley, Transcript, 16 September 1996, p. 233
[108] Harwood, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 21
[109] Report of the first meeting of the Commission
for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna Ecologically Related Species
Working Group, Wellington, New Zealand, 18-20 December 1995, p. 27
[110] Battam, Transcript, 15 October 1996, p. 428:
Department of Environment, Sport and Territories, Submission No. 36, p.
S 216
[111] Battam, Transcript, 15 October 1996, p. 428
[112] Report of the first meeting of the Commission
for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna Ecologically Related Species
Working Group, Wellington, New Zealand, 18-20 December 1995, p. 27
[113] Ibid, p. 27
[114] Department of Environment Sport and Territories,
Submission No. 36, p. S 216
[115] Report of the first meeting of the Commission
for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna Ecologically Related Species
Working Group, Wellington, New Zealand, 18-20 December 1995, p. 27
[116] Harwood, Transcript, 29 August 1996, p. 22
[117] Report of the first meeting of the Commission
for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna Ecologically Related Species
Working Group, Wellington, New Zealand, 18-20 December 1995, p. 27; Ribertson
G, Gales R and Brothers N (1996) Report on the Workshop on the Incidental
Mortality of Albatrosses Associated with Long-line Fishing, Preliminary
Draft, October 1996, p. 13
[118] Ribertson G, Gales R and Brothers N (1996) Report
on the Workshop on the Incidental Mortality of Albatrosses Associated
with Long-line Fishing, Preliminary Draft, October 1996, p. 14
[119] Faulkner J (1195) Media Release Labor Government
to take International Lead in Albatross Conservation, 22 February 1996
[120] McNee, Transcript, 10 October 1996, p. 407
[121] Humane Society International, Submission No.
22, p. S 102
[122] Ibid, p. S 102
[123] Evans, Supplementary Submission No. 38.1, p.
S 439
[124] Ibid, p. S 440
[125] Evans, Transcript, 26 September 1996, p. 272
[126] Exel, Transcript, 10 October 1996, p. 408
[127] Tuna Boat Owners Association of Australia Inc,
Submission No. 44, p. S 335
[128] Evans, Transcript, 26 September 1996, p. 269
[129] Ibid, p. 271
[130] Southern Ocean Seabird Study Association, Submission
No. 45, p. S 347
[131] McNee, Transcript, 10 October 1996.p. 406.
[132] Ibid, p. 406
[133] Ibid, p. 406
[134] Ibid, p. 406
Back to top