Action Plan, Budget and Guidance parameters FINAL REPORT. By Poseidon ARM Ltd. December 2013

Transcription

1 Fisheries Improvement Project for the Tuna pole- and- line fishery in Indonesia Western Pacific Ocean, Indian Ocean, Archipelagic and territorial waters Action Plan, Budget and Guidance parameters FINAL REPORT By Poseidon ARM Ltd. December 2013

2 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION THE ACTION PLAN... 7 GOAL 1. STOCK STATUS AND FISHERIES MANAGEMENT: TO ENSURE THAT THE TUNA CATCHES DO NOT EXCEED SUSTAINABLE LEVELS... 8 Outcome 1 Stock status improved and reference points applied in management... 8 Outcome 2 Data collection and Information systems strengthened... 9 Outcome 3: Tuna management strategies applied in the Indonesia GOAL 2. ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT: TO PROMOTE THE ECOSYSTEM BASED APPROACH TO FISHERIES MANAGEMENT Outcome 4: Pole- and- line retained species catch continually monitored Outcome 5: Pole- and- line baitfish catch subject to a management strategy Outcome 6: ETP status and risks assessed Outcome 7. Habitat impact status assessed Outcome 8: Ecosystems and biodiversity assessments made for Indonesian waters GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS: TO STRENGTHEN GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS IN INONESIA S TUNA FISHERY Outcome 9: Short term objectives incorporated into fisheries strategy Outcome 10: Government incentives evaluated Outcome 11: Tuna management plan revised to incorporate fishery specific short term and long term objectives Outcome 12: Decision making process strengthened Outcome 13: Performance review BUDGET GUIDANCE Introduction INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING: GOVERNANCE, CONSULTATION AND DECISION MAKING A. MMAF B. DKP Provinsi and District C. FKPPS BYCATCH AND ECOSYSTEM IMPACT ANALYSIS AP2HI, Provincial universities, MMAF and DKP RESEARCH PLAN INCENTIVES

3 4.6. PROJECT MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) A. IPLNF FIP COORDINATOR B. IPLNF NATIONAL COUNTRY REPRESENTATIVE INTERNATIONAL M&E CONSULTANT APPENDIX 1: Outline Logframe

4 Acronyms ALDFG Abandoned, lost and discarded fishing gear AP2HI Asosiasi Perikanan Pole- and- line Dan Handline Indonesia. ASTUIN Indonesia Tuna Association BET Bigeye Tuna BMT Benchmarking and Monitoring Tool CB Certification Body CCRF Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries CMM Commission Management Measure CPUE Catch Per Unit Effort DKP Dinas Kelautan dan Perikakan EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone ESD Ecologically Sustainable Development ETP Endangered, Threatened and Protected FAD Fish Aggregation Device FKPPS Forum Koordinasi Pengembangan Pemanfaatan Sumber Daya Ikan GoI Government of Indonesia HS Harvest Strategy IOTC Indian Ocean Tuna Commission IUU Illegal, unreported and unregulated (fishing) MCS Monitoring, Control and Surveillance MEY Maximum Economic Yield MMAF Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries MSC Marine Stewardship Council MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield NTT Nusa Tenggara P I Performance Indicator PSA Productivity Susceptibility Analysis RBF Risk Based Framework RIMF Research Institute for Marine Fisheries SPC South Pacific Commission SICA Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis SKJ Skipjack tuna TAC Total Allowable Catch UoC Unit of Certification UNFSA United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement WCPFC Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission WCPO West Central Pacific Ocean WPFMC Western Pacific Fishery Management Council WWF World Wildlife Fund YFT Yellow Fin Tuna BET Big Eye Tuna CB Certification Body CMM Commission Management Measure CPUE Catch Per Unit Effort 3

5 1. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this document is to provide background information on the number of activities and outcomes required to support the Fishery Improvement Project (FIP) for the Indonesian pole- and- line fisheries in Indonesia, covering the Indian Ocean, Pacific Ocean, and associated archipelagic and territorial waters. This follows on from a pre- assessment for these fisheries conducted in August 2013 (Hough Associates Ltd), a subsequent scoping (Poseidon, December, 2013) followed by a FIP stakeholder workshop held in Jakarta in December 2013 and. The document is divided into a number of sections and includes a summary Action Plan containing information on expected outcomes, activities and milestones, which when completed will meet the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) scoring guideposts for each of the three Principles, the assigned stakeholders responsible for implementing the plan, the current status (ongoing or new) and the expected timeframe to complete the initial tasks. This document is supported by two annexes: a logframe, which summarises the activities, with assigned milestones, sets of Objectively Verifiable Indicators and Means of Verification, and for reference purposes, links these to the relevant scoring guidepost; and a FIP Tracking document which lays out the delivery schedules against the milestones The second section of the document covers Guidelines for each of the participating stakeholders assigned to complete specific activities; and the required budget. Decisions on the co- funders will be proposed for each of the activities. The Units of Certification identified from the pre- assessment were: Skipjack tuna caught by pole- and- line, Pacific Ocean, archipelagic and territorial waters Skipjack tuna caught by pole- and- line, Indian ocean, archipelagic and territorial waters Yellowfin tuna caught by pole- and- line, Pacific Ocean, archipelagic and territorial waters Yellowfin tuna caught pole- and- line, Indian ocean, archipelagic and territorial waters A small range of tuna and tuna- like species are taken in these fisheries, so actions and activities defined will also relate to these species. This document identifies the activities and range of tasks required in the Action Plan for the fisheries to reach the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) standard. The current MSC fisheries methodology, Version 2, is used to define the actions. The most important feature to this is that all target species (Principle 1), must focus on the stock status and management activities throughout the range of the stock, whilst ecosystem interactions (for other retained, bycatch and ETP species) relate specifically to the fishery under assessment. Further changes to the Action Plan may be required, if MSC changes some of the scoring guideposts as part of its review process. It is anticipated that the International Pole- and- Line Foundation (IPNLF), will facilitate the development of the FIP Action Plan, supported by Asosiasi Perikanan Pole- and- Line Dan Handline Indonesia (AP2HI) Indonesia. However, the overarching management issues fall to the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries (MMAF), in association with defined 4

