Canadian atlantic swordfish and other tunas

Foreword

Photo of a Swordfish (Xiphias gladius)
Swordfish
(Xiphias gladius)
Photo of an Albacore Tuna (Thunnus alalunga)
Albacore Tuna
(Thunnus alalunga)
Photo of a Bigeye tuna (Thunnus obesus)
Bigeye tuna (Thunnus obesus)
Photo of a Yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares)
Yellowfin tuna
(Thunnus albacares)

The purpose of this Integrated Fisheries Management Plan (IFMP) is to identify the main objectives and requirements for the swordfish and other tunas (Albacore, bigeye, yellowfin) fishery in Atlantic Canada, as well as the tactics that will be used to achieve these objectives. This document also serves to communicate the basic information on the fishery and its management to staff of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), legislated co-management boards and other stakeholders. This IFMP provides a common understanding of the basic “rules” for the sustainable management of the fisheries resource.

Through IFMPs, DFO Maritimes Region intends to implement an Ecosystem Approach to Management (EAM) across all marine fisheries. The approach considers impacts extending beyond those affecting the target species and, in this respect, is consistent with the Food and Agriculture Organization’s Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. Implementation will take place in a step by step, evolutionary way, building on existing management processes. Advances will be made incrementally, beginning with the highest priorities and issues that offer the greatest scope for progress.  A summary of the EAM framework is included as Appendix 1 to the IFMP.

This IFMP is not a legally binding instrument that can form the basis of a legal challenge. The IFMP can be modified at any time and does not fetter the Minister's discretionary powers set out in the Fisheries Act. The Minister can, for reasons of conservation or for any other valid reasons, modify any provision of the IFMP in accordance with the powers granted pursuant to the Fisheries Act.

Where DFO is responsible for implementing obligations under land claims agreements, the IFMP will be implemented in a manner consistent with these obligations. In the event that an IFMP is inconsistent with obligations under land claims agreements, the provisions of the land claims agreements will prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

Signature and title of DFO approval authority             

Optional - Signature and title of other approval authority (i.e. authority established under land claims agreement)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Overview of the Fishery
2. Stock Assessment, Science and Traditional Knowledge
3. Social, Cultural and Economic Importance of the Fishery
4. Management Issues
5. Objectives
6. Strategies and Tactics
7. Access and Allocation
8. Shared Stewardship Arrangements
9. Compliance Plan
10. Monitoring and Evaluation
11. Plan Enhancement
12. Glossary

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Licences
Table 2: Active* Swordfish Licences, by Region, 2005-2009
Table 3: Active* Swordfish Licences, by Gear Type, by Region, 2005-2009
Table 4: Swordfish Landings (kg), by Province, Atlantic Region, 2006-2009
Table 5: Swordfish Value of Landings ($), by Province, Atlantic Region, 2006-2009
Table 6: Swordfish Landed Quantity and Value by Gear Type 2008-2009
Table 7: Swordfish Average Price*, by Gear Type, Atlantic Region, 2008-2009
Table 8: Landed Values of Species Caught by Swordfish Harvesters, 2009
Table 9: Income Dependency of Swordfish Harvesters on Swordfish, 2009
Table 10: Dependency of Swordfish Harvesters on Swordfish, by Home Port, 2009
Table 11: Dependency of Swordfish Harvesters on Swordfish and Port Dependency on Swordfish, by Port of Landing, 2009
Table 12: Tuna Licences by Province and DFO Region, 2004-2009
Table 13: Tuna Landed Quantity and Value by Gear Type, 2008
Table 14: Tuna Landed Quantity and Value by Gear Type, 2009
Table 15: Albacore Tuna Landed Quantities and Value, by Gear Type, Atlantic Region, 2009
Table 16: Bigeye Tuna Value of Landings by Gear Type, Atlantic Region, 2009
Table 17: Yellowfin Tuna Value of Landings by Gear Type, Atlantic Region, 2009
Table 18: Value of Species Caught by Tuna Harvesters, 2009
Table 19: Income Dependency of Tuna Harvesters, 2009
Table 20: Income Dependency of Tuna Harvesters on Tuna, by Home Port, 2009
Table 21: Income Dependency of Tuna Harvesters on Tuna and Port Dependency on Tuna, by Port of Landing, 2009
Table 22: Strategies and Tactics
Table 23: ICAAT Swordfish Quota and Allocations
Table 24: Compliance Risks and Mitigating Strategies

1. OVERVIEW OF THE FISHERY

1.1. History

The Atlantic swordfish fishery began commercially in the late 1880s as harpoon sailing vessels fished swordfish throughout Atlantic Canada and eventually expanded their fishery along the annual migration patterns of the eastern seaboard of North America. In the early 1960s, the Atlantic swordfish fishery shifted from a harpoon to primarily a longline fishery and landings increased to a high of approximately 8,000t. Recorded landings decreased sharply in 1970.

North Atlantic swordfish and tuna stocks come under the stewardship of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). ICCAT is the Regional Fisheries Management Organization responsible for the management of tunas and other highly migratory species in the Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea. While the Commission was established in 1969, the first specific ICCAT measures for the north Atlantic swordfish stock were not put in place until 1991, when countries were required to limit their annual catch by 15% less than their 1988 harvest levels. Minimum fish sizes were also put into place at that time. The Commission’s recommendation resulted in Canada reducing its annual harvest and introducing domestic measures to limit the harvesting of undersized swordfish. The first national allocations to ICCAT Contracting Parties were made for 1995 and went to those member countries with a history of fishing swordfish, namely Canada, the USA, Spain and Portugal. Japan, whose swordfish catches are a by-catch in other tuna fisheries, was restricted to 8% of their total north Atlantic catch of tunas. Japan has received a specific annual quota amount since 1997. Also, beginning that year, a small quota was put aside for the United Kingdom, on behalf of its overseas territories (primarily Bermuda) and a small amount was set aside for "Other" contracting parties (see Table 23). Starting in 2003, swordfish quota under the "Other" category was fully assigned to an additional nine countries. Also in 2003, ICCAT approved a substantial increase to the total allowable catch (TAC), including discards of north Atlantic swordfish, to 14,000t in 2003 from 10,400t the previous year, including discards. This increase was a result of improved stock status under the 10-year rebuilding plan that was initiated in 2000.

In the period of 1995 to 2000, further reductions in the Canadian quota on an annual basis resulted in the need for significant changes to our swordfish management strategy. Significant changes in the management strategy were implemented under the 2000-2002 Swordfish Plan, and they hinged on fleet allocations to each of the harpoon and swordfish longline fleets. In addition, the swordfish longline fishery implemented a number of measures under their Conservation Harvesting Plan (CHP) designed to reorient effort toward other tunas within their fleet allocation. In 2002, these management measures were further refined with the introduction of Individual Transferable Quotas (ITQ) to the longline fleet on a trial basis, and permanently in 2003.

From 2003 to 2009 the quota remained at 14,000t. In 2009 an assessment of the stock was completed and stated that the stock had been rebuilt to 99.9% of the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY). However, the TAC was reduced to 13,700t for 2010 - 2012 for precautionary reasons.

1.2. Type of Fishery

There are two commercial gear types (longline and harpoon) permitted in this fishery that takes place in the waters off Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. With the close relationship in catches for the longline fishery between pelagics this is, in effect, a multi-species fishery with catch authorized through licence conditions. Swordfish longline licence conditions are used in conjunction with licence conditions for the other tunas and together identify the authorized directed species as well as the large number of permitted by-catch species (sharks, marlins and other tunas).

1.3. Participants

Table 1. Licences
Longline & Harpoon Harpoon only
Area # Licenses Area # Licenses
Maritimes 76 Maritimes 184 (Group A)
Newfoundland 1 Maritimes 659 (Group B)
    Gulf NS 192 (Group B)
    PEI 168 (Group B)
Total 77   1203

Entry to the swordfish fishery, regardless of fleet sector, is limited to the current licences and has been since 1992. Licences have been fixed at this number, but may be reissued, within certain policy restrictions, from one fisher to another.

Since 2000 the Department facilitated a transfer process to provide First Nations with Swordfish licenses. As a result of this process there have been 9 licence transfers to Aboriginal people – with no transfers since 2004. All communal commercial fisheries licences are held in the name of the band.

1.3.1. Longline - ITQs

In most recent years, approximately 50-55 of the 77 licences have been active in any given year and are authorized to operate a longline fishing operation Atlantic-wide. A unique offshore tuna licence introduced in 2000, is based in the Maritimes Region and also operates a longline fishing operation Atlantic-wide but primarily directs for tunas.

The pelagic longline licences are transferable Atlantic-wide, and the other tunas licences are non-separable from the swordfish longline licences. Principal ports of landing in the Atlantic Region include Shelburne, Sambro, Woods Harbour and Clarks Harbour in Nova Scotia, and St. John's and Fermeuse in Newfoundland & Labrador. Pelagic longline vessels are also licensed to fish with harpoon gear, but since 2000, any landings by harpoon gear are attributed to the longline quota.

All longline licence holders are represented by the Nova Scotia Swordfishermen's Association (NSSA), which is based in Shelburne, Nova Scotia, with the exception of the offshore tuna longline licence which is represented by its owner/managers directly.

1.3.2. Harpoon – Competitive and ITQs

Historically the Harpoon A licence holders fished competitively and between 2005 and 2010, there were 60-74 active licences each year representing a total of 118 different licence holders of the 184 licences within Group A that make dedicated trips for swordfish. The Harpoon B licence holders do not make swordfish dedicated trips but have a licence that allows them to harpoon a swordfish on an opportunistic basis while harvesting other species.

Principal ports of landing in Nova Scotia include Shelburne, Cape Sable Island, Sambro, Woods Harbour and Clarks Harbour. Interest in the fishery remains along the eastern shore of Nova Scotia and in northeastern Cape Breton, but there were few active licences (i.e. during the years 1996-1999) in those areas of the Province. Gulf Region licences are primarily used by fishers from the Gulf, fishing opportunistically on swordfish while directing for bluefin tuna in waters off Nova Scotia.

Starting in 2001, a small number of fishers based primarily in Cape Breton and including some Gulf-based swordfish harpoon licence holders coordinated their own Conservation and Harvesting Plan (CHP) for the 4Vn area. Until 2009 the majority of the recently active harpoon-only licence holders were represented by the Swordfish Harpoon Association (SHA), which is based on the south shore of Nova Scotia. In 2010 some of the Harpoon A licence holders were represented by the Swordfish Harpoon Quota Society (SHQ), which is also based in Nova Scotia. Membership increased so that in 2012 this group represented 140 licence holders. The SHA was not active as an association and the remaining licence holders did not actively fish in 2012.

The SHQ supported the introduction of an Individual Quota (IQ) system in an attempt to address the “race for the fish” which occurred under the competitive strategy resulting in quota being caught in a short period of time resulting in a glut on the market. It was hoped this flexibility would add value to the fishery and to the licenses themselves. This community based allocation system, coordinated by the SHQ, was introduced as a voluntary pilot in 2011 and approved as a permanent option in 2012.

1.4. Location of the Fishery

1.4.1. Longline

This fishery extends from Georges Bank south of Nova Scotia to beyond the Flemish Cap east of Newfoundland when swordfish, the main species targeted, migrate into and adjacent to the Canadian Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Longline fishing effort generally progresses from west to east and back again and from offshore to inshore along the edge of the continental shelf following swordfish movements associated with seasonal warming trends of surface water temperature, and a northward movement of the edge of the Gulf Stream.

1.4.2. Harpoon

Harpooning for swordfish currently occurs primarily along the edges of Georges and Browns Banks, and targets mainly the large female swordfish "basking" in surface waters during the day.

1.5. Fishery Characteristics

The fishery is managed using either ITQs or competitive fishing, with DFO controlling the fishery in order to keep it within the Canadian quota allocated by ICCAT.

Both active fleets, harpoon and longline, in the Canadian fishery continue to push for the implementation of long-term objectives and decision making consistent with Marine Stewardship Council (MSC). A MSC's fishery certification and seafood ecolabel recognises fisheries that follow sustainable fishing practices. This requires that harvesting practices do not lead to overfishing, allow potential recovery of a depleted stock and maintain the ecosystem on which the fishery depends. More information can be found at: http://www.msc.org

1.5.1. Longline

The Canadian large pelagic longline fisheries that direct for, or incidentally catch, swordfish operate from April through December, though the season can extend year round subject to quota availability. To date vessels capable of fishing the winter season have focused on other fisheries in the January to March period.

In 2002, an ITQ management strategy was introduced and has proved successful. The maximum concentration of quota through permanent transfers that can be held by any individual licence holder is limited to 5% of the fleet’s quota. There is no limit on the amount of temporary quota.

In order to meet market demand for harpooned swordfish, a transport licence was introduced in 2011 whereby harpooned swordfish from a longline licence could be transferred to a transport vessel and landed separately from the longline catch. Specific rules including tagging of the transferred fish, use of special monitoring and tally documents are required to meet this policy.

