COMMISSION POUR LA CONSERVATION
DE LA FAUNE ET LA FLORE MARINES
DE L'ANTARCTIQUE
________________________________________________
COMMISSION FOR THE CONSERVATION
OF ANTARCTIC MARINE LIVING RESOURCES
______________________________________________
КОМИССИЯ ПО СОХРАНЕНИЮ
МОРСКИХ ЖИВЫХ РЕСУРСОВ АНТАРКТИКИ
CCAMLR
COMISIÓN PARA LA CONSERVACIÓN DE
LOS RECURSOS VIVOS MARINOS
ANTÁRTICOS
CCAMLR-XXXIII/BG/25
20 September 2014
Original: English
Agenda Item No. 5.2.1
SC Agenda Item No. 3
Krill: the power lunch of Antarctica
Submitted by ASOC
_______________________
This paper is presented for consideration by CCAMLR and may contain unpublished data, analyses, and/or
conclusions subject to change. Data in this paper shall not be cited or used for purposes other than the work
of the CAMLR Commission, Scientific Committee or their subsidiary bodies without the permission of the
originators and/or owners of the data.
Krill: The Power Lunch of Antarctica
ASOC
Abstract
For several years, ASOC has been calling for improved management of Antarctic krill fisheries.
In this paper, ASOC urges CCAMLR to continue to work towards requiring 100% scientific
observer coverage on board krill vessels, identifying priority objectives for research and
development in support of the management of the krill fishery, conducting a new krill synoptic
survey, keeping the trigger level as the enforceable catch limit, improving monitoring through a
strengthened CEMP program, continuing efforts towards estimating green weight and krill
escape mortality, reviewing krill notifications procedures with the aim of reducing speculative
notifications, and requiring mandatory ice-strengthening for krill fishing vessels.
Introduction
CCAMLR has managed the Antarctic krill fishery in the waters around the Antarctic Peninsula
and the Scotia Sea since its inception in 1982. Krill form a critical part of the Southern Ocean
ecosystem and have the potential to support a global scale fishery, thus effective ecosystembased management is critical. The key requirements facing krill management are:
1. A refined understanding of the size of the krill biomass and krill distribution
2. Ecologically sustainable catch limits
3. Accurate catch data
4. Predator data (biomass, distribution and energy requirements)
5. Robust understanding of ecosystem impacts (especially on land-based predators)
6. Understanding how all these factors will be affected by climate change and ocean
acidification
Over the last several years, ASOC has called for the following measures to underpin these
requirements:
a) Establishing feedback management procedures
b) Requiring 100% scientific observer coverage on board krill vessels
c) Improving monitoring through a strengthened CEMP program
d) Continuing efforts towards estimating green weight and krill escape mortality
e) Conducting a new krill synoptic survey
f) Reviewing krill notifications procedures with the aim of reducing speculative notifications
Current Antarctic krill fishing operations are focused in coastal areas where penguins and other
predator species forage. However, due to warming trends and predicted retreating sea ice in the
Antarctic Peninsula and Scotia Sea area, krill availability in this area seems to be reduced 1.
Penguins and many other predators rely on krill for survival. As previously reported by ASOC 2,
populations of Adélie (Pygoscelis adeliae) and chinstrap penguins (Pygoscelis antarctica) in the
West Antarctic Peninsula/Scotia Sea area have declined more than 50% during the last 30 years
but the specific cause of this change is uncertain. However, a reduction in the local availability of
krill to penguins might be an important factor 3.
Data on krill and predator foraging requirements in the CCAMLR krill fishery is limited.
CCAMLR has not been able to determine whether changes in penguin populations are caused
solely by environmental changes (including climate change and sea ice decline) leading to
changes in krill abundance, or whether concentrated krill fishing efforts in coastal areas are
having a cumulative impact on penguin populations.
Existing krill fishery management measures do not adequately take into account the foraging
needs of penguins, and more research is needed to determine the cause of penguin declines on
the Antarctic Peninsula. In addition, uncertainties remain about some aspects of krill biology that
are especially relevant to fisheries management. These uncertainties need to be addressed
through the systematic deployment of scientific observers on board krill vessels. Such a scheme
is needed to collect systematic biological samples of krill and related information that would
allow CCAMLR to manage the krill fishery based on solid scientific advice. There is also a need
to advance in the implementation of a series of measures regarding the management of the krill
fishery.