6 management actions approved by Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) and Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC). The associated fisheries management tasks fall to both MMAF at national level, and the Provincial Government and District Fisheries offices of Dinas Kelautan dan Perikakan (DKP). These are also supported by the Forum for Coordination for the Fisheries Resources Utilisation (FKPPS), which are responsible for implementation within the 4 different Indonesian management areas. The Research functions may be supported by the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) and IOTC, but with a critical role to be played by MMAF Conservation of Fish Resource (P4KSI). The Plan is further developed to include a FIP tracking document with activities linked to the MSC scoring guideposts and more specific milestones. The results generated from the Action Plan should have periodic internal and external reviews to ensure they will meet the MSC standard. An assessment of current status of the fisheries against the principle guideposts is summarized below. Table 1: Summary of pre- assessment scoring for the Indonesian Pacific pole- and- line fisheryerror! Not a valid link. Figure 1: MSC BMT Index for the Indonesian Pacific pole- and- line fishery < Overall Principle 1 Principle 2 Principle 3 Table 2: Summary of pre- assessment scoring for the Indonesian Indian Ocean pole- and- line fishery Principle Component PI Performance Indicator Index Year 1 1 Outcome Stock status Reference points

7 2 3 Management Retained species Bycatch species ETP species Habitats Ecosystem Governance and Policy Fishery specific management system Stock rebuilding Harvest Strategy Harvest control rules and tools < Information and monitoring < Assessment of stock status Outcome Management < Information Outcome Management Information Outcome Management Information Outcome Management Information Outcome Management Information Legal and customary framework Consultation, roles and responsibilities Long term objectives Incentives for sustainable fishing Fishery specific objectives Decision making processes < Compliance and enforcement Research plan Management performance evaluation Total number of PIs less than 60 4 Total number of PIs Total number of PIs equal to or greater than Overall BMT Index 0.62 A summary of the current status (FIMP- BMT 1 index sheet) is shown in Figures. Figure 2: MSC BMT Index for the Indonesian Indian Ocean pole- and- line fishery 1 The MSC FIP Benchmarking and Monitoring Tool (BMT) is used to assess the performance of each FIP over its project period. It may also be used by MSC to compare the progress of one FIP against the other. 6

8 < Overall Principle 1 Principle 2 Principle 3 2. THE ACTION PLAN A summary logframe is provided in Appendix 1. It contains three basic goals, 14 outcomes, 19 activities and 40 milestones. The project goals are as follows: Stock status and fisheries management: To ensure that the tuna catches do not exceed sustainable levels Ecosystem management: To promote the ecosystem based approach to fisheries management Governance systems: To strengthen governance systems in the Indonesias Tuna fishery The sixteen outcomes are as follows: 1. Stock status improved and reference points applied in management 2. Data collection and information systems strengthened 3. Tuna management strategies applied 4. Retained species subject to a management strategy 5. ETP status reviewed 6. Habitats status reviewed 7. Ecosystems and biodiversity assessments made 8. Legal framework implemented 9. Effective system of roles and responsibilities and consultation processes 10. Effective long term and short term objectives 7