The Canadian swordfish fishery continues to push for the implementation of long-term objectives and decision making consistent with Marine Stewardship Council (MSC). The longline fishery was MSC certified in April 19, 2012.

1.5.2. Harpoon

The harpoon fishery for swordfish primarily occurs from June through late August.

The quota is still fished competitively. However, it was subdivided into two quota groups beginning in the 2000-2002 Swordfish Management Plan: Group A comprises recently active licences while Group B includes all other licences. Recently active was defined as having at least one landed swordfish or hail out against the harpoon-only licence during any of the years 1996-1999 inclusive, documented with DFO.

The harpoon fishery was MSC certified on June 8, 2010 and as with the longline fleet the harpoon fishery pushes for the implementation of long-term objectives and decision making consistent with MSC.

For the 2011 introduction of the IQ program, individual licence shares were calculated by 90% historical shares (total landings from 1998-2009) and 10% equal shares. Members of the fleet may choose to combine their allocations to fish under either an ITQ or a competitive regime. All licence holders within the competitive regime start fishing at the same time and stop once the quota is caught. Individual licence holders within the SHQ group may accumulate quota, up to a maximum limit of 10% of the fleet’s quota, and activity fish throughout the season within their individual quota limit.

1.6. Governance

ICCAT, as the inter-governmental fishery organization responsible for the conservation of tunas and tuna-like species in the Atlantic Ocean, coordinates scientific research and allocates quota to its members. These quotas are monitored by both the Department and industry separately. The industry consists of the main fisher Associations, the SHA, SHQ and the NSSA, on behalf of their respective memberships.

These groups are part of the membership of the Scotia Fundy Large Pelagics Advisory Committee (SFLPAC) which meets at least once per year to discuss fisheries issues. Since the Maritimes Region houses most of the licence holders in both the harpoon and longline sectors, within SFLPAC, discussions and fishery recommendations for the Atlantic-wide fisheries involving swordfish and other tunas are developed under the chairmanship of the Senior Advisor Large Pelagics. Following that, input is provided, within an advisory forum, to the Atlantic Large Pelagics Advisory Committee (ALPAC) which provides representation to all regions and is chaired by national headquarters.

ALPAC convenes twice yearly with industry representatives for all large pelagic fisheries. A late winter/early spring meeting focuses on management recommendations for the up-coming fishing season, taking into consideration evaluations from post season reviews, the objectives for the fishery and international commitments and obligations as a result of ICCAT decisions. Consultations in the fall provide advice to Canada's delegation to ICCAT.

Working groups of the Advisory Committees may be struck to discuss and address specific issues. In the spring of 2010 an “Ecosystem Working Group” was initiated under ALPAC to provide advice on ecosystem considerations in the large pelagic fisheries. In 2011 a working group provided input into the development of the IFMP led by the Maritimes Region Senior Advisor Large Pelagics for approval by the Maritimes Regional Director General and the national Director General Resource Management with subsequent presentation to the Minister.

1.7. Links to key legislation and regulations

In addition to the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT), CHPs specific to Swordfish and other tuna fleets and the IFMP, the fishery is governed by a suite of legislation, policy and regulations including but not limited to those noted below.

1.7.1. International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT)

The International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas is an inter-governmental fishery organization responsible for the conservation of tunas and tuna-like species in the Atlantic Ocean and its adjacent seas.

1.7.2. Fisheries Act

The Fisheries Act of Canada regulates all activities on inland waters and on the sea that could impact fish or fish habitat.

1.7.3. Atlantic Fisheries Regulations (AFR)

General licensing and registration regulatory requirements are found in the Atlantic Fishery Regulations, 1985 (AFR), Part II. Part V applies to pelagic species and Section 50 of the AFR provides the regulations that govern Atlantic Canada’s Swordfish fishery. Part X provides the regulations that apply to the tuna fishery.

1.7.4. Fishery (General) Regulations (FGR)

The Fishery General Regulations (FGR) provide guidance in managing fishing and related activities across Canada. Specific issues applicable to these fisheries that are covered under the FGRs include: licence conditions, the authority to issue variation orders to set minimum legal sizes and amend season dates, and control incidental catches in the fishery.

1.7.5. Oceans Act

With the introduction of the Gully Marine Protected Area (MPA) in 2004, specific action includes a prohibition on pelagic longline fishing activity inside Zone 1 of the MPA to protect bottlenose whales from entanglement with longline gear.

1.7.6. Species at Risk Act

The Act is a key federal government commitment to prevent wildlife species from becoming extinct and secure the necessary actions for their recovery. It provides for the legal protection of wildlife species and the conservation of their biological diversity.

With the promulgation of the Species at Risk Act (SARA) in June 2003, new management measures were required in support of the recovery of leatherback turtles. This impacted the swordfish and other tunas longline fishery as well as the offshore tuna licence - both of which were required to carry Incidental Harm Permits (IHP) effective June 1, 2004, the date after which prohibition commenced for this species, until finalization of a Leatherback Turtle Recovery Strategy. The Leatherback Recovery Strategy was finalized in 2006 and is due for re-evaluation in 2011. Under Section 83 of SARA, permits were no longer required as the Recovery Strategy addressed the incidental harm to leatherback turtles.

Industry representatives from these fleets have actively participated in the recovery planning process and have already developed and implemented a Code of Conduct for Responsible Sea Turtle Handling and Mitigative Measures. Similar measures and processes may be required pursuant to SARA if other species for which there is known interaction with pelagic longline gear are declared at risk. Other species under SARA review for upcoming SARA or DFO listing decisions (current COSEWIC status) include loggerhead turtles (endangered), porbeagle shark (endangered), white shark (endangered), shortfin mako (threatened), basking shark (special concern), blue shark (special concern), and spiny shark (special concern).

1.7.7. International Plan of Action (IPOA) and Canada’s National Plan of Action (NPOA) for reducing incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries

In 1999, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) adopted a voluntary IPOA for Reducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries with the objective of encouraging countries to adopt national plans to reduce seabird by-catches where this was thought necessary. In April 2000, Canada hosted a workshop to discuss seabird incidental catch in the waters of Arctic countries. The general conclusion was that seabird by-catch is not an issue in the Canadian Atlantic pelagic longline fisheries. In 2007, Canada presented its National Plan of Action (NPOA) for reducing the incidental catch of seabirds within Canadian longline fisheries. Globally, the impact of Canada’s longline fisheries on incidental catch of seabirds tends to be low. Nevertheless monitoring has been and continues to be implemented to assess seabird by-catch in longline fisheries. A copy of the plan can be found on the Fisheries and Oceans Canada website: at http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/npoa-pan/npoa-pan/npoa-seabirds-eng.htm.

1.7.8. IPOA for Shark Conservation

The FAO also adopted in 1999 a voluntary IPOA for shark conservation to address global overfishing. In 2007, Canada released its national plan for the conservation and management of sharks and their long-term sustainable use. The national plan identified that blue shark is the most commonly caught large shark in Canadian waters. It also stated: “It is estimated that catch mortality within the total North Atlantic ranges between 26,000 and 32,000 tonnes for blue shark. These are considered to be low estimates, of which the Canadian portion is very small.” In addition, research suggests that blue shark have a high survival rate when handled properly. Therefore globally, the impact of Canada’s fishing activities on shark populations tend to be low. Nevertheless, measures have been and continue to be implemented to improve the management of these species. Current management measures in the swordfish longline fishery that are pertinent to shark by-catch include:

These measures are addressed under the Canadian Atlantic Shark Integrated Fisheries Management Plan – 2002-2007. This plan will be updated based on the review of the exploratory fisheries under the Emerging Fisheries Policy. A copy of the NPOA can be found on the Fisheries and Oceans Canada website: at http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/npoa-pan/npoa-pan/npoa-sharks-eng.htm.

In 2012 a report (Canada’s Progress Report on the Implementation of Key Actions Pursuant to the National Plan of Action on the Conservation and Management of Sharks (March 2007)) was released indicating that Canada has made progress in a number of areas and is continuing with additional studies to improve knowledge on shark species. This report is available at http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/npoa-pan/npoa-pan/sharks-requins-eng.htm.

1.7.9. Approval Process

  1. ICCAT sets quota and international management requirements
  2. Advisory Committee involvement
    1. SFLPAC - discusses management measures and objectives based on Canadian perspective. Depending on the nature of the issue (regional or inter-regional) recommendations are made either directly to the Maritimes Regional Director General (RDG) or to ALPAC.
    2. ALPAC – Based on ICCAT and SFLPAC discussions, this group makes recommendations to meet both the international obligations and domestic objectives (Canadian Swordfish IFMP).
  3. Recommendation submission
    A memo is prepared by Resource Management (Regions or DFO-Ottawa) to provide advisory committee discussion and recommend measures to sustainably manage the swordfish and other tuna fisheries.
  4. Approvals
    The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans delegates the authority for some approvals to national or regional staff but continues to retain final authority for fisheries management.
    1. Regional Director General approval is sought for regional based issues (e.g. Conservation Harvesting Plans) and for recommendations going to National Headquarters.
    2. National Headquarters – Director General, Resource Management and Associate Deputy Minister, Ecosystems and Fisheries Management approval is sought for minor changes to the management approach or when there are inter-regional issues. All recommendations that are to go to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans for Decision are also required to be approved by the Associate Deputy Minister, Ecosystem and Fisheries Management.
    3. Final decision and approval is undertaken by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans if changes to access and/or allocation are being considered or when significant changes in the management approach are being considered and recommended by the Department.

1.8. Landings

Swordfish are exported fresh, in gutted head-off form. This is also the form in which most of the fish are landed, indicating a low value-added component in onshore processing of this species. The export values are very close to the landed values, indicating the high export component of the landings.

2. STOCK ASSESSMENT, SCIENCE AND TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE

2.1. Stock Status (Scientific Advice)

2.1.1. Biology, Environment, Habitat

2.1.1.1. Swordfish

Swordfish are distributed widely in the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea, and range from Canada to Argentina on the western side, and from Norway to South Africa on the eastern side (Figure 1). Swordfish in the Atlantic Ocean are managed by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) as three separate stocks: the North and South Atlantic, separated at 5˚N latitude, and the Mediterranean Sea. This stock separation is supported by recent genetic analysis; however, the precise boundaries between stocks are uncertain. Hence, it is important to have effective management measures throughout the Atlantic and Mediterranean.

Adult swordfish have few natural predators with the possible exception of sharks. They feed on a wide variety of prey including groundfish, pelagics, deep-water fish and invertebrates. They are believed to feed throughout the water column, and undertake extensive vertical migrations. They are typically caught on pelagic longlines at night when they feed in surface waters or by harpoon during the day when they bask at the surface. The broad diet and habitat preference of swordfish make them very adaptable to changes in habitat.

Swordfish spawn in warm tropical and subtropical waters throughout the year, although seasonality has been reported. They are found in the colder northern waters during summer months and are in Canadian waters from May to November, primarily on the edge of the Scotian Shelf and the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. Results from pop-up satellite archival tagging (PSAT) provide strong evidence of precise homing to the summer foraging grounds. Young swordfish grow very rapidly, reaching about 140 cm LJFL (lower jaw-fork length) by age 3, but grow slowly thereafter. Females grow faster than males and reach a larger maximum size. Swordfish are difficult to age, but 50% of females are considered mature by age 5.

2.1.1.2. Other Tunas

The latitudinal range of bigeye tuna is very wide, and these fish are considered to be at the northern limit of their range in Canadian waters. Considered a tropical and subtropical species, juvenile fish tend to disperse into temperate waters as they grow larger, and only larger fish are caught in Canadian waters. This resource is currently managed as a single Atlantic-wide stock.

Yellowfin tuna are also considered a tropical/subtropical species. Yellowfin are managed as a single Atlantic-wide stock.

In contrast with yellowfin and bigeye tunas, albacore tuna are found to a greater extent in temperate waters. The stock structure is similar to swordfish; northern and southern stocks are separated at 5˚N, and there is a separate Mediterranean stock.

2.1.2. Species Interactions

Swordfish are caught both in directed swordfish fisheries, and as a by-catch of the other tuna (bigeye, yellowfin, albacore) fisheries. They are also a by-catch of the shark longline fleet. Bluefin tuna, the other tunas and a variety of sharks are all by-catch in the swordfish longline fishery.

As noted above, there are few natural predators of large swordfish, so predation has little influence on swordfish abundance.

2.1.3. Assessment

2.1.3.1. Swordfish

Swordfish fished in Atlantic Canada are part of the north Atlantic stock (Figure 1). Because of their migratory nature, swordfish are under the jurisdiction of ICCAT. Canada is one of 48 Contracting Parties at ICCAT. ICCAT compiles fishery statistics from its members, coordinates research and stock assessments, and develops scientific-based management advice. The management objective of ICCAT is to maintain quotas at the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY).

Figure of Geographical distribution of swordfish catch (t)by gear in the Atlantic and adjacent seas, 2000-2008
Figure 1. Geographical distribution of swordfish catch (t)
by gear in the Atlantic and adjacent seas, 2000-2008.