1. Systematic scientific observer coverage for the krill fishery
As already advised by the Scientific Committee in previous years, 100% scientific observation
across all vessels in the krill fishery is the best way to achieve systematic observer coverage,
meaning a level of coverage that ensures data collection across all areas, seasons, vessels, and
fishing methods. A robust scientific observation program is necessary to understand the overall
behavior and impact of the fishery and is also fundamental to collect biological data—a factor
that currently limits CCAMLR’s ability to monitor and manage the krill fishery.
For many years, the Scientific Committee has advised deployment of 100% scientific observer
coverage on board krill vessels. Clearly the reasons that have been impeding the implementation
of this observer scheme are political and not scientific. For example, back in 2007, Members of
WG-EMM expressed their frustration that the collection of scientific observer data, which was
granted a high priority by the Scientific Committee, was being impeded by non-scientific
arguments 4.
1
Atkinson, et al., “Oceanic Circumpolar habitats of Antarctic krill,” Marine Ecology Progress Series 362 (2008).
CCAMLR-XXXI/BG/17 - (Unhappy Feet: The Reduction of Adélie and Chinstrap Penguin Populations in the
West Antarctic Peninsula/Scotia Sea).
3
D.A. Croll and B.R. Tershy, “Penguins, Fur Seals, and Fishing: Prey Requirements and Potential Competition in
the South Shetland Islands, Antarctica,” Polar Biology 19 (1998).
4
WG-EMM-2007, para. 4.56.
2
At CCAMLR XXVIII- 2009 CCAMLR adopted CM 51-06 that made the deployment of
scientific observers on board krill vessels mandatory. This CM resulted in 30% mandatory
observer coverage in the first year and 50% in the second year. This represented a key step
forward in the establishment of a comprehensive scientific observation program.
At the recent meeting of WG-EMM, the need to improve data quality, including securing the
training of scientific observers, was discussed. Also, the Working Group agreed that scientific
observers could provide guidance in assisting the crew to estimate the green weight of krill
caught, highlighting the need for 100% krill fishing observers in this context. Furthermore, some
krill fishing operators are concerned that transshipment operations are not fully covered by
observers, allowing for catch underreporting. Thus, 100% observer coverage will not only
improve the availability of krill fishing data to WG-EMM, but will also secure full observation
coverage during transshipment operations.
The Working Group concluded that there was a general desire to increase the level of observer
coverage, recognizing that it was important to identify specific concerns that Members might
have with increasing the level of observer coverage. While agreeing on the need for 100%
observer coverage, the Working Group concluded that this was a decision for the Commission.
ASOC considers that, after many years of partial coverage of the krill fishery, it is crucial for
CCAMLR to finally adopt a 100% observer program to access the needed biological data from
the krill fisheries. Doing so would enable the Scientific Committee to develop impact
assessments of these fisheries, and enhance CCAMLR's ability to monitor and manage this
resource in a sustainable manner.
CCAMLR should therefore extend CM 51-06 and amending it to reflect that 100%
coverage should be required.
2. Revision to Conservation Measure 51-07 (Interim distribution of the trigger level in the
krill fishery in Subareas 48.1 to 48.4)
Over the past several years, the krill fishery has become increasingly concentrated in Subarea
48.1, with an increase in the fishing effort along the western coast of the Antarctic Peninsula.
More than half of the total catch in the last four years was taken in this subarea. The current
fishing season has followed a similar pattern, with activity concentrated in the Bransfield Strait.
The resulting closure of Subarea 48.1 marks the third time since the establishment of CM 51-07
that the Subarea was closed before the end of the fishing season.
Another consequence is that fishing is likely occurring very close to threatened populations of
Adélie (Pygoscelis adeliae) and chinstrap penguins (Pygoscelis antarctica) in the West Antarctic
Peninsula/Scotia Sea area, which have declined more than 50% during the last 30 years, as
previously reported.
As part of the review of Conservation Measure 51-07, WG-EMM will be advising the SC on the
current trigger level and whether it is still suitable in 2014. Any changes to this CM should be
determined only by the availability of the necessary scientific information. At this stage, it is
ASOC’s understanding that there is no additional scientific information that is readily available
to support any changes to CM 51-07. Potential changes to this CM in the future should consider
the need to move some of the fishing effort to pelagic areas away from the coast (beyond the
limit of 60 nautical miles) since 99% of current fishing operations take place in coastal areas
close to breeding colonies of land-based krill dependent predators.