9 11. Incentives assessed 12. Fishery specific management objectives applied 13. Decision making process strengthened 14. Effective application of compliance systems 15. Tuna research plan in place 16. Performance evaluation in place The specific activities will be addressed in the section below. GOAL 1. STOCK STATUS AND FISHERIES MANAGEMENT: TO ENSURE THAT THE TUNA CATCHES DO NOT EXCEED SUSTAINABLE LEVELS Outcome 1 Stock status improved and reference points applied in management The first component falls to the explicit responsibility of the two RFMOs, WCPFC and IOTC in setting limit and target reference points. Limit Reference Points have been set at WCPFC at F/Fmsy 1 for skipjack and yellowfin tuna 2. Target Reference points have yet to be developed and will link to the WCPFC harvest strategy. Interim Reference points have been set by IOTC 3 with the LRP at BLIM = 0.40 BMSY; FLIM = 1.50 FMSY, and a TRP at BMSY; FMSY. These will be subject to further review by the Scientific Committee of IOTC. The introduction of these reference points will also have to apply as a component of the Indonesia tuna management strategy (Activity 5). MMAF and P4KSI scientists will need to be engaged in the annual Scientific Committees at both RFMO meetings. It is accepted that P4KSI has the necessary stock assessment skills. Activity 1: WCPFC and IOTC to set explicit limit and target reference points for skipjack and yellowfin tuna and to apply these in management to EEZ The associated milestones are: Milestone 1,1: MMAF/P4KSI participating in SC WGs and WCPFC general session discussions on reference points Milestone 1.2: Explicit TRPs finalized at WCPFC for skipjack and yellowfin tuna Milestone 1.3: Explicit LRPs and TRPs set at IOTC for skipjack and yellowfin tuna Activity 2: Indonesia to extend these to cover management of all its tuna fisheries EEZ, AW and territorial tuna fisheries 2 WCPFC CMM IOTC Resolution 13/10 8

10 Once reference points have been set, these will need to be linked specifically to management actions and the harvest strategy covering the range of fisheries. Indonesia will be bound by these reference points in its EEZ fishery, and as such effort controls will need to explicitly link to historic activity for these groups where catches were in excess of 2,000t. This will include purse seine and longline fisheries with limits currently set at 500 days for purse seine, 5,889 t for longline bigeye catch and an average based on or 2004 if greater than 2,000 t for each of the other commercial fisheries, handline and pole- and- line. Indonesia will also be bound to implement compatible measures for its archipelagic waters. This is a difficult area in that measures might apply to waters under national jurisdiction 4, requires the introduction of compatible measures or that that the measures adopted and applied by it to highly migratory fish stocks within areas under its national jurisdiction do not undermine the effectiveness of measures adopted by the Commission under this Convention in respect of the same stocks.(article 8. WCPC 2000 (the Convention). SPC tagging data indicate that there are strong linkages between the fish within the MGA and those in the wider EEZ MMAF and P4KSI will participate in this WG. The associated milestone is: Milestone 2.1: Indonesia incorporates these Reference Points into the national tuna management strategy, including in waters under its direct sovereignty territorial and archipelagic Assigned stakeholders Priority Status Timeframe MSC Performance Indicator(s) WCPFC and IOTC with MMAF and P4KSI participation High New activity for Indonesia following adoption of RPs at WCPFC and IOTC Reference points Outcome 2 Data collection and Information systems strengthened Collection of catch and landings data for the Indonesian oceanic tuna fisheries is undertaken by MMAF (SDI) and passed to P4KSI. The data collection process has been strengthened, and information from the Pacific is passed to the Oceanic Fisheries. Programme of SPC and incorporated into the annual stock assessments. This includes catches taken in archipelagic waters. Progress in this area has been facilitated by the West Pacific East Asia Oceanic Fisheries Management Project (WPEA OFM) and includes pole- and- line catch data. It is highly likely that comprehensive range of information on stock structure (age, size, and sex), stock productivity, growth curves, and fleet composition is available to monitor and assess stock 4 Indonesia argues that its archipelagic waters, with the exception of FMA are xx and xx fall outside this Convention obligation. This was conditional on Indonesia becoming a CCM to WCPFC. MSC requires that Reference points must be set for the range of stock, such that any exclusions would be subject to challenge during the MSC public consultation process. 9

11 status in respect to the WCPO, but there are still uncertainties on the status of information from coastal fisheries. However, Indonesia has been judged to be non- compliant when reporting to IOTC in a number of areas: list of Active vessels 10/08, list of Authorized vessels 24 metres in length overall or more 07/02, coastal and surface fisheries 10/02 and observer reporting (5%) 11/04. Activity 3: Indonesia compliant with IO Resolutions: List of Active vessels 10/08, list of Authorized vessels 24 metres in length overall or more 07/02, Coastal and surface fisheries 10/02, Observer reporting (5%) 11/04 The associated milestones are: Milestone 3.1: Strengthen reporting systems from Province to MMAF Milestone 3.2: Strengthen observer coverage in IO compliant with IOTC Resolutions 10/02, 10/08, 07/02, 11/04 and CMM (100% for purse seine and 5% longline) Activity 4: There is good information on all other fishery removals, including for archipelagic waters, as well as disaggregated purse seine data Milestone 4.1: AW sub- fishery data made available go SPC Assigned stakeholders Priority Status Timeframe MSC Performance Indicator(s) MMAF High Expanding from existing activity Information Outcome 3: Tuna management strategies applied in the Indonesia Activity 5: Implementation of Harvest Strategy by Indonesia, that are consistent and compatible (AW) with WCPFC CMM , or any subsequent changes agreed at WCPFC level and IO Res 13/10 (IOTC). RFMO resolutions (WCPFC CMM and IOTC Resolution 13/10), and any subsequent adjustment to tuna management strategies are binding for the participants in each fishery. For the Pacific this includes a number of obligations relating specifically to Yellowfin and skipjack tuna as contained in CMM : Purse seine 10