Due to the highly migratory natu¬re of swordfish and their high individual value, scientists rely primarily on data derived from the commercial fishery. Canada, as a member of ICCAT, is obligated to provide catch, estimates of swordfish discarded from the longline fleet, catch-at-size and catch per unit effort (CPUE) information annually to ICCAT. This information is used by ICCAT scientists to conduct stock assessments during the ICCATSwordfish Species Group meetings. Canada participates in the ICCAT stock assessment process.

The draft advice of the ICCAT Swordfish Species Group is then peer reviewed by the ICCAT Standing Committee on Research and Statistics (SCRS) which usually meets in October of each year. Once final, this advice in the form of an Executive Summary is presented to the Commission. In Canada, the scientific advice is presented to ALPAC between the meetings of the SCRS and the Commission (usually late October or early November).

The ICCAT SCRS completes a full scientific evaluation of the swordfish and other tunas on a regularly scheduled basis, generally conducted every 3-4 years. The last full assessment of Atlantic swordfish stock was undertaken in 2009 which indicated that the stocks were fully rebuilt. While the stock continues to be monitored annually, the next full assessment of Atlantic swordfish is scheduled to be undertaken in 2012 in time for the Commission’s annual meeting.

The text that follows in this section has been extracted, with slight modification, from the most recent (2010) Executive Summary for North Atlantic Swordfish. The reports of the ICCAT SCRS for the various species can be found at: www.iccat.int. and the ICCAT Report for biennial period, 1998-99 Part II (1999) – Vol. 1, pp. 69-7199-2 can be found at: http://www.iccat.int/Documents/Recs/compendiopdf-e/1999-02-e.pdf

For the past decade, the North Atlantic reported catch (landings + estimated dead discards) has averaged about 11,332t per year. The catch in 2009 (12,655t) represents a 37% decrease since the 1987 peak in North Atlantic landings (20,236t).

The 2009 assessment indicated that the relative biomass (Figure 2A) trend shows a consistent increase since 2000, and indicates that the stock is at or above BMSY (Figure 2A). Fishing mortality (F) has been below FMSY since 2005. The results suggest that there is greater than 50% probability that the stock is at or above BMSY, and thus the Commission’s rebuilding objective [99-2] has been achieved (Figure 2B). However, it is important to note that since 2003 the catches have been below the TAC’s, greatly increasing the chances for a fast recovery.

An updated estimate of maximum sustainable yield (MSY) from production model analyses is 13,730t (with estimates ranging from 13,020t to 14,182t). Future TACs above MSY are projected to result in 50% or lower probabilities of stock biomass remaining above BMSY over the next decade. A TAC of 13,000 t would provide approximately a 75% probability of maintaining the stock at a level consistent with the Convention Objective over the next decade.

Figure 2. Biomass and Future Projection Scenarios.
A.Figure of biomass and future projection scenarios Schematic of the precautionary approach
B. Biomass and Future Projection Scenarios

A. Estimated biomass relative to biomass at MSY (B/BMSY) for the period 1950-2009. Upper and lower lines represent approximate 80% confidence ranges.

B. Future projections of B/BMSY under the constant catch scenarios listed. For the catch projection period (2005-2018), the upper line is the projected relative biomass at a constant catch of 10,000t and the lower line is the projected relative biomass at a constant catch of 15,000t (Source: 2010 SCRS Executive Summary, Atlantic Swordfish).

2.1.3.2. Other Tunas

The 2009 assessment for Albacore tuna in the North Atlantic region indicated that the stock has remained below BMSY since the late 1960s and that catches below 28,000t will be required for stock rebuilding. Catches in 2008 and 2009 were below that level and a TAC of 28,000t was recommended for 2010 and 2011. ICCAT recommended that the next assessment for northern albacore be scheduled for 2013.

For bigeye tuna, the 2010 stock assessment indicated that the 2009 biomass was slightly above or below (72-134%) the biomass at MSY (BMSY). Catches in 2009 were 86,011t. Projections indicate that catches reaching 85,000 t or less will promote stock growth. ICCAT recommended that the next assessment for bigeye tuna be scheduled for 2014.

The yellowfin tuna resource was last assessed in 2011, using catch and effort data through 2010. The 2006 biomass level was considered to be 85% of BMSY. Catches at that time were considered to be well below MSY levels, and maintenance of those catch levels is expected to lead to a biomass somewhat above BMSY by 2016.

2.1.4. Precautionary Approach to Management

Canada continues to move forward with the implementation of the Precautionary Approach (PA) to management decisions for all fisheries resources including the North Atlantic swordfish and other tunas fishery. The precautionary approach is a decision making process with rules which identify triggers and responses during periods of changing stock health. Health of the stock is based on abundance and responses would normally reduce effort on the stock during periods of decreasing abundance or allow increased effort during periods of increased abundance.

In general, the precautionary approach in fisheries management is about being cautious when scientific knowledge is uncertain, and not using the absence of adequate scientific information as a reason to postpone action or failure to take action to avoid serious harm to fish stocks or their ecosystem. This approach is widely accepted as an essential part of sustainable fisheries management.

Applying the precautionary approach to fisheries management decisions entails establishing a harvest strategy that:

Pre-agreed, risk-based actions will be designed to guide management decisions on harvest rates under various stock status conditions. In the healthy zone, the fish stock status is good, and fisheries management decisions and harvest strategies are designed to maintain fish stocks within this zone. In the cautious zone, decisions and strategies promote stock rebuilding to the healthy zone. In the critical zone, stock growth is promoted and removals are kept to the lowest possible level.

Schematic of the Precautionary Approach
schematic of the precautionary approach

Reference points are based on the productivity objectives of the fishery and can include biological, social and economic factors. Development of quantitative reference points requires data on the stock status and is often expressed as biomass, spawning biomass or abundance.

Stock levels above the Upper Stock Reference Point are deemed to be in the “Healthy Zone”. If the stock level falls below the Upper Stock Reference Point, the stock has entered the “Cautious zone” and harvest rate begins to be reduced. If the stock level falls below the Limit Reference Point, the stock has entered the “Critical Zone” and management must take serious measures to ensure stock rebuilding.

The Removal Reference Point represents the maximum removal rate, often expressed as Fishing mortality (F) or exploitation rates. Exploitation rate is the ratio of all human removals to total exploitable stock size.

The Target Reference Point is a stock level that may be greater than or equal to the Upper Reference Point for the fishery and is a level for the fishery that is considered to be desirable and at which management action should aim. This may take into greater account social and economic aspects of the fishery.

In general ICCAT objectives for management of stocks are to maintain or rebuild stock status to a level of BMSY. Although currently there are no clear reference points or responses they are moving towards adopting management decisions based on the precautionary approach.

Canada continues to pursue the use of the precautionary approach at ICCAT and was instrumental in moving this forward for north Atlantic swordfish. In the most recent management recommendation adopted by ICCAT, Canada insisted that two key clauses be included. “In advance of the next assessment of North Atlantic swordfish, the SCRS (Standing Committee on Research and Statistics) shall develop a Limit Reference Point (LRP) for this stock.” “Future decisions on the management of this stock shall include a measure that would trigger a rebuilding plan, should the biomass decrease to a level approaching the defined LRP as established by the SCRS."

Canada hosted an ICCAT precautionary approach workshop in April 2010 and continues to work within the ICCAT precautionary approach working group towards the adoption of this approach to the management of all ICCAT managed species.

2.1.5. Research

A primary focus of the research program on swordfish has been to improve the quality of the input information (catch, catch-at-size and effort) for the assessment, and to more fully understand the biology and behaviour of swordfish through cooperative (DFO Science and industry) tagging and fishing gear experiments. Research on swordfish depends very much upon cooperation from the fishing industry to gain access to fish for study, to collect detailed information and to seek input to improve the indices of relative abundance derived from commercial catch rate data. Mandatory submission of detailed log records, Dockside Monitoring, Observer coverage, and taking biologists aboard vessels are all part of the data collection scheme.

An extensive PSAT research program began in 2005 with effort concentrated in the Georges Bank area. More recently, tagging effort has shifted to the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. In collaboration with US scientists, Canada is examining pooled PSAT data covering deployments along the eastern coast of North America with the objective of obtaining a more comprehensive understanding of swordfish movement, migrations and behaviour.

DFO Resource Management Branch, in conjunction with the Science sector, has initiated a comprehensive work plan to address the incidental catch in Canadian large pelagics fisheries, with a focus on six key species: bluefin tuna, porbeagle shark, shortfin mako shark, blue shark, leatherback and loggerhead turtles, as well as discarding of swordfish. The work plan was vetted through the ecosystem working group of ALPAC and consists of a number of projects with three main objectives: examining appropriate levels of observer coverage, managing discards for all targeted species, and controlling incidental mortality for non-targeted species.

3. SOCIAL, CULTURAL and ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE of the FISHERY

3.1. Swordfish

3.1.1. Licences

In 2009, there were approximately 134 Swordfish licences issued by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) that reported swordfish landings, with the overwhelming majority (99%) held in Nova Scotia in DFO’s Maritimes Region, as shown in Table 2. A breakdown of these licences by gear-type is presented in Table 3. Data indicate an increasing percentage of licences using harpoon gear to catch swordfish compared to longline gear, over 2005-2009.

Table 2. Active* Swordfish Licences, by Region, 2005-2009
Landing Region / Home Province 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Maritimes NB 0 0 2 1% 2 1% 0 0 1 1%
NS 135 99% 135 99% 138 99% 132 99% 132 99%
Newfoundland / Labrador NB 0 0  0 0 0 0 1 1% 1 1%
NS 2 1%  0 0 0 0  0 0 0 0
TOTAL** 137 100% 137 100% 140 100% 133 100% 134 100%
* An “Active” licence refers to a licence that reports swordfish landings in a given year.
** Gulf and Quebec regions do not appear in this table because they did not report swordfish landings.
Table 3. Active* Swordfish Licences, by Gear Type, by Region, 2005-2009
Landing Region / Home Province Gear Type 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Maritimes NB Longline 0 0 2 1% 2 1% 0 0 1 1%
Harpoon 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NS Longline 50 36% 52 38% 45 32% 42 32% 37 28%
Harpoon 85 62% 83 61% 92 66% 90 68% 95 71%
Newfoundland / Labrador NB Longline 0 0 0 0 1 1% 1 1% 1 1%
NS Longline 2 1% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL**   137 100% 137 100% 140 100% 133 100% 134 100%

3.1.2. Quantities and Values

In 2009, the volume of swordfish landings in Atlantic Region was 1,300 metric tonnes (t), slightly down from 1,383t in 2008. These round weight landings represented about 1% of total pelagics and other finfish landings in Atlantic Region that year. The value of swordfish landings in 2009 was $7.7 million, down 12% from 2008 ($8.8 million). In 2009, swordfish accounted for 11% of the landed value of total pelagics and other finfish category, ranking fourth after herring (45%), mackerel (19%) and total tuna (12%). From 2004 to 2008, over 98% of swordfish (in terms of value) was landed in Nova Scotia.

Table 4. Swordfish Landings (kg), by Province, Atlantic Region, 2006-2009
DFO Region Nova Scotia New Brunswick PEI Quebec NL Grand Total
Maritimes Gulf Total Maritimes Gulf Total
2006 1,404,526 - 1,404,526 - - - - - - 1,404,526
2007 1,327,471 - 1,327,471 - - - - - 20,718 1,348,189
2008 1,365,288 - 1,365,288 - - - - - 17,664 1,382,952
2009 1,291,838 - 1,291,838 - - - - - 7,873 1,299,711
Table 5. Swordfish Value of Landings ($), by Province, Atlantic Region, 2006-2009
DFO Region Nova Scotia New Brunswick PEI Quebec NL Grand Total
Maritimes Gulf Total Maritimes Gulf Total
2006 11,896,528 - 11,896,528 - - - - - - 11,896,528
2007 11,237,805 - 11,237,805 - - - - - 140,528 11,378,333
2008 8,683,185 - 8,683,185 - - - - - 119,816 8,803,001
2009 7,662,968 - 7,662.968 - - - - - 53,327 7,716,295

Swordfish are landed using three gear types in the Atlantic Region. In 2008-2009, about 80% of swordfish were landed by longline, followed by harpoon, and a very small amount by rod and reel, as seen in Table 6.

Table 6. Swordfish Landed Quantity and Value by Gear Type 2008-2009
2008
Gear Used Landed Quantity (kg) % of Total Landed Value ($) % of Total
Longline 1,126,127 81% 7,167,902 81%
Rod and Reel (Trolling) 1,433 0% 9,113 0%
Harpoon 255,392 18% 1,624,207 18%
Total 1,382,952 8,803,001  
2009
Gear Used Landed Quantity (kg) % of Total Landed Value ($) % of Total
Longline 1,051,755 81% 6,116,676 79%
Harpoon 247,649 19% 1,598,019 21%
Total 1,299,404 7,714,695  

Recent average price has decreased from $8.47/kg in 2006 to $5.94/kg in 2009. Table 7 shows the average price by gear type for 2008-2009.