At the last meeting, based on the existing knowledge, WG-EMM concluded that CM 51-07 in its
current form is consistent with the objectives of Article II, and thus recommended that the
current interim distribution of the trigger level in the krill fishery in Subareas 48.1 to 48.4 be
maintained.
CCAMLR should extend the duration of CM 51-07, maintaining the current interim
distribution of the trigger level in the krill fishery in Subareas 48.1 to 48.4.
3. The need to identify priority objectives for research and development in support of
CCAMLR’s management of the krill fishery
SC-CAMLR-XXXIII/07 (Comments and suggestions for the development of a feedback
management system for the krill fishery) from the Russian Federation highlights several issues
related to krill and the krill fishery that are required to manage the krill fishery in a precautionary
manner. As noted in that paper, the current spatial distribution of krill catch limits is based on
data from the CCAMLR 2000 Synoptic survey. These data, which were obtained during one
particular season 14 years ago, do not provide information on trends in the spatio-temporal
variability of krill distribution. Hence new assessments of krill biomass and its spatial
distribution in smaller areas are needed. This information is more important than ever since the
impact of climate change might have led not only to the spatial redistribution of krill but also to
changes in the functional structure of its habitat. It is well known that the uncertainties related to
estimating the krill flux in the Antarctic Peninsula/Scotia Sea area represent a big challenge for
the management of the krill fishery, since the flux of krill might be changing inter-annually,
during one particular year, or even throughout the fishing season.
Another important aspect presented in SC-CAMLR-XXXIII/07 is the information gap on the
total abundance of krill-dependent predators, which precludes any estimates regarding overall
consumption of krill by predators 5. As mentioned in this document, the total krill biomass and its
spatial distribution is unknown, and to date, there has been no science-based evidence or
estimates of the impact of the fishery on krill resources and on the status of krill-dependent
predators. Thus, to estimate the competition between the fishery and krill-dependent predators it
would be necessary to study not only the spatial overlap between predator foraging areas and
fishing grounds but also the functional overlap.
The lack of essential information on the spatial distribution of krill is an important cause of
uncertainty for the development of feedback management in Area 48. This information is
essential not only to estimate the current status and trends in the krill biomass and its spatial
distribution but also to understand the dynamics of the fishery, so as to evaluate relationships
between the fishery and dependent predators in terms of competition for krill resources.
The conclusion of the Russian Federation that key scientific questions relating to feedback
management remain insufficiently studied is in sync with the recent findings of the cross-sector
5
WG-EMM-2009, para. 3.128.
workshop on krill fishing and conservation in the Scotia Sea and Antarctic Peninsula region 6.
One of the key findings of this workshop is the need to formulate a research and development
strategy to support progress in the management of the Antarctic krill fishery so that the limited
available resources can be targeted appropriately. This strategy should allow the identification of
priority objectives for research and development in support of CCAMLR’s management of the
krill fishery. The research and development strategy will need to include and take advantage of
integrated regional surveys using new technologies and input from the fishing fleet, as proposed
at the recent ARK workshop for krill fishery representatives and the scientific community to
share information on krill 7.
Also, a new synoptic survey stands out as an important element of this research and development
strategy. Fourteen years have gone since the last krill synoptic survey was conducted. Thus, it
would be important for CCAMLR to conduct a new krill synoptic survey to obtain a new
biomass estimate for Area 48. Besides krill biomass information at the basin scale, a synoptic
survey could help in detecting unforeseen effects from climate change, sea ice reduction, fishing
operations, ocean acidification, etc. for areas that might not be covered by regional surveys.
CCAMLR should identify priority objectives for research and development in support of
CCAMLR’s management of the krill fishery. CCAMLR needs to conduct a new krill
synoptic survey to obtain a new biomass estimate for Area 48.
4. The need to keep the trigger level as the enforceable catch limit until the necessary
scientific information is available
SC-CAMLR-XXXIII/07 also provides some background information and discussion on the
trigger level, implying that there is no evidence that the catch of 620,000 tonnes had an impact
on the status of krill resources and dependent predators when the fishery operated at this level
back in the 1980s. This document also challenges the rationale for the use of the trigger level as a
catch limit, arguing that it is not scientifically justified, neither by the status of krill resources nor
by the scale of the current fishery.
