Review of observer data. The Secretariat presented the data reported by observers of the On-Board Observer Program relating to possible infractions received and processed by the Secretariat since the Panel’s previous meeting. The Panel discussed those cases that were not automatically referred to the pertinent Parties, and forwarded those that indicated possible infractions of the AIDCP to the responsible government for investigation and possible sanction. The following cases, identified by the corresponding trip number, were discussed: 2012491 and 2012497. Fishing without an observer. Both vessels left port to fish without an observer aboard. In both cases, the observers were transported out to these vessels the following day. The Panel decided to forward each case to the Party in question for investigation.
Review of observer data. The Secretariat informed that, since the previous meeting of the IRP, in July 2017, there had been no cases reported as a possible infraction that had to be discussed by the Panel. It also recalled that some possible infractions are automatically forwarded to the corresponding Party for investigation, as is the case of the lack of release equipment.
Review of observer data. The Secretariat presented data reported by observers of the On-Board Observer Program relating to possible infractions received and processed by the Secretariat since the Panel’s previous meeting. The Panel discussed the three cases that were not automatically referred to the pertinent Parties, specifically: Cases 2014-004 and 2014-145 involved trips in which someone other than the assigned qualified observer recorded data on the fishing activities of the vessel, compromising the value of those data and raising questions about whether the vessels involved could be deemed in violation of the AIDCP for fishing without a qualified observer. The Secretariat indicated that the observer had been dismissed from the program. The Panel expressed significant concern about these instances and requested additional information from the Secretariat in order to better understand how similar cases could be avoided in the future. It asked the Secretariat to provide the IRP with updates on these cases at future meetings, and also recommended that the Secretariat:
Review of observer data. The Secretariat presented the data reported by observers of the On-Board Observer Program relating to possible infractions received and processed by the Secretariat since the Panel’s previous meeting. The Panel discussed those cases that were not automatically referred to the pertinent Parties, and forwarded those that indicated possible infractions of the AIDCP to the responsible government for investigation and possible sanction. The following cases, identified by the corresponding trip number, were discussed: 2011-485. Interference with the observer's work. The observer was denied access to drinking water and he complained about the hygienic conditions on the vessel. The vessel in question usually operates in the Western Pacific. The observer did not report it as a possible infraction, but the flag State is already investigating the case. The Panel agreed to refer this case to the relevant Party for investigation. 2011-609. Interference with the observer's work. The observer was offered US$ 5,000 to not report fishing by the vessel in the high seas closure area. Moreover, he reported multiple instances of verbal abuse by the fishing captain. The Panel agreed to refer this case to the relevant Party for investigation. 2011-734 and 2011-774. In both cases, the vessels involved began to fish on dolphins before their respec- tive flag States had granted them a DML. These cases will be referred to the Parties as possible infrac- tions by their vessels, and to remind the governments of the importance of advising their fleets promptly of their DML allocations. 2012-510. This case does not involve the national or IATTC observer programs. No AIDCP-related in- formation was received from the program responsible for assigning the observer to this trip. The Panel agreed that the case should be reported to the relevant government for investigation, and that it should be monitored as a special case. The United States said that, in order maintain the high standards and integrity of the AIDCP, this case should be closely monitored. Should the vessel be one of its flag vessels, the United States would inves- tigate the case and inform the Secretariat as soon as the investigation was complete. Mexico stated that the differences between the IATTC and other relevant programs should be documented and, if it was con- cluded that the other programs did not meet the standards of the AIDCP, it might be necessary to review the memorandum of understanding on the cross endorsement...
Review of observer data. The Secretariat presented the data reported by observers of the On-Board Observer Program relating to possible infractions received and processed by the Secretariat since the Panel’s previous meeting. The Panel discussed those cases that are not automatically referred to the relevant Parties to determine which should be forwarded to the responsible government as possible infractions. Only one case of alleged observer harassment was presented, on which the observer describes that he was verbally harassed. Furthermore, the Secretariat presented a letter from the captain explaining that the offensive remarks were not directed at the observer but at the events that took place during the set. The Panel recommended that this case be sent to the corresponding Party for investigation.