Table 7 . Swordfish Average Price*, by Gear Type, Atlantic Region, 2008-2009
2008
Gear Used Average Price ($/kg)
Longline 6.37
Rod and Reel (Trolling) 6.36
Harpoon 6.36
Total 6.36
2009
Gear Used Average Price ($/kg)
Longline 5.82
Harpoon 6.45
Gillnet (set of fixed) 5.21
Total 5.94
*Average Price is equal to landed value divided by landed quantity

Figure 3. Swordfish Exports and Landed Values

Figure of swordfish exports and landed values

3.1.3. Exports

The United States (U.S.) which accounted for 99.95% of swordfish exports in 2009, is the major export market for swordfish from the Atlantic Region. After the U.S., France is a distant second export destination. The landed value of swordfish has been very close to its export value during 2004-2007, but the two have diverged during 2008 and 2009 (Figure 3). Over 2004-2009, swordfish landed value (based on round weight) has ranged from $10.1 million to $7.7 million, while swordfish export value (based on dressed weight) has ranged from $10.7 million to $12.8 million.

Domestic imports of Swordfish in Canada decreased over 2008-2009 from 423,408 kg to 370,429 kg (13%) and declined, in value terms, from $2.98M to $2.75M (8%).

3.1.4. MSC Certification

The North West Atlantic Region harpoon swordfish has been certified as sustainable as of 18 June 2010Footnote 1, whereas the North Atlantic longline swordfish has certified as sustainable as of April 19, 2012.

3.1.5. Dependency Analysis – Swordfish Harvesters

Table 8 shows that in 2009, there were 123 swordfish harvesters in the Atlantic Region, with swordfish representing 22% of the total value of all species they landed. Of this total number of harvesters, there were 88 (71%) who also caught lobster with landed values almost twice the value of swordfish landings that year.

Table 8. Landed Values of Species Caught by Swordfish Harvesters, 2009
Species Landed Value ($) % of Total
Landed Value
Number of Harvesters*
Lobster 14,893,049 42% 88
Swordfish 7,716,295 22% 123
Atlantic Halibut 4,196,497 12% 37
Haddock 1,033,687 3% 36
Bluefin Tuna 1,718,851 5% 41
Bigeye Tuna 1,264,826 4% 38
Yellowfin Tuna 377,101 1% 23
Albacore Tuna 52,688 0% 37
Others 4,359,681 12% 80
Total 35,612,676 100% 123
* This table reflects the catches associated with Fisher Identification Numbers (FINs). Since multiple licences can be held under one FIN, the total number of licences reported in Tables 1(A) and 1(B) may not equal the total number of harvesters.

Very few fish harvesters rely on swordfish as their main source of fishing income. According to Table 9, only 18 harvesters (15%) have greater than 50% dependency on this species. In comparison, 61 (50%) rely on income from harvesting swordfish for less than 10% of their fishing revenue.

Table 9. Income Dependency of Swordfish Harvesters on Swordfish, 2009
Dependency Ratio (%) Number of Harvesters Average
Swordfish Landed
Value ($)*
Average
Total Landed
Value ($)*
Ratio
0-10 61 8,247 272,274 4%
10-25 25 37,662 234,951 15%
25-50 19 152,448 436,413 37%
50-75 9 268,511 411,632 65%
75-90 6 107,850 134,447 81%
90-100 3 103,832 108,981 97%
Total 123 37,214 250,532 15%
* The averages are over the number of harvesters.

3.1.6. Income Dependency by Home Port

Table 10 and Appendix 6 presents the income dependency profile of swordfish harvesters based on home port, in 2009. “Home Port” means that ort identified by the fisher upon registering his vessel with DFO. While “home port” does not reflect residency, it normally refers to the port from which the fisher usually operates. It may be assumed that home port is often close to the residency of the fisher.

The landed values relate to only those home ports indicated by swordfish harvesters in 2009. To meet data confidentiality requirements, an “X” is placed in the table where necessary. Dependency analysis based on home ports shows the earnings profile of harvesters by home port, no matter where they landed a particular species.

In addition, assuming that the home port is a realistic proxy for the area of residence of fish harvesters, Table 10 shows the areas that are more dependent on revenues from swordfish. Most of the revenues from swordfish go to fish harvesters in Statistical Districts 22 (from the Western Shore of the Northwest Arm to Black Point, Shad Bay) and 32 (from Barrington River to the Yarmouth County line), which account for 65% of total swordfish landed value. Swordfish harvesters whose home port is Mitchell Bay, East Port Hebert, and Abbott’s Harbour (100%), Port Maitland (73%), and Clam Point (51%), show the greatest dependency on swordfish.

Table 10. Dependency of Swordfish Harvesters on Swordfish, by Home Port, 2009
    Swordfish Harvesters All Harvesters
Statistical District Home Port Swordfish Landed Value ($) Total Landed Value
in Port ($)
Income Dependency
on Swordfish
Total Landed Value in
Port ($)
Dependency
on Swordfish
7 Glace Bay X X 9% X 0%
18 Eastern Passage X X 0% X 0%
19 Mitchell Bay X X 100% X 2%
  Sheet Harbour X X 21% X 1%
20 East Jeddore X X 2% X 1%
  Little Harbour 938 62,548 1% 403,475 0%
22 Sambro 1,788,812 4,561,015 39% 8,000,997 22%
23 West Dover X X 3% X 0%
28 East Port Hebert X X 100% X 1%
30 Little Harbour X X 9% X 3%
  Lockeport 39,968 417,058 10% 3,713,708 1%
  Osborne Harbour X X 24% X 7%
31 Jordan Bay X X 12% X 2%
  Port La Tour X X 38% X 9%
  Seal Point X X 12% X 12%
  Shelburne X X 41% X 2%
  Up. Port La Tour X X 4% X 0%
32 Bear Point 207,925 787,911 26% 2,716,110 8%
  Clam Point X X 51% X 2%
  Clarke's Harbour 851,735 2,911,219 29% 17,376,678 5%
  Forbes Point X X 2% X 0%
  Newellton X X 45% X 6%
  Shag Harbour X X 5% X 0%
  Stoney Island X X 13% X 1%
  Swim Point X X 2% X 0%
  West Head 565,532 2,331,861 24% 10,612,366 5%
  Woods Harbour 1,200,784 5,877,300 20% 17,626,844 7%
33 Abbott's Harbour X X 100% X 0%
  Argyle X X 5% X 0%
  Dennis Point 106,679 676,486 16% 8,573,098 1%
  East Pubnico 52,015 707,294 7% 3,131,299 2%
  Lower East Pubnico 385,778 1,719,666 22% 16,356,252 2%
  Pubnico 219,251 594,545 37% 13,793,924 2%
  Tusket X X 37% X 15%
  Wedgeport 98,956 683,195 14% 10,033,372 1%
  West Pubnico X X 42% X 6%
34 Melbourne X X 12% X 12%
  Pinkney's Point 41,222 421,240 10% 6,719,986 1%
  Port Maitland X X 73% X 5%
  Yarmouth 209,640 2,809,149 7% 27,239,794 1%
  Yarmouth Bar 24,536 468,599 5% 4,309,371 1%
36 Meteghan X X 49% X 2%
43 Truro X X 0% X 0%
44 Parrsboro X X 28% X 24%
50NB North Head X X 42% X 7%
32N Burin X X 0% X 0%
Grand Total 7,716,295 7,716,295 34,572,796 229,228,790 3%
Table 11. Dependency of Swordfish Harvesters on Swordfish and Port Dependency on Swordfish, by Port of Landing, 2009
    Swordfish Harvesters All Harvesters
Statistical District Port of Landing Swordfish Landed Value* ($) Total Landed Value ($) Income Dependency
on Swordfish
Total Landed Value in
Port ($)
Port's Dependency ($)
7 Louisbourg X X 6% X 0%
18 Eastern Passage X X 0% X 0%
20 East Jeddore 12,501 889,373 1% 5,614,552 0%
  Little Harbour 1,006 35,234 3% 713,741 0%
22 Sambro 2,476,129 5,835,730 42% 12,651,877 20%
  Sambro Head X X 2% X 0%
23 West Dover X X 3% X 0%
28 East Port Hebert X X 100% X 1%
  Port Mouton X X 1% X 0%
30 Little Harbour X X 24% X 2%
  Lockeport 55,940 505,690 11% 2,694,362 2%
  Osborne Harbour X X 61% X 32%
  Port Hebert X X 10% X 2%
31 Gunning Cove X X 12% X 0%
  Port La Tour 46,128 803,162 6% 4,697,410 1%
  Sandy Point X X 9% X 0%
32 Bear Point 36,354 307,367 12% 1,741,467 2%
  Clarke's Harbour 44,947 1,446,530 3% 14,208,060 0%
  Newellton 61,991 558,608 11% 5,298,531 1%
  Shag Harbour 79,440 417,972 19% 5,150,127 2%
  South Side X X 6% X 1%
  West Head 572,529 2,409,405 24% 14,233,372 4%
  Woods Harbour 3,299,837 8,437,434 39% 20,894,044 16%
33 East Pubnico 126,444 1,096,582 12% 3,840,226 3%
  Lower Argyle X X 2% X 0%
  Lower East Pubnico 203,828 616,926 33% 14,058,993 1%
  Lower West Pubnico 217,375 1,196,484 18% 44,459,310 0%
  Wedgeport 90,757 333,313 27% 9,872,434 1%
34 Pinkney's Point 58,543 855,746 7% 7,521,352 1%
  Port Maitland X X 42% X 0%
  Sandford X X 76% X 2%
  Yarmouth Bar 42,779 1,247,676 3% 8,847,974 0%
24N St. John's X X 80% X 0%
32N Burin X X 0% X 0%
Grand Total 7,716,295 30,449,001 25% 238,392,979 3%
*Landed values relate to only those ports where swordfish harvesters landed in 2009. X’s are placed to ensure data confidentiality.

3.1.7. Income Dependency by Port of Landing

Table 11 presents income dependency information from the perspective of the port of landing. According to this data, the ranking of ports of landing based on their dependency on swordfish revenues is as follows: Osborne Harbour (32%), Sambro (20%), and Woods Harbour (16%). In particular, the ports of Sambro and Woods Harbour together account for 75% of swordfish landed value, and both show a relatively high dependency on swordfish, 20% and 16% respectively. Overall, Statistical Districts 22 and 32 together capture 85% of the landed value.

3.2. Tuna

3.2.1. Licences – Tuna Species (Albacore, Bigeye, Yellowfin)

Information is presented regarding the following three sub-species of tuna: Albacore, Bigeye, and Yellowfin. The majority of tuna licences for these tunas are concentrated in the Nova Scotia portion of the Maritimes Region (Table 12). In 2009, there were a total of 63 tuna licences, with 94% of these licences held in the Nova Scotia portion of the Maritimes Region.

Table 12. Tuna Licences by Province and DFO Region, 2004-2009
Region/ Province 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Gulf NB 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
  NS 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
PEI 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Maritimes NB 2 5% 2 5% 2 4% 2 4% 2 3%
NS 33 83% 35 85% 41 89% 51 93% 59 94%
NL NL 5 13% 4 10% 3 7% 2 4% 2 3%
QC QC 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0
Total 40 100% 41 100% 46 100% 55 100% 63 100%

Quantities and Values – Tuna Species (Albacore, Bigeye, Yellowfin)

Over the period, 2008-2009, the quantity of total tuna landings decreased by 48% and the tuna sub-species registered a decline as follows: Yellowfin 69%, Albacore 68%, and Bigeye 17%.

Table 13. Tuna Landed Quantity and Value by Gear Type, 2008
Gear Used Weight (kg) % of Total Weight Value ($) % of Total Value
Longline 308,210 91% 2,786,553 89%
Harpoon 8,149 2% 93,547 3%
Rod and Reel (Trolling) 18,853 6% 217,436 7%
Troller Lines 2,184 1%      25,092 1%
Total    337,396 100% 3,122,628 100%
Table 14. Tuna Landed Quantity and Value by Gear Type, 2009
Gear Used Weight (kg) % of Total Weight Value ($) % of Total Value
Longline 168,244 96% 1,643,659 96%
Harpoon 3,676 2% 35,160 2%
Rod and Reel (Trolling) 3,011 2% 27,436 2%
Troller Lines 301 0%      2,131 0%
Total    175,232 100% 1,708,386 100%

3.3. Albacore Tuna

3.3.1. Quantities and Values

The volume of Albacore tuna landings dropped from 33,544 kg to 10,738 kg between 2008 and 2009. At the same time, the value of landings declined by 85%, from $386,087 to $56,807, during the same period. Longline was the most common gear type for harvesting Albacore tuna, followed by rod and reel, and harpoon.