12 A three (3) months (July, August and September) prohibition of setting on FADs shall be in place for all purse seine vessels fishing in EEZs and high seas between 20N and 20S in the Convention Area Submitting a FAD management Plan Binding limits for purse seine fishing effort, including 500 EEZ days for Indonesia Restricting the catch of BET at 5,889 tonnes. CCMs are encouraged to take measures not to increase their catch of Yellowfin tuna 100% observer coverage Catch retention of all target tuna species Other fisheries (Handline) CCMs shall take necessary measures to ensure that the total effort and capacity of their respective other commercial tuna fisheries for Bigeye, Yellowfin and Skipjack tuna but excluding those fisheries taking less than 2,000 tonnes of Bigeye, Yellowfin, and Skipjack, shall not exceed the average level for the period or CCMs shall provide the Commission with estimates of fishing effort for these other fisheries for 2013 and future years. The harvest strategy for the Indian Ocean responds to the status of stocks within the defined Kobe plots for the respective species, but these stocks are not subject to overfishing. Harvest control rules have yet to be developed for these species. Milestone 5.1: Indonesia confirms strategy consistent with WCPFC for limiting EEZ PS effort 500 days; and 5,889 t (BET) LL days Milestone 5.2: Agree action for 'other commercial fisheries including compatible measures implemented for Archipelagic waters (based on CMM objectives) Milestone 5.3: Compliance reporting to IOTC and WCPFC demonstrates national effectiveness Assigned stakeholders MMAF (SDI and Fishing business service directorate (PUP)) Priority High Status Strengthening existing strategy Timeframe Q and ongoing probably until Q MSC Performance Harvest strategy Indicator(s) Activity 6: Implement a set harvest control rules and tools for purse seine, longline and 'other commercial fisheries including pole- and- line in WCPFC EEZ, Indian Ocean and AW and territorial waters 11

13 This component falls to the explicit responsibility of MMAF (SDI) but, for vessels less than 30 GT, with delegated responsibility to Provincial Dinas (DKP). MMAF are required to monitor the uptake of EEZ purse seine days, along with the catch of BET for the longline sector. Compatible measures will have to be developed for AW fisheries purse seine, longline, pole- and- line and handline, which ensures that effort does not increase from the years Limits set for AW are the explicit responsibility of the Indonesian government and should not undermine the effectiveness of measures adopted by the Commission. Possible measures may include either or input restrictions - vessel days scheme, or output - fixed quotas for purse seine, pole- and- line, handline and longline and ringnet vessels, may be linked to the average or 2004 levels. The basis for establishing measures would have to conform with the Decision making processes (3.2.2) which take account of relevant information, not least, the appropriate scientific advice. MFMR will also be required to monitor the application of measures at Provincial and national level, for reporting of compliance of these measures to WCPFC and the Technical Compliance Committee. An annual report will be submitted from DKP Provinces to MMAF. Milestone 6.1: Establish a working group to assess the implications of the CMM and IOTC Resolution 13/10 and advise on measures for purse seine, longline and other commercial fisheries including pole- and- line & handline Milestone 6.2: Conduct a workshop to explore input and output controls including FAD management, quotas and effort limits in ALL Indonesian fisheries Milestone 6.3: Initiate Decrees that support management tools, and provide guidance to DKP Provinsi on implementation of measures Milestone 6.4: Undertake and assess evidence that the measures established are effective Assigned stakeholders MMAF Priority High Status Undertaking a new activity Timeframe 2014 to 2016 MSC Performance Harvest control rules and tools Indicator(s) GOAL 2. ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT: TO PROMOTE THE ECOSYSTEM BASED APPROACH TO FISHERIES MANAGEMENT Outcome 4: Pole- and- line retained species catch continually monitored Accurate information is required on total removals from the fishery i.e., including retained species (all commercial catches excluding the main tuna species) caught by pole- and- line. 12

14 Quantitative information is available and shows catches of retained species 5 for bonito (kawa kawa), longtail (tongkol abu abu) and frigate tuna (tongkol komo) at 0.9%, 0.5% and 0.1%. These are well under the definition of main at 5%. Nevertheless, updates of this information will need to be made available to assessors. Activity 7: Document the catch of other tuna and tuna like species Milestone 7.1: Other tuna and tuna like catch documented for of all retained species taken by pole- and- line vessels Assigned stakeholders Priority Status Timeframe MSC Performance Indicator(s) MMAF (SDI) Intermediate Improving from current activity Continuous 2.1.3, Retained species (retained other than bait) Outcome 5: Pole- and- line baitfish catch subject to a management strategy It is noteworthy that MSC requires that all product used for bait is an intricate part of the assessment, and therefore requires that the stock sustainability from the supplying fishery should also be assessed, irrespective of its location. Catches reported are (anchovy (Stolephorus) and scad (Decapterus russelii and D macrostoma) (Hough, 2013). However, it is usual for a very large number of different species to be caught in these fisheries, including occasional catches of reef fish and commercial species taken for human consumption (e.g trevally). Bait sites need to be identified and the information gathered and reviewed on a site by site basis, to identify gaps in knowledge that would be required for risk assessment/ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM) and to determine if management strategies need to be implemented for particular fisheries or species (Activity 10). Coordinated enumerator training may be required, which will require development of training modules, including species identification. Where high ecological risk situations are identified, bait species data collection by enumerators will need to be ongoing, to support management strategies introduced and ensure compliance. Activity 8: Document the bait species (anchovy (Stolephorus) and scad (Decapterus russelii and D macrostoma) caught by bagan and bouke-ami in site specific locations. 5 Pole and line English PDTS. Xls (2010) 13

