At the 43rd meeting of the CCAMLR Commission, which manages the Antarctic’s living marine resources – ending on October 25 – the divergence of vision between environmental conservation and sustainable fishing came face to face with the fact that no agreement was reached on the future of krill fisheries.
On the one hand, a proposal for a marine protected area around the Antarctic Peninsula, and on the other, a modernisation and increase in the allocation of fishing quotas.
To find out more about this unprecedented event, we spoke to Dr. Javier Arata, executive officer of ARK, the association of companies for responsible krill fishing.
How many vessels does the association represent and what proportion of the krill fishery does it account for?
Between the 10 companies, there are 13 vessels, two of which have not fished in the last two years. Two other vessels are not part of the ARK, one Russian and one Ukrainian. For the moment, they have no express interest in joining us, and their catches are small. ARK accounts for over 90% of krill catches. In the CCAMLR areas, the fishing season starts in December and ends in November, so the 2024 fishing season is not over yet.
What is the krill biomass around Antarctica and what proportion is fished?
It is estimated that there are between 350 million and 500 million tonnes of krill in Antarctica as a whole. But it is scattered. Most of it is found in the Scotia Arc, which includes the South Orkney Islands, the South Georgia Islands and the South Sandwich Islands, forming a chain of archipelagos. Two global assessments have been carried out in this area, one in 2000 and the other in 2019, and both arrived at a similar figure of around 62 million tonnes.
Based on this figure, CCAMLR estimated that 5.61 million tonnes could be fished in the whole of Area 48. However, CCAMLR indicated that this was a global quota for the area, but that as krill form scattered groups that do not communicate instantaneously, it should be divided in smaller spatial units. Meanwhile, CCAMLR had set a trigger level, in other words a precautionary catch limit, of 620,000 tonnes. This measure is in place until the spatial resolution of the krill estimate is fine tuned, so that catches can be distributed on a smaller scale.
In 2008, a study showed that if fishing was concentrated in a single area, it could have a significant impact. So in 2009, a new measure (CM-51-07) was introduced and the trigger level of the area 48 was divided into subareas: 1. Antarctic Peninsula, 2. South Orkney Islands, 3. South Georgia and 4. South Sandwich Islands. In reality, this was a rather positive solution, so we’ve been doing this between 2009 and this year, as well as estimating krill stocks on a smaller scale.
What happened during the latest CCAMLR negotiations on krill fishing?
This year, unfortunately, we did not reach agreement on certain points, either on marine protected areas or on the fisheries management plan. The most serious thing for us occurred at the end of the meeting, when China disagreed with the continuation of the measure CM-51-07, that is the plan from 2009 to subdivide the quota into subareas. As such, next year, the trigger level will apply to the whole Area 48. Overall it’s small, but if you fish it in just one place, it’s a relative big amount.
What are the grounds for this disagreement?
This is a political issue, not a scientific one. The members of CCAMLR felt that bringing together the new krill fisheries plan, which was of interest to fishing nations including China, and the MPA proposal, which was of interest to many other countries such as the United States, the EU, Chile and Argentina, would make it possible to discuss the fisheries issue while working together.
We met last July in Korea to develop these agreements ahead of the CCAMLR meeting. It seemed that progress was real, an agreement was reached that seemed to satisfy both parties, an acceptable catch quota was maintained for the area, subdivided into smaller units, and a plan for the marine protected area with permanent closures and seasonal closures in summer during the breeding season of fur seals and penguins.
What is this new krill fisheries plan that wasn’t adopted?
In 2022, a smaller-scale estimate of the krill quota in the Antarctic Peninsula was made. We were quite pleased because, on the one hand, CCAMLR was moving towards a more modern strategy, with quotas spread over smaller areas and taking into account the krill needs of predators, penguins, fur seals and whales, and the industry was happy to see the possible increase in quotas.
In 2023, the data was revised by the working groups. In 2024, the new quota was re-estimated downwards, with the possibility of focusing more on the areas where the fleet actually operates, in other words closer to the coast rather than in the ocean. CCAMLR, the environmental NGOs and the industry were satisfied.
But there was another very important element to this discussion, the adoption of a marine protected area in the same zone, something the CCAMLR has been working on since 2002.
In 2009, the first small MPA was established south of the South Orkneys. In 2011, a roadmap was created to develop MPAs throughout the CCAMLR area, across the whole of Antarctica. But there are differences of opinion, differences of vision, mainly concerning Russia and China on certain aspects. China, because of its particular interest in krill fishing, and Russia, for geopolitical reasons, have not authorised the adoption of new MPAs since 2016.
What do you envisage for the next season now that the measure CM-51-07 is not in force anymore?
It would have been preferable to extend it, as we indicated at this year’s meeting, we were waiting until the last minute for the various countries to negotiate. We think that subdividing the quota is still the way forward. Estimating stocks at the local level and then allocating quotas to smaller spatial units is what has been agreed at the scientific level. Thus, the truth is that CCAMLR has put us in a very difficult situation.
We are discussing internally the need to follow certain rules on the line discussed by CCAMLR so far. We are working on an intermediate solution to what exists today, in other words a single zone, lamentably, and to establish catch limits by subareas on a voluntary basis within the ARK.
ARK represents the majority of the krill fishing fleet and sits as an observer member at the CCAMLR international negotiations.
Javier Arata monitors the progress of CCAMLR, passing the information on to the industry and formulating industry proposals for CCAMLR measures.
He has previously worked as a scientist at the Chilean Antarctic Institute on the subject of marine protected areas and their interaction with fisheries.
Interviewed by Camille Lin, Polar Journal AG