Table 15. Albacore Tuna Landed Quantities and Value, by Gear Type, Atlantic Region, 2009
Gear Used Quantity of Landings (kg) % of Total Quantity Value of Landings ($) % of Total Value
Harpoon 1,092 10% 5,777 10%
Longline 8,279 77% 43,796 77%
Rod and Reel (Trolling) 1,153 11% 6,102 11%
Troller Lines 214 2% 1,132 2%
Total 10,738 100% 56,807 100%

3.3.2. Exports

Albacore tuna exports peaked in 2007 ($191,181) and fell by 96% to under $8,000 by 2009 (Figure 4). U.S. and Japan have been the main export destinations for Albacore tuna over this period. The Japanese market registered a substantial increase between 2006 ($8,553) and 2008 ($45,540) but there were no reported Albacore tuna exports to Japan in 2009. The U.S. was Canada’s only export destination for the year 2009.

Domestic imports of Albacore tuna in Canada increased over 2008-2009 from 1.67M kg to 2.56M kg (53%) and increased, in value terms, from $5.6M to $8.8M (59%).

Figure 4. Quantity and Value of Albacore Tuna Exports

Figure of quantity and value of Albacore Tuna exports

3.4. Bigeye Tuna

3.4.1. Quantities and Values

Bigeye tuna quantity of landings decreased from 133,806 kg in 2008 to 110,997 kg in 2009. The value of landings dropped by 17%, from $1.5 million to $1.27 million during 2008 and 2009.

Table 16 shows that longline was the most common (96%) gear type for harvesting Bigeye tuna. Harpoon and rod and reel accounted for the remaining 4% of the value of landings.

Table 16. Bigeye Tuna Value of Landings by Gear Type, Atlantic Region, 2009
Gear Used Quantity of Landings (kg) % of Total Quantity Value of Landings ($) % of Total Value
Harpoon 2,519 2% 28,924 2%
Longline 106,533 96% 1,222,996 96%
Rod and Reel (Trolling) 1,858 2% 21,334 2%
Troller Lines 87 0% 999 0%
Total 110,997 100% 1,274,253 100%

3.4.2. Exports

Bigeye tuna exports fell by 36%, from $1.7 million in 2004 to just over $1.0 million in 2009 (Figure 5). Over 2008-2009, the U.S. was the only export destination for Bigeye tuna. Japan has historically been another major export market, but dropped off in 2008.

Domestic imports of Bigeye tuna in Canada increased over 2008-2009 from 0.54M kg. to 0.87M kg. (61%) and increased, in value terms, from $4.2M to $5.5M (32%).

Figure 5. Quantity and Value of Bigeye Tuna Exports

Figure of quantity and value of Bigeye Tuna exports

3.5. Yellowfin Tuna

3.5.1. Quantities and Values

Yellowfin tuna landings dropped from 169,932 kg in 2008 to 53,430 kg in 2009. The value of landings also declined from $1,199,701 to $377,101 (69%). Table 17 shows that virtually all harvesting of Yellowfin tuna is accomplished using longline gear.

Table 17. Yellowfin Tuna Value of Landings by Gear Type, Atlantic Region, 2009
Gear Used Quantity of Landings (kg) % of Total Quantity Value of Landings ($) % of Total Value
Harpoon 65 0% 459 0%
Longline 53,365 100% 376,642 100%
Rod and Reel (Trolling) 0 0% - 0%
Troller Lines 0 0% - 0%
Total 53,430 100% 377,101 100%

3.5.2. Exports

The value of Yellowfin tuna exports from Atlantic Region peaked in 2006 at $2.97 million and then fell steadily; down by 74% to $0.7 million in 2009 (Figure 6). The U.S. has been the main export market for Yellowfin tuna from the Atlantic Region (58% in 2009). Ecuador has notably become the second largest export market since 2008, accounting for 37% of Yellowfin tuna exports from the Atlantic Region.

Domestic imports of Yellowfin tuna in Canada decreased over 2008-2009 from 1.07M kg to 0.72M kg (32%) and declined, in value terms, from $9.8M to $6.8M (30%).

Figure 6. Quantity and Value of Yellowfin Tuna Exports

Figure of quantity and value of Yellowfin Tuna exports

3.6. Skipjack Tuna

3.6.1. Quantities and Value

There are limited Skipjack tuna landings in the Atlantic Region from 2006 to 2009. Only 10t were reported to ICCAT from the 2009 fishery.

3.6.2. Exports

During the period 2006-2009, Skipjack tuna exports from Atlantic Region were evidently based on imported raw materials that are, in turn, exported after processing. Domestic imports of Skipjack tuna in Canada slightly decreased over 2008-2009 from 35.5M kg to 34.8M kg (2%) and declined, in value terms, from $145.8M to $142.5M (2%).

Thailand accounted for 95% of the imports in 2009, compared to approximately 2% from the Philippines. The value of Skipjack tuna exports, over the period 2004-2009, reached a high of $1.02 million in 2005 but fell sharply the following year (2006) (Figure 7). Export values leveled off between 2007 and 2009, ranging from $0.48 million to $0.50 million. There have been no Skipjack tuna exports to the U.S since 2008.

In 2009, the Caribbean Islands of Saint Vincent Grenadines, Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Jamaica, and Netherlands Antilles combined, have accounted for 69% of Skipjack tuna exports from the Atlantic Region (2009).

Figure 7. Quantity and Value of Skipjack Tuna Exports

Figure of quantity and value of Skipjack Tuna exports

3.7. Dependency Analysis – Tuna Harvesters

Table 18 reveals the breakdown of the 2009 landed values for various species whose licences are also held by tuna harvesters. The vast majority of tuna harvesters (41) also hold a swordfish licence, and approximately half (21) also hold a lobster licence. Overall, the main licences also held by tuna harvesters are swordfish and lobster.

Table 18. Value of Species Caught by Tuna Harvesters, 2009
Species Landed Value ($) % of Total Landed Value No. of Harvesters*
Swordfish 5,848,864 35% 41
Lobster 4,077,222 25% 21
Atlantic Halibut 2,174,566 13% 11
Bluefin Tuna 1,572,591 10% 35
Bigeye Tuna 1,274,253 8% 39
Yellowfin Tuna 377,101 2% 23
Albacore Tuna 56,807 0% 42
Others 1,139,074 7% 35
Total 16,520,479 100% 46

Table 18 reflects the catches associated with Fishers’ Identification Numbers (FINs). Since multiple licences can be held under one FIN, the total number of licences reported in Table 12 may not equal the total number of harvesters.

Table 19 shows that most of the individual tuna harvesters (44) rely on the tuna fishery for less than 10% of their annual income.

Table 19. Income Dependency of Tuna Harvesters, 2009
Average Landed Values ($)
Dependency ratio (%) No. of Harvesters* Tuna Total (all species)
0-10 25 7,557 293,624
10-25 19 66,793 451,102
25-50 1 x x
50-75 1 x x
75-90 0 - -
90-100 0 - -
Total 46 37,139 359,141
* X’s are placed to ensure data confidentiality, where necessary.

3.7.1. Income Dependency by Home Port

The information in Table 20 and Appendix 7 shows, for tuna harvesters by home port, how dependent these tuna harvesters’ income is on tuna. It also indicates how dependent those home ports’ revenues are on tuna.

Table 20. Income Dependency of Tuna Harvesters on Tuna, by Home Port, 2009
Tuna Harvesters All Harvesters
Statistical District Home Port Tuna Landed Value ($) Total Landed Value ($) Income Dependency on Tuna Total Landed Value ($) Port’s Dependency
19 Sheet Harbour X X 1% X 0%
22 Sambro 212,195 2,260,221 9% 8,000,997 3%
31 Shelburne X X 51%
17%
X 3%
2%
  Port La Tour X X X
32 Woods Harbour 304,355 3,784,268 8% 17,626,844 2%
  West Head 198,827 1,727,873 12% 10,612,366 2%
  Bear Point X X 40% X 5%
  Newellton X X 11% X 1%
  Clark's Harbour X X 4% X 0%
  Stoney Island X X 3% X 0%
  Clam Point X X 2% X 0%
33 Lower East Pubnico X X 17% X 1%
  West Pubnico X X 12% X 2%
  Wedgeport 33,980 405,617 8% 10,033,372 0%
  Pubnico X X 4% X 0%
  Dennis Point X X 5% X 0%
  Tusket X X 5% X 2%
  East Pubnico X X 1% X 0%
34 Yarmouth X X 5% X 0%
  Port Maitland X X 8% X 1%
36 Meteghan X X 35% X 1%
42 Hantsport X X 4% X 4%
44 Parrsboro X X 4% X 3%
50 North Head, NB X X 10% X 2%
Total 1,708,386 16,206,998 11% 180,972,255 9%
* Landed values relate to only those ports where tuna harvesters resided in 2009. X’s are placed to ensure data confidentiality, where necessary.

For instance, the harvesters of Statistical District 31 with home ports Shelburne have a 51% dependency on tuna for their income, but the port of Shelburne as a whole does not significantly (3%) depend on tuna for its revenues. Statistical Districts 22 and 32 together account for 56% of the tuna landed value. Sambro, Woods Harbour and West Head are the principal home ports for tuna fish harvesters within these districts.

Table 21 shows, for each port of landing, how income-dependent on tuna are those harvesters who landed in these ports, and how significant is tuna as a source of revenue in each of these ports.

For instance, the harvesters who landed tuna in Lower Wedgeport (Statistical District 33) depended on tuna for 79% of their income. Overall, this port of landing did not depend significantly on tuna landings for its revenues. Sambro and Woods Harbour are the main landing ports for tuna, capturing 82% of total landed value. Overall, the port dependency on tuna is low. Again, Sambro and Woods Harbour are the most dependent on tuna, although this dependency is still low at 3% and 5%, respectively.

Table 21. Income Dependency of Tuna Harvesters on Tuna and Port Dependency on Tuna, by Port of Landing, 2009
Tuna Harvesters All Harvesters
Statistical
District
Port of landing Tuna Landed Value ($) Total Landed Value ($) Income Dependency on Tuna Total Landed Value ($) Port’s Dependency on Tuna
22 Sambro 379,055 3,303,166 11% 12,651,877 3%
31 Gunning Cove X X 36% X 1%
32 Woods Harbour 1,015,636 5,695,871 18% 20,894,044 5%
  West Head 74,183 1,289,920 6% 14,233,372 1%
  Newellton X X 41% X 1%
  Shag Harbour X X 10% X 0%
  South Side X X 3% X 0%
  Clarks Harbour 2,175 471,124 0% 14,208,060 0%
33 Lower West Pubnico 53,063 878,716 6% 44,459,310 0%
  East Pubnico X X 4% X 1%
  Wedgeport 20,666 198,086 10% 9,872,434 0%
  Lower East Pubnico X X 1% X 0%
  Lower Wedgeport X X 79% X 0%
34 Pinkney's Point X X 6% X 0%
  Yarmouth X X 83% X 0%
  Sandford X X 3% X 0%
  Port Maitland X X 1% X 0%
24 St. John's (NL) X X 6% X 0%
Total 1,708,386 13,972,104 12% 208,160,173 1%
* Landed values relate to only those ports where tuna harvesters landed in 2009. X’s are placed to ensure data confidentiality, where necessary.

4. MANAGEMENT ISSUES

4.1. Fisheries Issues

Several domestic and international obligations require the swordfish longline fishery to not only address issues related to the conservation and sustainable management of its supporting fishery resource, swordfish and other tunas, but also non-related pelagic species incidentally caught species especially those of concern here or elsewhere, and the environment in general.

Specifically, ICCAT requirements, the International Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, by-catch guidelines and the IPOA on Capacity, Sharks, and Seabirds under the auspices of the United Nations FAO, the Oceans Act, and the Species at Risk Act are relevant to these fisheries and gear types, and especially to the swordfish longline fishery, which is less selective with regard to incidental catch.

4.1.1. Small Fish Management

Currently there are two options available for management of small swordfish, both of which involve minimum fish size criteria established by ICCAT. Both options have the potential of requiring the release of small swordfish harvested in the catch, either as live releases or as dead discards.

In the Canadian situation, a non-selective catch of undersized fish by harpoon is not considered to be an issue given that the harpoon harvest is almost exclusively mature fish. The longline fleets are the primary source of incidentally caught small fish. The option made available since 1996 includes a minimum fish size 119 cm LJFL with zero tolerance on small fish or a minimum size of 125 cm LJFL with a 15% tolerance for fish under that size. While the previous approach by the longline fleet had been to use the smaller size and no tolerance, given that they had been provided a discard allowance until 2004, with zero tolerance on landing small fish, this resulted in significant discards in some years that was counted against the fleet’s quota. In more recent years, the Canadian longline fleet has opted for using the 125 cm length with the tolerance reducing the need to discard small fish. Although all discards have been reduced and continue to be accounted for through estimates of release by licence holders, quantities of small north Atlantic swordfish continue to be discarded annually.

4.1.2. By-catch

Incidental by-catch and discarding of non-targeted species occur in many fisheries. Discarding of targeted species also occurs for a variety of regulatory reasons, e.g. undersized fish, licence restrictions, etc. There are no by-catch concerns related with the use of harpoon gear in the swordfish fishery and conditions of license for that fishery specify that the license holder/operator is authorized to direct for and retain swordfish only.

There continues to be some concerns about by-catch and discard issues in Canadian large pelagic fisheries with a focus on the swordfish/other tuna longline fishery. The swordfish longline fishery target species are swordfish and bigeye, yellowfin and albacore tunas.