15 Note that these species definitions may be too general. A recent categorisation of Solomon Is baitfish identified 24 separate species. A Risk- Based Assessment (RBA) framework needs to be completed for bait species as well as for possible habitat impacts. This would draw on the information review as outlined above (Milestone 8.3), and anticipating data deficiencies would involve the application of SICA (Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis - qualitative analysis, requiring information from stakeholders) and PSA (Productivity- Susceptibility Analysis, involving semi- quantitative analysis) 6. The RBA would identify ecological risks from species/fishery interactions, recognizing that risks will vary across sites and species, and may result in fishery specific limits for any species at risk. The likely candidate for limits would be bait sites heavily fished by bagans where bait is destined for human consumption. For each site, it will be necessary to determine through Rapid Rural Appraisal the susceptibility attributes. The risk assessment would access productivity information obtained from literature and from 7. Key requirements would be identification of the SICA 8 components: The main risk bearing activities, which would in this case be fishing; The spatial scale of the fishery, i.e., the percentage range of the stock that overlaps with the fishing activity; The temporal scale, the time spent on the fishing grounds where the interactions will occur; The level of fishing intensity, identifies the direct impacts as defined as Negligible, Minor, Moderate, Major, Severe and Catastrophic; The consequence of fishing activity on either population size or reproductive capacity. Key requirements would be identification of PSA components: Average age of maturity Average size of maturity Average maximum age Average maximum size Fecundity Trophic level Reproductive capacity The overlap of the fishery with the species distribution (Availability) Species overlap with the type of gear (Encounterability) Gear Selectivity Post capture mortality 6 MSC may provide support for this. RB in contact with Cassie Leisk <cassie.leisk@msc.org> 7 A similar study was undertaken by Banks and Leadbitter in the Philippines, RFLP, This has been supplied to the project team. 8 See pages of the MSC FAM version 2. 14

16 Milestone 8.1: Set up site specific monitoring system for baitfish catches Milestone 8.2: Enumerator training Milestone 8.3: Data on catch trends and catch composition by site, including bycatch information Milestone 8.4: Identification of species productivity indicators Milestone 8.5: Through the application of Rapid Rural Appraisal, collect productivity and susceptibility attributes Training in risk assessment methods and the application of EAFM to Indonesian tuna fisheries will be required for Universities, P4KSI and MMAF (BPSDM). The workshops should also be participatory, requiring industry and local government (e.g DKP District) input. Activity 9: Risk assessment and workshop (SICA & PSA). Milestone 9.1: Training in risk assessment and the application of the Risk Based framework (including training of trainers) Milestone 9.2: Workshop to determine risk mitigation for retained and bait species Assigned stakeholders Universities, P4KSI and MMAF BPSDM Priority High Status New activity Timeframe Q Q MSC Performance Retained species status (bait) Indicator(s) Activity 10: Develop a bait fish management plan for the bait sites. The plan should contain a process for catch monitoring, limiting availability, encounterability and mortality, assessing and reviewing site specific risks, assessing bycatch interactions and determining actions e.g. move on requirements. Key objectives of the plan should contain: 1. Keeping biomass levels of baitfish species above levels where recruitment could be affected (Species sustainability) 2. Ensuring that any impacts on ecosystem structure and function and kept at acceptable levels (Ecosystem sustainability) A network of Sites will be identified in cooperation with the industry. It is likely that management processes will be pilot tested. From an ecological and biological perspective, the 15

17 Sites will be linked to each FMA under the control of DKP Provinsi, and local control of DKP District. Best practice actions will be determined in cooperation with the pole- and- line industry. Special attention will be paid to medium to high risks sites where the intensity levels of fishing activity are likely to be high. Potential issues include: 1. Reduction in abundance of baitfish in individual bait grounds due to the direct capture of baitfish by either the bouke- ami or bagan techniques 2. Incidental capture of adult and juvenile reef fish, and other non- target species (bycatch) during baitfishing operations 3. Discarding of non- biological material (rubbish, debris) from pole- and- line boats or bagans 4. Spillage of oil/chemicals from pole- and- line boats or bagans 5. Anchors of pole- and- line boats or bagans dragging causing damage to surrounding habitat 6. Disagreement on payments to bait ground owners and disputes on the distribution or use of these payments within communities 7. Negative social impacts of pole- and- line boats or bagans operating in bait grounds The strategy will need to be monitored, and the success of any mitigation measures introduced regularly assessed. Management and mitigation must be incorporated into a strategy, which will be different for each fishery and will likely include, inter alia: Spatial and seasonal closures; Changes to gear configurations, to minimize interactions with juveniles and at- risk species e.g. hook types, minimum mesh sizes, maximum gear dimensions etc.; Non- target species catch limits; These measures will be incorporated into the National Tuna Management Plan (NTMP). Milestone 10.1: Develop Prepare a workshop template on options for management mitigation (if required) Milestone 10.2: Bait species management measures explored by PK4SI Milestone 10.3: Introduce provincial decrees in order to protect baitfish species (if required) Milestone 10.4: Evaluate the effectiveness of management mitigation measures for vulnerable retained and bait species Assigned stakeholders P4KSI, Industry, Universities, Provincial and District Dinas 16

