69 



gardless of political jurisdiction. However, a number of the provisions specifying how 

 the precautionary approach is to be applied are extremely weak and in some cases 

 would establish a very bad precedent. It is of crucial importance that this section 

 be strengthened in the following manner. 



1. Management Reference points (or thresholds) 



States and regional organizations should be required to set management reference 

 points (or thresholds) that trigger predetermined courses of action (such as closure 

 of a fishery) for every species fished as well as for key associated and dependent 

 species. Although the text contains good language requiring that measures be taken 

 to avoid exceeding reference points for target species and that pre-agreed recovery 

 plans be implemented if such reference points are exceeded, it does not require 

 states to establish reference points in the first place for either target or non-target 

 sp)ecies. This is a major failing that must be corrected. 



The guidelines in Annex 2 specifying how thresholds are to be developed are 

 toothless and represent a significant departure from the stronger guidelines pre- 

 pared by the working group on reference points convened by the Chairman during 

 the March session. Even the original guidelines prepared by that group, if made 

 mandatory, provide only a starting point for specific measures that are needed to 

 give this section efiect. 



2. Uncertainty 



Uncertainty plagues all aspects of fisheries management, and the text requires 

 states to take into account uncertainty when managing fisheries. However, the pre- 

 cautionary section of the text contains an inappropriate reference to socio-economic 

 conditions. Such conditions are not relevant to scientific uncertainty and the need 

 for precaution, and reference to them in this section should be removed. 



In addition, the March working group on reference points drafted specific rec- 

 ommendations on incorporating uncertainty into management. This type of specific- 

 ity is critical to give this important section the content it needs to be efTective. 



3. Non-target species and ecosystem management 



The text requires that states "should consider" associated ecosystems; develop 

 data collection and research programs to assess the impact of fishing on non-target 

 species and their environment; adopt plans "as necessary" to ensure the conserva- 

 tion of non-target species; and "consider" the protection of habitats of concern. These 

 are all very important elements of a precautionary approach to fisheries and must 

 be made mandatory if they are to have an impact. Qualifiers like "as necessary" un- 

 dermine effectiveness and should be removed. 



4. New or exploratory fisheries 



We are concerned about language in this section requiring cooperation with those 

 initiating a fishery in setting management measures. Such measures should be 

 based on the biological characteristics and conservation needs of the population con- 

 cerned, without undue interference by the person(s) initiating the fishery. In addi- 

 tion, conservation measures should be in place prior to the initiation of a new or 

 exploratory fishery. 



B. General Principles 



The text contains a section enumerating general principles by which straddling 

 and highly migratory fish stocks are to be managed on the high seas. We believe 

 these principles, amended as suggested below, should apply to straddling and highly 

 migratory fish stocks throughout their range, both on the high seas and within 

 EEZs. 



1. MSY and optimum yield 



The text repeats language in UNCLOS Article 119, setting out "maximum sus- 

 tainable yield as qualified by relevant environmental and economic factors" as a 

 goal. Similarly, the text requires states to "adopt conservation and management 

 measures to promote optimum utilization and ensure long-term sustainability of fish 

 stock(s) as concerned. ♦ * *" 



The terms "maximum sustainable yield" and "optimum utilization," as used in the 

 text and in UNCLOS, are outmoded and probably contradictory with the goal of sus- 

 tainability. (The problems with maximum sustainable yield as a management goal 

 were discussed at length in the management reference points working group and in 

 FAO's paper on management reference points). In the spirit of moving beyond 

 UNCLOS, the text provides an im.portant opportunity to redefine maximum sustain- 

 able yield and optimum utilization in a manner that ensures sustainabiHty. 