Over the past decade, as by-catch concerns were identified in the swordfish/other tuna longline fleet, the fleet was pro-active in taking a number of mitigative steps to address this issue. First and foremost, the fleet practices live release, to the extent possible, of all sensitive species or other non-target species that are captured.

In 2001 and 2002, the Nova Scotia Swordfishermen’s Association (NSSA) obtained funding through Environment Canada’s Habitat Stewardship Fund to pay for increased observer coverage to determine the extent and possible means for mitigation of sea turtle by-catch by their fleet. In 2003, the NSSA developed a Code of Conduct for Responsible Sea Turtle Handling and Mitigative Measures, which some parts are now included in licence conditions. All licence holders must follow this Code of Conduct as a condition of their licence, which includes measures such as avoiding areas of high sea turtle capture rates and notifying all vessels operating in the area if high sea turtle capture rates are encountered; as well as gear hauling protocols to minimize harm to any turtles that may be captured, sea turtle handling guidelines and usage instructions for de-hooking gear. Over the course of 2003-2004, de-hooking and line-cutting kits were purchased by the NSSA to supply each active vessel in the fishery. In 2008, all licence holders in this fishery received training and certification in the use of this equipment through a workshop given by the US National Marine Fisheries Service. Training was also provided in 2011 both as a refresher and to licence holders needing to be trained. The Canadian Sea Turtle Network has agreed to take over training for all licence holders, crew and Fisheries Officers starting in 2013.

A gear configuration with longer gangion lines allows captured animals such as sea turtles to get to the surface to breathe, which enables live release in nearly all cases. The majority of the fleet has voluntarily used circle hooks to increase the chances of survival for released species and in 2012 this measure was made mandatory through inclusion in licence conditions.

By-catch includes several groups of other pelagic species such as sharks, marlins, tunas and other by-catch species. Approximately 16 of the upwards of 25 species typically caught are landed, reported and marketed, thus minimizing resource waste. As identified in Section 1.7.8 landings of three species of shark are limited by quota caps: porbeagle 50t; blue shark 250t; and shortfin mako 100t.

Under the current bluefin tuna management plan, the swordfish longline fleet is provided an annual bluefin tuna quota of 18.76t in the western Atlantic and an ICCAT allocation of 15t in the central north Atlantic to address bluefin by-catches and eliminate discards. These allocations, along with the ability to receive transfers from other inshore bluefin tuna fleets, have resulted in discards of bluefin tuna by the pelagic longline fleet having been reduced in at-sea observer records. The offshore swordfish and other tuna licence holder also receive a 20t domestic allocation of bluefin tuna to support retention of bluefin by-catch by this licence holder.

Finally, the research program identified in Section 2.1.5 examining the impacts of by-catch in the pelagic longline fishery with a view towards further mitigation of catches of sensitive species, as required, is currently on-going within DFO. The research program will also undertake studies to better understand the impacts of discards of sharks and other species that are incidentally harvested and released by the pelagic longline fleet.

4.1.3. National Plan of Action (NPOA) for Reducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries

Canada’s NPOA for Reducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries notes that the impact of Canada’s longline fisheries on global incidental catch of seabirds tends to be very low. This has been further confirmed by incidental by-catch analyses of observer data in 2000 and subsequent years. Nevertheless, measures have been and continue to be implemented to better understand the extent of the issue and if further mitigation measures are required to reduce seabird by-catch in Canadian longline fisheries.

This NPOA provides an assessment of by-catch levels of seabirds within Canada’s longline fisheries, identifies priorities for the NPOA, highlights Canada’s current legislative framework and international commitments, reviews Canada’s integrated fisheries management framework, and presents a series of actions for better identifying by-catch levels and further enhancing efforts to reduce the incidental capture of seabirds. A status update on the actions taken under the NPOA since the 2007 report is expected to be completed by the summer of 2012.

4.1.4. National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks

Canada’s NPOA for the Conservation and Management of Sharks identifies management measures pertinent to shark by-catch in the swordfish longline fishery. The 2007 NPOA on sharks notes that globally, the impact of Canada’s fishing activities on shark populations tends to be low. Nevertheless, the NPOA clearly identifies that measures have been and continue to be implemented to improve the management of these species.

This NPOA provides an overview of shark stocks in Canadian fisheries waters, identifies priorities for the NPOA, highlights Canada’s current legislative framework and international commitments, and outlines current measures to monitor, assess and manage these populations and their related fisheries. Recommendations for possible enhancements to existing conservation and management practices are also presented. A status update on the actions taken with regard to sharks since the 2007 report is expected to be completed by the summer of 2012.

4.2. Depleted Species Concerns

4.2.1. Species at Risk Act and Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC)

The Species at Risk Act (SARA) came into force in 2003. The purposes of the Act are “to prevent wildlife species from being extirpated or becoming extinct, and to provide for the recovery of wildlife species that are extirpated, endangered or threatened as a result of human activity and to manage species of special concern to prevent them from becoming endangered or threatened”.

4.2.2. Porbeagle Sharks

In 2004, porbeagle sharks (Lamna nasus) were designated as Endangered by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) and the stock was considered for listing on Schedule 1 of SARA. Analysis from the 2005 Recovery Potential Assessment (RPA) for porbeagle sharks (available on the DFO website) indicates that the stock population could recover if human-induced mortality was kept below about 4% of vulnerable biomass (about 185 t per year). As DFO determined that the population could recover, current and future management of this species is to ensure that mortality is kept below this 4% level as required for recovery. As such, the government decided not to list porbeagle sharks as endangered under the Species at Risk Act. Current management measures for this stock limit harvests to no more than 185t per year. Landings in most recent years have only been about half of that level with by-catches by the pelagic longline fleet averaging approximately 50 tonnes per year. Given the low productivity of the porbeagle, it is expected to take several decades for this species to recover from its low abundance.

4.2.3. Other Shark Species

COSEWIC has also recommended that great white sharks be listed as Endangered, that shortfin makos be listed as Threatened, and that blue and basking sharks be listed as Special Concern. Recovery Potential Assessments completed in 2006 are available for both shortfin mako and white sharks on the Fisheries and Oceans Canada website. The government has listed white shark under SARA and is currently considering whether or not some or all of the remaining species should also be listed.

4.2.3.1. Shortfin Mako shark

As noted in the RPA, since mako sharks are not part of a directed fishery in Canada and by-catch rates represent only a small portion of the global population, it is expected that current exploitation rates by Canadian fishing fleets are not having a significant negative impact on the sustainability of this species. The RPA for shortfin mako noted that it is unlikely that a reduction in by-catch of shortfin makos by the Canadian pelagic longline fishery would have any detectable or biologically significant influence on the population; however, it would be prudent not to exceed 100t annually. In line with recommendations from the RPA, the swordfish longline fleet has been releasing all live caught makos to reduce mortality.

4.2.3.2. White shark

The RPA for white sharks notes that the abundance in Canada would in general follow the trajectory of the North Atlantic population, a component of which has declined in recent decades in U.S. waters. Therefore, the recovery potential in Canadian waters will be dependent on the overall recovery in U.S. and other North Atlantic waters. The RPA concludes that given the very poor status of the population, any level of harm would jeopardize its survival or recovery. Since white sharks are so rare in Canadian waters and since their capture would be as incidental by-catch, the only viable management option to enhance the recovery of white sharks in the Atlantic Ocean is the live release of captures. However there has been no documented incidental catch of white sharks in this fishery over the past decade.

In 2012 white shark was listed under the Species at Risk Act and the fishery is now prohibited to retain any white shark.

4.2.3.3. Blue shark

The most recent assessment by ICCAT noted that for both North and South Atlantic blue shark stocks, although the results are highly uncertain, biomass is believed to be above the biomass that would support Maximum Sustainable Yield and that the current harvest levels are sustainable.

However, according to recent domestic research, the catch mortality for blue sharks within Canadian Atlantic fisheries waters may have been greatly underestimated in the past. As blue sharks are of low commercial value, they are regularly discarded as by-catch within the commercial pelagic fishery. Historically, such discards of by-catch have not been regularly recorded. While blue shark are likely the most commonly caught large shark in Canadian fisheries waters actual landings are very low annually (less than 1 tonne) due to lack of markets/value. While by-catch rates for blue sharks may be higher than those for other shark species, research suggests that they have a higher survival rate on returning to the water as long as appropriate handling techniques are used.

Over the past decade, the blue shark population in Canadian fisheries waters has been in decline while mortality has been increasing. Catch rates for commercial longline fisheries and recreational tournaments have fallen and the median size of blue sharks caught has decreased. This warrants ongoing monitoring of the species. It is estimated that catch mortality within the total North Atlantic ranges between 26,000 and 32,000 tonnes for blue shark. These are considered to be low estimates, of which the Canadian portion is very small. Tagging studies show that blue sharks are extremely migratory and do not establish long-term residency in Canadian fisheries waters. Further research on the blue shark population and fishery within Canadian fisheries waters is warranted and in particular the impact of reported and unreported catches requires further assessment. Since 1995, fishery management plans have placed non-restrictive catch guidelines of 250 tonnes on blue sharks within the directed fishery (i.e., for longline, handline, and rod-and-reel gear).

4.2.4. Loggerhead Sea Turtles

In April 2010, COSEWIC assessed the status of loggerhead sea turtles as Endangered and in response the government of Canada is considering listing it under the SARA. The status of the loggerhead sea turtle is a species of conservation concern however, a decision on listing under SARA may take several years. In the interim period DFO actively investigated strategies and tactics to reduce human impacts to loggerheads in the waters of Atlantic Canada.

The only documented source of human-induced harm or mortality in Canadian waters is fishery by-catch in the Canadian swordfish longline fishery that targets swordfish and tuna species (Harris et al. 2010).

Harris, L.E., W.E. Gross, R.K. Smedbol, and L.H. Bondt. 2010. Loggerhead Sea Turtles (Caretta caretta) in Atlantic Canada: Biology, Status, Recovery Potential, and Measures for Mitigation. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 2010/089: viii + 36 p.

The loggerhead sea turtle RPA meeting in February 2010 was unable to assess the impact of proposed mitigation strategies on population abundance and distribution in Canadian waters, however the range and scope of the threats overall would suggest that the Canadian fleet is not the primary threat to the recovery of the species.

Following the RPA, the Maritimes Region developed the “Atlantic Canadian Loggerhead Turtle Conservation Action Plan”. This plan has several strategies which will apply to the pelagic longline fleet including:

With the assistance of the fleet tagging of 37 loggerhead turtles occurred in the 2012 and information from these PSAT tags will be compiled in 2013.

4.2.5. Leatherback Sea Turtles

The Leatherback turtle was listed as endangered under SARA in June 2003. Fisheries and Oceans Canada led the development of a recovery strategy for Atlantic Leatherback turtles. Success in the recovery of this species will require the commitment and cooperation of many different constituencies that will be involved in implementing the directions set out in this strategy which specifies measures that can be taken under Canadian jurisdiction to promote the recovery of the Atlantic leatherback turtle. The recovery goal is to “achieve the long-term viability of the leatherback turtle populations frequenting Atlantic Canadian waters” and will not be achieved by Fisheries and Oceans Canada or any other jurisdiction alone. The strategy to assist with the rebuilding of Leatherback turtles in Atlantic Canada is outlined in the Leatherback Turtle Recovery Strategy for the stock that has been prepared as a requirement under the Species at Risk Act. The leatherback turtle has also been listed in the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES). Canada signed this treaty, as have many of the countries that host nesting or migratory populations of leatherbacks. CITES attempts to ensure that trade in endangered species do not threaten the existence of those species.

4.3. Oceanic and Habitat Considerations

Time/Area closures: In addition to the legislated closure of Zone 1 of the Gully Marine Protected Area (MPA), there are several closed areas that restrict swordfish and other tuna harvest in order to reduce potential gear conflicts with other fisheries, to protect swordfish broodstock, and/or to minimize the by-catch of bluefin tuna.

Figure 8. Swordfish Closed Areas

Map of swordfish closed areas

Swordfish licence holders are restricted from activity within Fishing Zones of Canada 1 (Gulf of St. Lawrence) and 2 (Bay of Fundy).

Other existing closures that are in place in the swordfish fishery for oceanic considerations include: Bluefin Exclusion Zone closed to longline gear Aug. 1 - Dec. 31; the Swordfish Broodstock Closure to harpoon gear Sept. 1 - Dec. 31; and a closure of the Hell Hole to longline gear annually from July 1 - November 30.

The Government of Canada is working with the provinces and territories to conserve Canada's marine ecosystems through the development of a National Network of Marine Protected Areas. Marine protected areas are effective in protecting plants, animals and habitats as well as enhancing biodiversity and improving the health and sustainable use of our oceans, Great Lakes and coastlines, while also contributing to Canadian coastal communities and industries. Canada has almost 800 marine protected areas, which together protect about one percent of the marine environment. Existing and proposed marine protected areas provide the foundation for building the national network of marine protected areas, which will be composed of a number of bioregional networks of marine protected areas. Fisheries and Oceans Canada will continue to work with marine resource users, including swordfish and other tunas fishing fleets, to establish a National Framework. The National Framework is an important step towards meeting Canada's domestic and international commitments to establish a national network of marine protected areas.