18 Priority High Status Undertaking a new activity Timeframe Q Q MSC Performance (c) Retained (baitfish) species management Indicator(s) Outcome 6: ETP status and risks assessed Whilst unlikely, it is important to be able to document whether fishers have any interaction with Endangered, Threatened and Protected Species (ETPs). An assessment would most likely require village level Rapid Rural Appraisals to be undertaken. Activity 11: Provide documentary evidence that there are no interactions with ETPs. Milestone 11.1: Conduct a survey using Rapid Rural Appraisal of pole- and- line masters and crew. Assigned stakeholders University/BPSDM Priority Intermediate Status Undertaking a new activity Timeframe Q MSC Performance ETP status Indicator(s) Outcome 7. Habitat impact status assessed Whilst it is unlikely that there will be significant impact of the gears fishing materials and payaos, on habitats, it is important to record whether payaos might entangle marine mammals, turtles or other protected species (Manta Rays). It is also important to establish best practice guidelines to eliminate damage to the benthos by dragging of anchors Activity 12: Conduct a survey using Rapid Rural Appraisal of pole- and- line masters and crew Milestone 12.1: Conduct a survey using Rapid Rural Appraisal of pole- and- line masters and crew Milestone 12.2: Implement any mitigation requirements (e.g anchor dragging) into the baitfish management plan Assigned stakeholders University/BPSDM Priority Intermediate Status Undertaking a new activity Timeframe Q MSC Performance Habitat status 17

19 Indicator(s) Outcome 8: Ecosystems and biodiversity assessments made for Indonesian waters Some work has been undertaken by SPC on the ecological effects within the western Pacific as a whole. These indicate a very diverse ecosystem and broad resilience of the ecosystem to high levels of exploitation whilst the biomass remains high. However, if the biomass is reduced for apex predators including skipjack and yellowfin, the dynamics may well change for the worse. This therefore requires modeling work to include the Indonesian EEZ. Modeling the impact of fishery removals on the ecosystem needs to be undertaken, using existing models developed by SPC. This data- intensive modeling has been applied to areas east of the Indonesia (Papua), but will require the collection of additional trophic data and biological samples to adequately assess ecosystems within the area of the fishery, with the support of the WPEA OFM. It is therefore important to seek support from the WPEA programme and work with the pole- and- line fishers in sampling. The results of this work could be fed into the wider SPC analysis, but could also form the basis of providing evidence of healthy skipjack and yellowfin stocks through reporting to MMAF. Activity 13: Collect and analyse biodiversity indicators to support the use of the biodiversity index; Milestone 13.1: Collect trophic contents to support the use of the biodiversity index Milestone 13.2: Analyses data and assess the likely impact that may occur as a result of removals from the pole- and- line fishery Milestone 13.3: Results incorporated into stock assessment modeling Assigned stakeholders P4KSI, Universities Priority Intermediate Status Undertaking a new activity Timeframe Q MSC Performance 2.5.1, 2.5.2, Ecosystem status Indicator(s) 3. GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS: TO STRENGTHEN GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS IN INONESIA S TUNA FISHERY Outcome 9: Short term objectives incorporated into fisheries strategy Long- term objectives are articulated in the Fisheries Master Plan, but exclude reference to the precautionary approach to fisheries management (PAFM). However, both the PAFM and the ecosystem approach to fisheries management (EAFM) are two of the underlying principles of 18

20 the National Tuna Management Plan. The concern however, is that the Master Plan, and actions, e.g continued expansion in the purse seine fleet demonstrate non- compliance to these principles. Activity 14: The precautionary approach and ecosystem approaches to fisheries management clearly articulated in Government strategy and policy documents Milestone 14.1: The precautionary approach to fisheries management clearly articulated in Government strategy and policy documents Assigned stakeholders MMAF Priority High Status Currently in process Timeframe Q MSC Performance Short and long term objectives Indicator(s) Outcome 10: Government incentives evaluated The MSC guidance requires that the management system provides for incentives that are consistent with achieving the outcomes consistent with MSC principles, and must ensure that perverse incentives i.e. incentives that encourage fishermen to fish unsustainably, do not arise. WWF has undertaken a study examining the application of fisheries incentives in Indonesia and produced some guidelines. Evidence would need to suggest that these guidelines are being applied. It is expected however, that this PI will be eliminated from the assessment criteria. In which case, these milestones may become redundant. Activity 15. Undertake a review of subsidies and their impact on fishery sustainability Milestone 15.1: Study undertaken Milestone 15.2: Actions taken to remove negative subsidies Assigned stakeholders Priority Status Timeframe MSC Performance Indicator(s) MMAF Intermediate New development To be reviewed Incentives 19

