Chapter III — Marine Mammal/Fisheries Interactions 



approximately 1,900 individuals, despite the fact that 

 more dolphin sets were made in 1998 than in 1997. 



Subsequent to enactment of the 1988 amendments, 

 some environmental organizations began to push for 

 a consumer boycott of tuna caught by encircling 

 dolphins. In response, the three largest U.S. tuna 

 canners announced in 1990 that they would no longer 

 purchase tuna caught in association with dolphins. 

 This announcement led to further shifts in the eastern 

 tropical Pacific tuna fishery as more U.S. vessels 

 relocated to the western Pacific. It also prompted 

 Congress to pass the Dolphin Protection Consumer 

 Information Act, which set standards for labeling tuna 

 as being "dolphin-safe." 



Although the Marine Mammal Protection Act's 

 tuna embargo provisions appeared to be an effective 

 means of compelling other nations to reduce dolphin 

 mortality, they came under fire as possibly being 

 inconsistent with U.S. obligations under the General 

 Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Mexico 

 challenged an embargo of its tuna before a GATT 

 panel in 1990. A second challenge was brought by 

 the European Community and the Netherlands in 

 1992, claiming that the intermediary nation embargoes 

 were not GATT-consistent. As discussed in previous 

 annual reports, the dispute resolution panels in those 

 cases found the unilaterally imposed U.S. embargo 

 provisions to be inconsistent with the GATT. The 

 panels suggested, however, that such trade sanctions 

 may be permissible if designed to ensure compliance 

 with a multi-lateral agreement. The panels' decisions 

 were never formally adopted by the GATT Council 

 and do not have the force of final decisions. 



The Marine Mammal Protection Act's tuna-dolphin 

 provisions were amended further by the International 

 Dolphin Conservation Act of 1992. The amendments 

 were, in part, designed to address GATT concerns 

 and focused on ways to eliminate, rather than merely 

 reduce, incidental dolphin mortality. The amendments 

 established a framework for a global moratorium on 

 the practice of setting on dolphins to catch tuna. 

 Although no fishing nation agreed to the moratorium 

 and, as a result, certain provisions of the Act never 

 became effective, other provisions were not contingent 

 on a moratorium. Changes included (1) revising the 

 quotas applicable to the U.S. fleet, (2) modifying the 



U.S. permit to proscribe setting on eastern spinner 

 and coastal spotted dolphins, and (3) prohibiting, as of 

 1 June 1994, the sale, purchase, transport, or ship- 

 ment in the United States of any tuna that is not 

 dolphin-safe. 



The 1992 La Jolla Agreement 



Rather than agreeing to the global moratorium on 

 setting on dolphins called for by the International 

 Dolphin Conservation Act of 1992, the governments 

 of all nations participating in the eastern tropical 

 Pacific tuna fishery opted for a different course. At 

 a special meeting of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna 

 Commission held in 1992 they adopted a resolution to 

 establish a multi-lateral program to reduce incidental 

 dolphin mortality in the eastern tropical Pacific. This 

 non-binding agreement, called the La Jolla Agreement 

 after the site of the meeting, established the Interna- 

 tional Dolphin Conservation Program under the 

 auspices of the Tuna Commission. The agreement 

 established a goal of reducing dolphin mortality to 

 levels approaching zero and set annual limits on total 

 incidental dolphin mortality as a means of achieving 

 that goal. Under the agreement, dolphin mortality 

 was capped at 19,500 in 1993, 15,500 in 1994, 

 12,000 in 1995, 9,000 in 1996, 7,500 in 1997, 6,500 

 in 1998, and less than 5,000 in 1999. Other aspects 

 of the program adopted under the resolution were 

 continuation of the requirement to place observers on 

 board all large purse seiners, with the additional 

 requirement that at least 50 percent of the observers 

 be deployed under the Tuna Commission's observer 

 program; establishment of a panel to monitor compli- 

 ance by the international fleet with the annual dolphin 

 mortality limits; expansion of existing research and 

 educational programs, including increased efforts to 

 find methods of catching large yellowfin tuna that do 

 not involve encircling dolphins; and establishment of 

 a scientific advisory board to assist the Tuna Commis- 

 sion in coordinating, facilitating, and guiding research 

 directed at reducing dolphin mortality. 



The parties subsequently agreed to a system where- 

 by each vessel participating in the fishery would be 

 given an individual dolphin mortality limit. Once that 

 limit was reached, the vessel would have to stop 

 setting on dolphins for the remainder of the year. 

 Under that agreement, any vessel that leaves the 



115 