In this context it is important to remember the rationale behind the establishment of the trigger
level as the enforceable catch limit in the context of the precautionary approach embraced by
CCAMLR. Since the first management arrangements for krill were developed in the early
1990’s, CCAMLR acknowledged that the establishment of annual catch limits based on krill
biomass estimates would not be sufficient to account for the risk of localised fishing impact on
predator populations, and that an improved management would be needed, including the
development of a “feedback management procedure”. In the absence of such a feedback
management procedure, CCAMLR adopted an interim, ad hoc approach in order to set krill catch
limits for Area 48, where the fishery was primarily concentrated.
6
Bridging the Krill Divide: Understanding Cross-Sector Objectives for Krill Fishing and Conservation - Report of
an ICED-BAS-WWF workshop on Understanding the objectives for krill fishing and conservation in the Scotia Sea
and Antarctic Peninsula region, Woking, UK 9th & 10th June 2014 - 56 pages - Report compiled and edited by
Simeon Hill, Rachel Cavanagh, Cheryl Knowland, Susie Grant, and Rod Downie.
7
WG-EMM 2014, para. 2.202 (i).
The concern over the potential impact of concentrated fishing on land-based krill predators
prompted CCAMLR to introduce a complementary provision to the establishment of a krill catch
limit for Area 48. Thus, in 1991, the Scientific Committee addressed the potential impact of
localised fishing by recommending that the highest historic catches of krill from existing fishing
grounds near land-based predator colonies be used to determine the upper catch limit. 8
Accordingly, a provision was introduced in Conservation Measure (CM) 32/X (1991) 9 that
required krill catch limits to be established for smaller geographical areas if the total krill catch
in any fishing season exceeded 620,000 tonnes. This limit, which was later called the “trigger
level”, was calculated summing the maximum historical krill catch in each subarea, and was
intended to operate as an “upper limit to catches on the existing fishing grounds” near vulnerable
land-breeding predator colonies. 10
In 2000, aware of the fact that an appropriate management procedure could take years to be
developed, the Commission agreed, "that krill catches should not exceed a set (i.e. ‘trigger’)
level in Area 48 until a procedure for division of the overall catch limit into smaller management
units has been established. This is consistent with the current Conservation Measure 32/X which
sets such a trigger level at 620,000 tonnes – slightly above the historical maximum annual catch
in Area 48 to date”. 11
In 2007, CM 51-01 12 which sets the krill catch limit for Area 48, (applicable to Subareas 48.1,
48.2, 48.3 and 48.4) was amended to clarify that until limits are in place for the Small Scale
Management Units (SSMUs) that were created in 2002; the trigger level (620,000 tonnes) was
the actual limit and was going to be implemented as such. As a result, the trigger level was
defined for the first time in a CM and was “upgraded” in its legal status to an enforceable cap.
The current situation regarding the trigger limit was also assessed in the cross-sector workshop
on krill fishing and conservation in the Scotia Sea and Antarctic Peninsula region 13. A resulting
recommendation from that meeting reads as follows: "Any long-term increase in catches beyond
the current catch limit (the 620,000 or “trigger level”) would require more information about
the state of the ecosystem and its response to fishing than is currently available. CCAMLR
should prioritize specification of the information that would be necessary before any long-term
increase in catches beyond the “trigger level” can be considered. Such information is likely to
include both data and analyses, and to concern the state of the ecosystem and its response to
fishing."
8
SC-CCAMLR, 1991, para. 3.83.
Conservation Measure 32/X - Precautionary Catch Limitations on Euphausia superba in Statistical Area 48 which transitioned later into CM 51- 01.
10
SC-CCAMLR, 1991, para. 3.106 and 3.108.
11
CCAMLR, 2000, para. 7.23.
12
Conservation Measure 51-01 - Precautionary catch limitations on Euphausia superba in Statistical Subareas 48.1,
48.2, 48.3 and 48.4.
13
Bridging the Krill Divide: Understanding Cross-Sector Objectives for Krill Fishing and Conservation - Report of
an ICED-BAS-WWF workshop on Understanding the objectives for krill fishing and conservation in the Scotia Sea
and Antarctic Peninsula region,,, Woking, UK 9th & 10th June 2014 - 56 pages - Report compiled and edited by
Simeon Hill, Rachel Cavanagh, Cheryl Knowland, Susie Grant, and Rod Downie.
9
CCAMLR needs to keep the trigger level as the enforceable catch limit until the necessary
scientific information and any associated recommendations are available
5. Improving CEMP
As mentioned in previous years, to effectively assist CCAMLR in the development of the
feedback management of the Antarctic krill fishery, the CCAMLR Ecosystem Monitoring
Program (CEMP) should be enhanced. In its current configuration, CEMP does not allow
distinguishing the impacts of fishing from those associated with environmental change, its main
objective.