21 Outcome 11: Tuna management plan revised to incorporate fishery specific short term and long term objectives Activity 16: Revise Tuna management plan to include short term management objectives Milestone 16.1: Revised tuna management and development plan A current tuna management plan is lacking specific short- term objectives which relate to MSC principles 1 (compliance with Reference Points an adoption of control rules and tools) and a clear structure that articulates specific measures and strategies relating to fishery specific ecosystem actions. The plan requires revision such that it follows a process, which underlines a commitment to data collection, an assessment of stock status and the adoption of fishery specific measures. The Plan should also articulate the process on how decisions are taken and applied, and lay down a process, which should provide a mechanism to evaluate the application of strategies. Assigned stakeholders MMAF Priority High Status Developed from existing activities Timeframe Q MSC Performance Fishery specific objectives Indicator(s) Outcome 12: Decision making process strengthened MMAF, FKKPS and DKP should all be able to demonstrate a process of considering research, and the outputs of monitoring and evaluation when making decisions. The pre- assessment identified a need to improve the processes that respond to serious and other important issues identified through research and consultation (e.g. over exploitation of baitfish species). Evidence would also have to show that the decisions advanced by the organisations are precautionary and that the decision making process is applied across all levels of fishery management. Decisions would have to incorporate binding decisions at EEZ level and compatible measures for territorial waters. The process also requires that stakeholders are informed of decisions with explanations provided and provides information and explanations to stakeholders on request, including when judicial decisions have been implemented. The MSC guidance requires: There are established decision- making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery- specific objectives.(sg (a)) 20

22 That the decision- making processes respond to serious and other important issues identified in relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation, in a transparent, timely and adaptive manner and take account of the wider implications of decisions; (SG (b)) That the decision- making processes use the precautionary approach and are based on best available information. Information on fishery performance and management action is available on request, and explanations are provided for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring evaluation and review activity (SG (c). Explanations are provided for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity ((SG (d). Activity 17: Guidelines on Decision making consistent with MSC guidelines incorporated into Management/FKPPS structure Milestone 17.1: Policy and guidelines strengthened on decision making through MMAF and FKKPS by incorporating the need to respond to research, monitoring and evaluation Milestone 17.2: Policy and guidelines strengthened to include adherence to the precautionary approach to fisheries management Milestone 17.3: Evidence available that decisions respond to respond to serious and other important issues identified through research and consultation and explanations are provided for any actions or lack of action Assigned stakeholders Priority Status Timeframe MSC Performance Indicator(s) MMAF, FKKPS and DKP High Improving on existing structure Q Q Decision making Outcome 13: Performance review A performance review structure does exist that examines the actions of Provincial and District. However, this needs to specifically relate to checks that the regional and national strategies for target and other species caught are being followed. This should also make some provision that corrective actions are stipulated. 21

23 Activity 18: Strengthen the monitoring, evaluation requirements (MMAF) and reporting on the required responses to actions taken by DKP Provinsi to ensure effective implementation of national laws Milestone 19.1: Improvements made to M&E on the effective application of tuna management strategies, reporting requirements and evidence of corrective actions taken Assigned stakeholders MMAF Priority High Status Building on existing actions Timeframe Q MSC Performance Performance Review Indicator(s) 3. BUDGET Request from IPNLF managemnt 4. GUIDANCE 4.1 Introduction An assessment of needs identifies that implementation of the FIP will lead to increasing the scores to a pass or beyond (4.4). However, achieving MSC Certification relies heavily on the actions of MMAF (4.2), DKP Provinsi and District (4.2). Target species status and management The major issues relate to the setting of reference points (<80), a harvest strategy (FAIL) and the setting of management measures (FAIL). There is also a probability (medium to high) that yellowfin tuna, whilst not overfished within the range of the Western & Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), is most probably overfished in the Western part of the WCPO, including the waters of the Indonesia. Much will depend on the 2014 yellowfin stock assessment (due out in August, 2014), and thereafter if a yellowfin rebuilding strategy is required. This may impact on the ability of YFT to remain as a target species under MSC assessment. Critical to the scoring of the P1 performance indicators is that it is not only the pole- and- line fishery that falls under the MSC assessment, but the status and management of the entire yellowfin tuna stock throughout the WCPO. This includes all nations and fisheries, including some that are not advancing rapidly towards achieving good management outcomes (Philippines, Indonesia and Vietnam). The issue of timelines is also addressed below, but 22