Review of observer data. The Secretariat presented the data reported by observers of the On-Board Observer Program relating to possible infractions received and processed by the Secretariat since the Panel’s previous meeting. The Panel discussed those cases that are not automatically sent to the relevant Parties to determine which of them should be notified to the responsible Government as possible infractions. Trips 2018-621 and 2018-855, on which the vessels made sets before the Government reported the allocation of DMLs, were reviewed. In both cases, it was decided to send a letter to the Government reiterating their obligation to report—stipulated in Annex IV.I.12 of the AIDCP: “No vessel may begin fishing for tunas associated with dolphins until the Director receives such notification”—and to notify DML allocations in a timely manner. It was determined to send the following four cases to the corresponding Government as a possible infraction. Trip 2018-889. Trip without an observer. The vessel carried an observer from the Western Pacific Com- mission, but he was not approved in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding signed with the WCPFC, which violates the rules of the AIDCP that state that all Class-6 vessels must carry an observer on board in the Agreement area. Trip 2019-212. The case of a trip with a captain that was not included in the List of Qualified Captains. It was clarified that this captain has never been on said list. Trip 2019-303. The case of a trip with a captain that was not included in the List of Qualified Captains. He has never been on the list and, one week after the trip began, he was replaced by another captain, who had been identified by the vessel’s administration as the one who would start the trip. No sets on dolphins were made throughout the trip. Trip 2019-372. Interference with the observer’s duties. The observer did not have access to all the neces- sary equipment. Trip 2019-448. This is a trip that has not ended. Information was received on several occasions that the observer was being harassed to the extent of receiving death threats. The flag State of the vessel cooperated to return the observer to port and replace him with another observer. Several IRP representatives expressed that the safety of observers must be ensured and that their work should be facilitated. This guarantees good data. Venezuela proposed that this case be treated as a special case. The Panel agreed to review it at the next meeting.
Review of observer data. The Secretariat presented the data reported by observers of the On-Board Observer Program relating to possible infractions which had occurred since the Panel’s previous meeting. The Panel discussed a case in which an observer encountered difficulties with the vessel crew while col- lecting statistical information on dolphin abundance not directly related to fishing activities. The Panel asked the Director to send a notice to the Parties requesting them to make clear to vessel captains and owners the importance of ensuring that the observers are not impeded in any way by anyone from per- forming their assigned duties, including the responsibilities with respect to obtaining statistical informa- tion on the populations of dolphins in the EPO. The Director was also asked to express to the flag gov- ernment of the vessel the Panel’s concern over the incident and urge it to make the captain and owner of the vessel aware of this concern (Appendix 3).
Review of observer data. The Secretariat presented the data reported by observers of the On-Board Observer Program relating to possible infractions received and processed by the Secretariat since the Panel’s 65th meeting. The Panel discussed those cases that are not automatically sent to the relevant Parties to determine which of them should be notified to the responsible Government as possible infractions. The case of Trip 2019-448 of a possible observer harassment report was reviewed. Even though this case has already been preliminary investigated by the relevant authority, the IRP recommended sending it as a possible infraction case to the authority for investigation and including it in the list of Special Cases fol- lowed up by the Panel. The IRP also recommended that the Secretariat send a communication to the corre- sponding Party recalling that it is important for captains to be more alert of possible observer harassment. The case of Trip 2019-614 of a fishing captain not included in the List of Qualified Captains was reviewed. The IRP recommended sending this case as a possible infraction to the corresponding Party and requested that both fisheries authorities and observer programs verify the List of Qualified Captains before assigning and/or dispatching a vessel with a DML.
Review of observer data. The Secretariat presented the data reported by observers of the On-Board Observer Program relating to possible infractions received and processed by the Secretariat since the Panel’s previous meeting. The Panel discussed those cases that were not automatically referred to the pertinent Parties, and forwarded those that indicated possible infractions of the AIDCP to the responsible government for investigation and possible sanction. The following cases, identified by the corresponding trip number, were discussed. The Panel decided that neither case constituted an infraction. 2014-507. Fishing without a qualified captain. The captain had to be replaced while the vessel was at sea fishing. He was replaced by a crew member who had fulfilled all the requirements for qualification, but the Party did not ask the Secretariat to add him to the List of Qualified Captains until three days later. No sets on dolphins were made during those three days. 2014-550. Accidental set on dolphins. A vessel without a DML caught three rough-toothed dolphins (Steno bredanensis) accidentally during a set on a floating object. Crew members attempted to release the dolphins by hand from the net, resulting in two of the three dolphins being released alive.
Review of observer data. The Secretariat presented document IRP-70-04 which includes a summary of the data reported by observers of the On-Board Observer Program corresponding to possible infractions, received and processed by the Secretariat since the previous IRP meeting. During this period, the Secretariat reviewed a total of 233 fishing trips and identified 2 cases of possible non-compliance regarding dolphin safety gear requirements for vessels with DMLs, which will be automatically transmitted to the Parties as previously instructed by the IRP. These 2 cases include a possible non-compliance for not having a high-intensity floodlight that complies with the requirements of the Agreement and one case for not having a dolphin safety panel. Dur- ing this period, no cases of possible non-compliance were detected that required review by the IRP, in order to provide guidance to the Secretariat. On the other hand, the Secretariat informed the Panel of a vessel that had a cumulative mortality of 33 dolphins. The Secretariat was consulted on the captain's record to assess whether this particular captain requires special follow-up by the IRP. The information provided by the Secretariat indicates that this captain has a mortality average slightly above the fleet average. However, the Secretariat was left with the task of analyzing this situation in more detail and reporting back to the Panel in the future.