4.4. Gear impacts

The impacts of pelagic longline gear are reviewed in the DFO CSAS publication: “DFO. 2010. Potential impacts of fishing gears (excluding mobile bottom-contacting gears) on marine habitats and communities. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Sci. Advis. Rep. 2010/003”. www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/CSAS/Csas/publications/sar-as/2010/2010_003_e.pdf

Leatherback and loggerhead turtles are incidentally captured in nets and entangled in fishing lines in pelagic and coastal foraging areas and in migratory corridors. Leatherbacks are the most vulnerable of all Atlantic sea turtles to entanglement in fishing gear such as pelagic longlines, fixed pot gear and gillnets, buoy anchor lines, and other ropes and cables.

Interactions between fishing activities and Northern Bottlenose Whales are not well understood. Observations have shown a small number of northern bottlenose whales entangled in, or interacting with, fishing gear. Several entanglements in Atlantic Canada have been recorded in longline gear, involving both bottom and pelagic fisheries. One of the longline entanglements involved pelagic gear on the Grand Banks and the whale was released alive. It is unknown if Northern Bottlenose Whales on the Grand Banks are from the endangered Scotian Shelf population or the separate Davis Strait population. Another line-gear entanglement involved a Northern Bottlenose Whale with its beak wrapped in monofilament in the Gully pre-MPA designation. Evidence from this later incident is not conclusively pelagic longline gear. Other cetacean species are at risk of gear entanglement given the overlap in space and time between the swordfish longline fishery and annual whale migrations along the Scotian Shelf.

Lost gear from the Scotian Shelf swordfish longline fishery represents a potential entanglement threat to sea turtles, whales, and bottom-dwelling species (e.g., coral and/or sponge communities). However, all licence holders have radio transmitters on their longline gear which allows for recovery of most lost gear.

4.5. International Issues

Within the swordfish fishery conducted in the North Atlantic Canadian waters and on the adjacent high seas, international and national agencies have defined roles, responsibilities and authority for fisheries management. At an international level, fishing for swordfish, both on the high seas and in zones of national jurisdiction, is governed by the International Convention on the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna of 1966. The International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT) was established under the Convention and is tasked with the coordination of scientific research and making recommendations designed to maintain populations of tuna at levels which will permit maximum sustainable yield (MSY). To obtain this objective, the Commission has adopted minimum permissible size (weight) limits for swordfish and tuna caught and retained, overall catch limits for various species, gear regulations and schemes for international and port inspection.

Canada provides information based on ICCAT Tasks 1 and 2 which includes catch-at-size information on catch and discards. Licence conditions require the release of all live marlin species caught and recent landings (2009 - 0.6t) are well below the ICCAT reference years of 1996 and 1999 when Canada reported landings of 8t and 5t respectively. In addition, ICCAT identified a concern on by-catch of shortfin mako. Catches of shortfin mako have been decreasing in recent years to 43t in 2009. Therefore domestic management measures for the swordfish fishery fully meet the minimum requirements as established by ICCAT and in many cases are significantly stricter than those established in the ICCAT Recommendations for the North Atlantic Swordfish Fishery.

5. OBJECTIVES

There are five overarching objectives that guide fisheries management planning for the Atlantic swordfish and other tuna fisheries. They are guided by the principle that the fishery is a common property resource to be managed for the benefit of all Canadians, consistent with conservation objectives, the constitutional protection afforded Aboriginal and treaty rights, and the relative contributions that various uses of the resource make to Canadian society, including socio-economic benefits to communities.

The conservation objectives are those from DFO’s framework for an ecosystem approach to management (EAM framework). They require consideration of the impact of the fishery not only on the target species but also on non target species and habitat.

The social, cultural and economic objectives reflect the Aboriginal right to fish for food, social and ceremonial purposes. They also recognize the economic contribution that the fishing industry makes to Canadian businesses and many coastal communities. Ultimately, the economic viability of fisheries depends on the industry itself. However, the Department is committed to managing the fisheries in a manner that helps its members be economically successful while using the ocean’s resources in an environmentally sustainable manner.

6. STRATEGIES AND TACTICS

This section of the IFMP presents the strategies and tactics being used in this fishery to achieve the general objectives listed in Section 5. For a general description of strategies and tactics in the context of the EAM framework, see Appendix 1.

While those objectives may be considered to be general statements, they are translated into practical terms through the definition of strategies. The strategies outlined in this IFMP constitute what is being done to manage pressures imposed by fishing activities in order to control their impact on valued fish population and ecosystem attributes. Strategies are not included where the fisheries are not considered to have a significant impact.

Tactical management measures are “how” the strategies will be implemented to manage the pressures imposed by fishery activities. The principal tactical management measures that will be applied in this fishery to implement the key strategies identified above are described here. (Note that tactics may regulate more than one pressure. They are listed here under the strategies that they are most strongly associated with.)

Table 22. Strategies and Tactics
Strategies Tactics
Productivity
Keep fishing mortality of North Atlantic swordfish moderate by setting a TAC (13,700t in 2012) with a high probability of maintaining stock levels that would produce MSY, with greater than 50% probability.
  • Domestic adherence to ICCAT agreed upon Total Allowable Quotas (TAC). Initial Canadian TAC in 2012 established at 1,348t.
  • Minimum legal size, with permitted retention of 15%
  • Fleet quota caps
  • Spatial/temporal closures (Swordfish exclusion zone)
Keep fishing mortality of Atlantic bigeye tuna moderate by setting a TAC with a high probability of maintaining or rebuilding stock levels consistent with ICCAT objectives.
  • Catch limit of 2,100t is imposed on Canada
  • Minimum legal size
Keep fishing mortality of Atlantic yellowtail tuna moderate by setting a TAC with a high probability of maintaining stock levels consistent with ICCAT objectives and setting fishing mortality rates below FMSY.
  • Limit on fishing effort to the 1992 level of activity
  • TAC of 110,000t began in 2012 
Keep fishing mortality of North Atlantic Albacore tuna moderate by setting a TAC with a high probability of rebuilding the stock levels from the overfished condition.
  • 200t per year with up to a 25% (50t) carry forward from previous year
Keep fishing mortality of bluefin tuna moderate by setting a TAC with a high probability of rebuilding stock levels to achieve BMSY, with at least 50% probability.
  • By-catch limits (total of 43.574t for longline in 2012)
  • Mandatory release (harpoon, trolling)
  • Area closures (Canadian Fishing Zones 1 and 2; Hell Hole; Bluefin Exclusion Zone)
Keep fishing mortality of sharks moderate by maintaining precautionary management measures that where possible are species-specific.
  • Porbeagle shark by-catch quota (185t)
  • Catch limits for Shortfin mako (100t) and blue shark (250t)
  • Encouraged release of live sharks (longline)
  • Mandatory release of white tip and hammerhead sharks (all fleets)
  • Mandatory release of all sharks (harpoon, trolling)
Keep fishing mortality of other pelagic finfish (e.g. mahi mahi, marlins) moderate by maintaining precautionary management measures that would allow the stock to recover to the BMSY level.
  • ICCAT white marlin MSY 600 – 1,320t
  • ICCAT blue marlin MSY ~ 2,000t (1,000 -2,400t)
  • Mandatory release of live marlin
  • Mandatory release of other pelagic finfish (swordfish harpoon)
Biodiversity
Control unintended incidental mortality for all species.
  • Use fishing practices that promote avoidance with by-catch species.
  • NSSA Code of Conduct for responsible sea turtle handling:
    • Require de-hooking equipment on all vessels
    • Use of equipment when required;
    • Training for all licence holders/operators.
  • Adherence to the Fisheries and Oceans Canada Work plan to Address Incidental Catch in Canadian Large Pelagic Fisheries.
  • 100% mandatory use of circle hooks
Control unintended incidental mortality of leatherback and loggerhead turtles.
- reference for leatherback turtles = <1% mortality from all anthropogenic sources.
  • Adherence to the Leatherback Recovery Strategy
  • Adherence to the Atlantic Canadian Loggerhead Turtle Conservation Action Plan
  • Mandatory release
  • Handling practices (NSSA Code of Conduct for Responsible Sea Turtle Handling, de-hooking equipment, training)
  • Gear configuration (circle hooks, gangion length)
  • Avoidance
Habitat
Manage area disturbed of Habitat.
  • Recover lost gear to reduce the impacts of ghost fishing and species interactions
Manage area disturbed of northern bottlenose whale habitat (reference = no presence).
  • Area closure (The Gully Marine Protected Area)
Culture and Sustenance
N/A – There is no FSC fishing in this fishery.
Prosperity
Limit inability for self-adjustment to overcapacity relative to resource availability.
  • Quota transferability (longline)
  • Community management of Harpoon A IQ quota transferability
  • Fleet rationalization
  • Transshipping allowance for harpoon caught swordfish with the longline fleet
  • Introduction of Harvest Benefit Combining option for the Harpoon A fleet in 2013
Limit inflexibility in policy and licensing among individual enterprise/license holders.
  • Transferable quotas for target and by-catch species
  • Fleet exemption status for longline fleet
  • Substitute operators/designated operators
  • Quota carry-over provisions
  • Permitted discarding of damaged swordfish
Limit instability in access to resources and allocations.
  • Fleet quotas
  • Individual quotas, enterprise allocations
  • Area closures to prevent gear conflict
  • Trip limit for Harpoon B licences
Support MSC certification for sustainability.
  • DFO provision of certification data

6.1. Productivity

Under the international stewardship of ICCAT, this fishery uses management methods that adhere to ICCAT objectives to keep fishing mortality moderate. ICCAT has identified rebuilding objectives, particularly for swordfish and bigeye Tuna, based on established reference limits within a precautionary approach. This approach is based primarily on maintaining stocks at a level to support the maximum sustainable yield.

Canada adheres to its assigned quota adjusted for quota transfers from other countries and application of fleet quota overages or underages from the previous year. Development of and adherence to the TAC ensures that consideration is given to the impact of discards on the reproductive potential of the target species.

By-catch quota of porbeagle shark and catch limits on shortfin mako and blue shark in the longline fishery are based on the best available current information for those species. As further information becomes available these catch limits will be reviewed to ensure fishing mortality is kept moderate.

Reproductive potential is supported through the use of temporal and geographical closures in order to reduce interactions with spawning stock biomass. These closures identify the importance of nearer shore areas in late summer/fall.

Without specific TAC levels for many pelagic species, monitoring of the landings identifies the impact on the species and reduces waste of the resource.

A joint project between industry and the department is implementing a Work plan to Address Incidental Catch in Canadian Large Pelagic Fisheries. This is a comprehensive work plan for monitoring fishing activity, measuring the discard mortality and establishing suitable references to indicate when that mortality is unacceptable. The focus of this plan is directed toward six key species; bluefin tuna, porbeagle shark, shortfin mako, blue shark, leatherback turtle and loggerhead sea turtle as well as the discarding of swordfish. This work plan includes several broad level projects.

  1. Review observer coverage levels.
  2. Management of discards for targeted species (including estimation of all discards, survival of released catch that would be counted against the quota through incorporation of discards into stock assessments).
  3. Control incidental mortality for non-targeted species (including survival of released catch and potential mitigation measures).

6.2. Biodiversity

The nature of this fishery is such that unintended incidental mortality is significantly reduced through fishing practices that promote avoidance or release of by-catch species. This strategy is particularly important for protecting species listed as threatened or endangered under SARA. Licence conditions require the release of all incidentally- caught SARA species and licence holders and vessel operators have received training in the safe handling and release of turtles. Northern bottlenose whales are further protected by the Gully Marine Protected Area Zone 1, which has been identified as critical habitat for the Scotian Shelf population.

Fishing practices also supporting the avoidance of by-catch species include the NSSA Code of Conduct which promotes moving away from areas of incidental catch and informing other licence holders of these areas. The use of 16/0 circle hooks reduces the by-catch of small species and compared to J hooks reduces harm to discards.

Industry compliance with the Fisheries and Oceans Atlantic Canadian Loggerhead Turtle Conservation Action Plan and the NSSA Code of Conduct (including the use of de-hooking equipment) reduces impact on the most common SARA species with which this fishery interacts.

Implementation of the Workplan to Address Incidental Catch in Canadian Large Pelagic Fisheries will have similar support for biodiversity objectives as with productivity objectives.

6.3. Habitat

Habitat impacts for pelagic fisheries are not as obvious compared with bottom contact fisheries and therefore are more difficult to assess.

Recovery and prevention of lost longline gear will reduce ghost fishing and potential interactions with marine species (e.g. entanglement with whales or turtles). Lost gear has the potential to continue fishing as dead catch would become bait for other animals. The use of radio transmitters on the gear by industry ensures that lost gear is kept to a minimum.

Closures such as the Gully (Zone 1) have served to protect critical habitat during their migration.