24 realistically, some outcomes, most specifically testing the effectiveness of strategies, may not be in place until the end of Overall, a failure to set a management strategy and supporting measures represents a risk to the attainment of MSC. This issue must be addressed by the project, in cooperation with MMAF. However, it is important to point out that the prescribed actions are already a condition of RFMO membership. Ecosystems and other species interactions Passes may be attained for other commercial species (retained) and baitfish. However, much depends on the identification of sustainable baitfish sources, and at present there is some evidence of localized depletion at specific sites. Corrective action is therefore required to either eliminate these sites as sources for bait, or to establish a management plan for baitfish within each FMA. The development of a baitfish strategy will rely on site- specific PSA assessments, and data will need to be collected to assess sensitivity criteria. Bycatch, Endangered, Threatened and Protected (ETP) species and habitats are all likely to score at default 100. However, the project has still to undertake considerable work in this area, over the coming year, to assess the likely impact on other species, most specifically to assess the interactions with ETPs and habitats. The use of Rapid Rural Appraisal to assess these interactions will need to be undertaken. Governance and fisheries specific management The areas of Governance (3.1) are quite strong, and should passes. However, the areas of fisheries specific management (3.2) are likely to attain near passes and the one fail (Decision making processes) under 3.2. The decision making process should clearly show that the responsible agencies, MMAF and FKPPS / DKP are implementing management actions based on reliable information, research, and evaluation. MMAF should work to revise the National Tuna Management Plan to that it encompasses core issues such as the development of harvest control rules and tools across the range of Indonesian tuna fisheries, and implements, when required, ecosystem management measures which cover retained, bycatch and ETPs. The NTMP should also encompass a system of verifying that activities are being implemented. All the above issues are certainly within reach, and once completed should attain a score over INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING: GOVERNANCE, CONSULTATION AND DECISION MAKING A. MMAF BACKGROUND The IPLNF, and its Indonesian based members AP2HI, is promoting a Fishery Improvement Plan (FIPs) for the Indonesian pole- and- line industry. So that adopted best management 23

25 practices will comply with Marine Stewardship Council standards, enabling the fishery s certification by The work requires the active engagement of MMAF and its affiliate organisations (P4KSI and DKP), and partners with parallel initiatives being advanced by the principal NGOs, WWF and SFP, which are promoting FIPs for other national tuna fisheries. To this end, all stakeholders have endorsed a Fishery Improvement Plan (Section 2 above) and outputs from the FIP are expected to support the strength of fisheries management both within the Indonesian tuna sector as a whole, and for the pole- and- line fisheries fishing national waters. As part of this process, the FIP requires that certain changes are implemented by MMAF which, when applied, will strengthen the application of good governance at national and provincial level (that are consistent with the MSC principles) but also endorse the application the WCPFC management measures (CMMs) and IOTC Resolutions across all tuna fisheries in the Indonesia. DESCRIPTION OF THE ASSIGNMENT Global objective: The expected position by the end of 2016 is that: There is a robust decision making process in place that accepts the application of WCPFC CMMs / IOTC Resolutions, along with compatible measures to be applied in Archipelagic and territorial waters and demonstrates consideration of this information The national decision making processes respond to all issues identified in relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation, in a transparent, timely and adaptive manner and take account of the wider implications of decisions; The national decision- making processes use the precautionary and ecosystem approaches and are based on best available information. Information on fishery performance and management action is available on request, and explanations are provided for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring evaluation and review activity; There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place which is responsive to the state of the stock and is designed to achieve stock management objectives in the target and limit reference points; There are well defined and effective harvest control rules in place that are consistent with the harvest strategy and ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as the target reference points are approached; Evidence is in place to ensure that the strategies have been implemented successfully identified. Functions, roles and responsibilities are explicitly defined and well understood for all areas of responsibility and interaction; The management system includes consultation processes that regularly seek and accept relevant information, including local knowledge. The management system demonstrates consideration of information and explains how it is used or not used; 24

26 That there is a system of performance review in place that assesses the application of management measures as prescribed by the WCPFC and IOTC management measures and the National Tuna Management Plan. Specific objectives These inputs are specific to implementation by MMAF and sub organisations, DKP Provinsi and District, but are required to facilitate the achievement of MSC outcomes. They require participation, implementation and a review process. All form part of RFMO convention requirements, and are also consistent with national obligations Requested Services As part of the requirement to strengthen governance functions there are some core activities that MMAF needs to address, in part as an requirement as a Cooperating Commission Member (CCM) of WCPFC and IOTC, but also in support of the principles of good governance that the Indonesia aspires to, which are also consistent with MSC requirements. Specific supporting activities have been identified as follows: Implementing of the required harvest strategies throughout the Indonesian tuna sector in accordance with the CMMs/Resolutions and consistent with the Convention (Article 8), but more specifically as applied to purse seine, longline and other commercial fisheries; Ensuring that the national fisheries consultation and decision making processes consider all relevant information, and that specific top down decisions, that relate to the implementation of RFMO measures, and any additional scientific and management information, are passed down to provincial and local government levels through the FKPPS structure; Ensuring that the precautionary and ecosystem approaches to fisheries management are applied in decision making and explanations are provided for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring evaluation and review activity; Oversee the development of a network of baitfish management plans, in cooperation with AP2HI, FKPPS and DKP Provinsi and District; Establishing national harvest control rules (input and output restrictions) across the range of tuna fisheries which allow for limits to be implemented as the Target Reference Point is approached in each of the fisheries concerned. Such rules and tools will need to take account of best practice examples to illustrate their appropriateness to the 25