An enhanced CEMP will require additional sources of funding. In 2011, CCAMLR established
the CCAMLR Ecosystem Monitoring Program Fund with initial funding from Norway (100,000
AUS $) and the EU (20,000 Euros). To ASOC's knowledge, there have not been any additional
contributions from Members to this fund. Thus, it would be key for fishing nations to contribute
financially to the CEMP Fund to facilitate the development of the envisioned feedback
management of the krill fishery.
CCAMLR needs to invest the necessary logistical and financial resources in order to
progress in the enhancement of CEMP. Fishing nations should take the lead in
contributing to the further development of the CEMP Fund.
6. Green weight
Green weight estimates have been requested for the second consecutive year. According to the
last meeting of WG EMM, there is still variability in the way vessels estimate green weight. In
addition, several vessels are not providing some parameter estimates at the frequency required to
estimate variability and/or using a resolution to provide estimates that increases uncertainties in
overall catch estimates. As mentioned earlier, scientific observers may provide guidance to the
crew in estimating green weight and independent estimates of green weight parameters. This
emphasizes the importance of having 100% observer coverage on all krill fishing vessels.
ASOC recognizes the work of CCAMLR Members on estimating green weight and
encourages CCAMLR to continue working diligently in resolving this issue.
7. Krill escape mortality
Krill escape mortality occurs when krill are squeezed through fishing nets, an unknown
percentage of which are killed or seriously injured, without being counted as caught.
Uncertainties about the level of krill escape mortality have serious implications for assessments
and catch allocation schemes, undermining CCAMLR’s capacity to determine the real impact of
fishing operations on the ecosystem.
In 2009, WG-EMM recommended that a concerted effort be made to estimate escape mortality
in the krill fishery by evaluating existing data and the continued development of existing models.
New experiments are showing that escape mortality from nets is difficult to estimate and factors
affecting it include krill size, tow depth and duration, and amount of catch in the net. As
recognized in the recent meeting of WG-EMM, there are still some unaccounted variables in the
experiment design that need to be identified, and even if the direct mortality was low, injured
animals may potentially become easier prey for predators.
ASOC recognizes the work of CCAMLR Members on conducting escape mortality
experiments and encourages CCAMLR to continue working on this, so as to determine the
overall impact of the fishery on krill.
8. Notifications for krill fishing
In 2008, ASOC had already begun to notice the large disparity between notified and real krill
catches, and called on CCAMLR to encourage Members to be realistic about the expected level
of catch that is notified. ASOC proposed then that one way to achieve this would be to apply a
fee for notifications that is proportional to the notified catch. This situation has not changed in
the last 6 years; thus, ASOC proposes that krill notifications procedures be reviewed with the
aim of reducing speculative notifications, so that notifications actually reflect what is likely to be
caught.
CCAMLR needs to review krill notifications procedures with the aim of reducing
speculative notifications.
9. Requirement of ice-strengthening (ICE 1-C) for all krill vessels
Fishing vessels operating in the Southern Ocean should be subject to the rigorous safety and
environmental regulations since they navigate areas where ice conditions are changing and where
multi-year ice may be encountered. Regarding safety and the potential for environmental
disasters, in April 2013, the Chinese-flagged krill fishing vessel Kaixin caught fire and sank near
the Bransfield Strait on the Antarctic Peninsula 14; fortunately everyone on board was rescued
before the vessel sank. Ice classification standard ICE-1C is currently the minimum standard
recommended for fishing vessels to operate in the Antarctic Treaty area, however it is considered
a minimum and a higher standard could be warranted in some regions and circumstances.
Amongst the actions that CCAMLR should implement regarding standards on vessel safety and
operations is the mandatory requirement for ice-strengthening for krill fishing vessels.
As proposed in ASOC paper "Proposals on improving the governance and control of fishing
vessels operating in the Southern Ocean" submitted to this meeting, CCAMLR should
upgrade CCAMLR Resolution 20/XXII on ice strengthening standards to a binding
Conservation Measure that sets a minimum standard of ICE-1C for krill vessels.
14
See CCAMLR_XXXII/BG/10 Summary report on the fire incident of the fishing vessel Kaixin. Submitted by the
People’s Republic of China.