6.3.1. Critical Habitat

The Northern Bottlenose Whale Recovery Strategy identifies Zone 1 of the Gully Marine Protected Area and areas with water depths greater than 500 meters in Haldimand Canyon and Shortland Canyon as critical habitat for the Scotian Shelf population. Under s. 2 of the Species at Risk Act, critical habitat is “… habitat that is necessary for the survival or recovery of a listed wildlife species and that is identified as the species’ critical habitat in the recovery strategy or in an action plan for the species.” Once critical habitat is identified in a Recovery Strategy or an Action Plan, it must be protected within 180 days. Critical Habitat protection applies only to the habitat itself, including the features, functions and attributes of the habitat that make it necessary for the survival and recovery of the species.

Regular fishing activity by a relatively small group of fishing interests does overlap with known Northern Bottlenose Whale critical habitat. The primary fisheries are with groundfish longline gear directing for halibut, and pelagic longline gear directing for swordfish. The swordfish longline fishery crosses the mouths of several canyons along the edge and slope of the Scotian Shelf, but is excluded from deepwater areas (Zone 1) of the Gully MPA.

Given that no known or active fisheries were thought likely to destroy critical habitat for the Northern Bottlenose Whale, the Recovery Strategy did not list fishing activities as “activities likely to destroy critical habitat.” Direct interactions between species at risk and activities including fisheries are typically dealt with under the general prohibition of SARA (s. 32), which prohibits the harm, harassment, capture, kill or take of species at risk, either purposefully or incidentally. Section 32 applies as soon as the species is listed under SARA, and is independent of the areas identified and protected as critical habitat. The boundaries of Critical Habitat for a given species have no bearing on where and when s. 32 of SARA applies.

SARA offers two options for ensuring the protection of critical habitat: the development of a Protection Statement (which uses other Acts of Parliament to prevent the destruction of critical habitat), or the creation of a Protection Order (putting into force s. 58 of SARA, which prohibits the destruction of critical habitat). In 2010, a Protection Statement was posted for the Northern Bottlenose Whale critical habitat located in Shortland and Haldimand canyons. Other Acts of Parliament required to protect the identified critical habitat from fishing activities were not listed, as these activities were not identified as “activities likely to destroy critical habitat” in the Recovery Strategy. As a result of a 2010 Federal court decision on killer whale critical habitat, how critical habitat is protected in the future under the Species at Risk Act will change. The 2010 Protection Statement for Northern Bottlenose Whales will be replaced in 2011/2012 by a Protection Order (s. 58(4)), which will put into force the SARA s. 58 prohibition against the destruction of critical habitat.

6.4. Culture and Sustenance

In 1990, the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in R. v. Sparrow. In this landmark decision, the Court provided meaning and context to the Constitution Act, 1982, section 35(1) and held that, after conservation and other “valid legislative objectives”, Aboriginal rights to fish for food, social and ceremonial purposes have priority over all other uses of the fishery.

Aboriginal communal food, social and ceremonial fishing is a cultural and sustenance activity. The resources fished through an FSC licence are used communally to provide food for its members, and support the traditional social and ceremonial activities of the First Nations community or Aboriginal group.

There are no Food Social and Ceremonial (FSC) licences in this fishery.

6.5. Prosperity

With the introduction of the longline fleet rationalization, an ITQ system and fleet exemption status, operating costs can be reduced. Supply and demand requirements, as well as operating costs can be controlled through the ITQ management system and quota carry-over provisions.

MSC certification completed in the harpoon fishery and currently underway in the longline fishery should allow the industry to maintain access as markets demand more sustainable fishing practices and may result in increased prices.

7. ACCESS AND ALLOCATION

7.1. Canadian Sharing Arrangement Swordfish

Canada and other countries receive an allocation of the overall TAC from ICCAT. The TAC has been set at 13,700t for 2012. It should be noted that country allocations (Table 23) have exceeded the TAC since 2007. However, a number of countries have not landed their full allocation and therefore total catches have not exceeded the TAC.

Areas of operations include inside and outside of the Canadian Exclusive Economic Zone. The access to outside area is limited to a single offshore licence which is provided a 5t swordfish allocation. The remaining quota, along with transfers from other countries, is allocated at the beginning of the year 90% going to the pelagic longline fleet and 10% going to the harpoon fleet (up to a maximum of 150t). The harpoon fleet allocation is further divided with the main portion for the Group A licence holders and a small allocation (9t in 2011) to the Group B licence holders based on usage in the previous years.

Uncaught quota for both the longline and harpoon fleets may be carrier over to the next year up to a maximum of 25% of their initial shares as per ICCAT rules. However in an ICCAT swordfish assessment year (usually very 3 years and next expected in 2013) no roll-over of harpoon quota is allowed and any uncaught harpoon quota as of September 30th will be transferred to the longline fleet.

The option of Harvest Benefit Combining was introduced in 2013 for the Harpoon A fleet to reduce over-capacity. Under this program licence holders will be able to combine their licence landing history resulting in the elimination of one licence and increased access for the remaining licence.

Note: The Minister can, for reasons of conservation or for any other valid reasons, modify access, allocations and sharing arrangements as outlined in this IFMP in accordance with the powers granted pursuant to the Fisheries Act.

Table 23. ICCAT Swordfish Quota and Allocations
  2009 2010
European Community 6,718 6,718
United States (1) (2) 3,907 3,970
Canada (2) 1,348 1,348
Japan 842 842
Morocco (3) 850 850
Mexico  (3) 200 200
Brazil 50 50
Barbados 45 45
Venezuela 85 85
Trinidad & Tobago 125 125
UK (Overseas Territories) (4) 35 35
France (St. Pierre et Miquelon) (4) 40 40
China 75 75
Senegal (3) 400 400
Korea 50 50
Belize (3) 130 130
Philippines 25 25
Cote d’Ivoire 50 50
St. Vincent & the Grenadines 75 75
Vanuatu 25 25
Chinese Taipei 270 270

Within the country allocations:
(1) The United States may harvest up to 200 t of its annual catch limit within the area between 5 degrees North latitude and 5 degrees South latitude.

(2) For each year of this catch quota allocation, the United States will transfer 25 t to Canada. Senegal has transferred 100t and will continue this practice in 2013. These transfers do not change the relevant shares of Parties as reflected in the above allocation.

(3) The European Union shall be allowed to count up to 200t of its swordfish catch taken from the South Atlantic management area against its uncaught North Atlantic swordfish quota.

7.2. Sharing Arrangement for Approved Pelagic By-catch

Limitations covering other tunas and pelagic by-catch are as follows.

Albacore

Bigeye

Yellowfin

Shark by-catch

8. SHARED STEWARDSHIP ARRANGEMENTS

There are two main bodies that foster shared stewardship within the swordfish fishery. The Atlantic Large Pelagics Advisory Committee (ALPAC) is the main body for both industry and the department to work collaboratively on the management of large pelagic species in Atlantic Canada. Aside from the representation of most sectors of DFO, the ALPAC group is made up of industry stakeholders that include: fish harvesters; processors; representatives from each of the Atlantic Provinces and Quebec; as well as other environmental non-government organizations. The ALPAC normally meets at least twice annually. In the spring of each year ALPAC reviews the fishery from the previous year and the members discuss any issues/concerns and recommendations for the domestic management of the fishery. In the fall and in advance of the annual ICCAT meeting, the Department meets with ALPAC members to discuss and adopt Canadian positions at ICCAT. Fleet representatives for both the swordfish pelagic longline and harpoon fleets are actively engaged in the ALPAC process.

There is also a smaller ALPAC Advisors group that meets several times per year in order to provide strategic input into the Canadian positions and recommendations for the annual meetings of ICCAT. This sub-group is made up of a select number of large pelagic fleet representatives including representatives from both the swordfish pelagic longline and harpoon fleets.

An “Ecosystem Working Group” was initiated in the spring of 2010. The Working Group is to provide advice to ALPAC and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) with respect to the implementation of an Ecosystem Approach to Management (EAM) in the various large pelagic fisheries in Atlantic Canada. Both of the swordfish fleets, pelagic longline and harpoon, are represented on the working group.

As well, since the Scotia Fundy sector of the Maritimes Region houses most of the licence holders in both the harpoon and longline sectors, the Scotia Fundy Large Pelagics Advisory Committee (SFLPAC) is the second tier government-industry consultative group that meets at least once per year to discuss fisheries issues in greater detail (that may be difficult in the larger ALPAC forum). The SFLPAC provides input and advice to Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) on the conservation, protection and utilization of the Canadian east coast fisheries resources of tunas, swordfish and shark, and on the management of the fisheries for these large pelagics resources. This Committee serves as the pre-eminent consultative forum for Scotia-Fundy based large pelagics fishing industry and government. The Committee will provide recommendations and advice on Maritimes (Scotia-Fundy) regional policy issues related to these fisheries. Consequently, the Committee can review recommendations made by sub-committees to determine what management measures could be included in regional fishing plans. Fishermen’s representatives from all swordfish fleets participate in the SFLPAC process.

8.1. Swordfish Tagging Project:

In collaboration with swordfish licence holders, Departmental scientists deployed 18 satellite tags (PSATs) on swordfish from the waters off southern Newfoundland in 2009. In 2010 an additional 7 swordfish were tagged in this area. This tagging will provide important information on swordfish migration into and out of Canadian waters as well as information on swordfish spawning.

8.2. By-catch Project:

Blue sharks (listed as a Special Concern in Canada by COSEWIC) are the main by-catch species in the Atlantic Canada large pelagic longline fisheries. The pelagic longline fleets will continue to implement mitigation measures to address blue shark by-catch.

As discussed in section 6.1 of this document a joint project between industry and the department is implementing a Work plan to Address Incidental Catch in Canadian Large Pelagic Fisheries. This is an ongoing comprehensive work plan for monitoring fishing activity and evaluating discards.

8.3. Turtle Release Project:

Leatherback turtles were assessed as endangered under the Species at Risk Act (SARA). Members of the Canadian Swordfish Pelagic Longline Fisheries have voluntarily undertaken measures to ensure minimal harm to leatherback turtles which are unintentionally caught by longline gear.

These responsible practices include:

  1. Temporarily increasing observer coverage with funding from the Habitat Stewardship Fund at Environment Canada to determine extent and possible mitigation of sea turtle by-catch.
  2. Developing a Code of Conduct for Responsible Sea Turtle Handling and Mitigation Measures in 2003 which was added to the Conservation Harvesting plan in 2004 and continue to be followed as a requirement under licence conditions.
  3. Purchased 30 turtle de-hooking and line cutting kits in 2003 and 15 kits in 2004, which is enough for all active vessels in the fishery.
  4. Approximately 72 individuals, representing all license holders in the swordfish fishery participated in a Protected Species Safe Handling, Release and Identification Workshop on April 2008 and all were certified. This certification was repeated again in March 2011 and will be continued as required.
  5. At-sea observer coverage has varied from 5% - 25% since 2000. Current requirements are for a 5% target and increased coverage applied when the fleet moves to new areas during the season.
  6. The voluntary use of corrodible circle hooks was replaced with the mandatory requirement for 100% use in 2012.

9. COMPLIANCE PLAN

9.1. Conservation and Protection Program Description

The management of Canadian fisheries requires an integrated approach to monitoring, control and surveillance that involves the deployment of fishery officers to air, sea and land patrols; observer coverage on fishing vessels; dockside monitoring program (DMP); and remote electronic monitoring (VMS).

Conservation and Protection activities are designed to ensure compliance with the legislation, policies and fishing plans relating to the conservation and sustainable use of the resource. The C&P National Compliance Framework describes a three pillar approach to the sustainability of this and other fisheries. The pillars are respectively, Education/Shared Stewardship: Monitoring, Control and Surveillance; and Major Case Management. The full framework is available upon request.

9.2. Regional Compliance Program Delivery

Compliance in the Swordfish fishery is achieved through the application of the Fisheries Act, the Fishery (General) Regulations, the Atlantic Fishery Regulations and the Aboriginal Communal Fishing Licences Regulations by Fishery Officers.

The following offers a general description of compliance activities carried out by C&P in the Swordfish Fishery.

9.3. Consultation

Shared stewardship and education are achieved in the Swordfish Fishery through a renewed emphasis on the importance of C&P communication with the community at large including:

9.4. Compliance Performance

Almost all fishing for swordfish with longline gears takes place concurrently with activity for bigeye, yellowfin and albacore tunas and often with bluefin as well.

C&P typically expends about 1% of its annual enforcement effort on large pelagics of which roughly half is dedicated to swordfish (in consideration of overlaps between tuna and swordfish). Given the relatively small number of active harvesters engaged in swordfish fisheries in comparison to activities such as lobster and groundfish, this level of attention to swordfish is probably commensurate. Nevertheless, C&P considers swordfish a priority species that has an international profile and will seek ways to refine its strategies or possibly increase the time spent in this fishery.

A summary of officer time, patrol vessel days, aircraft hours, violations, observer coverage and penalties appears in the tables at the end of Section 9.

9.5. Current Compliance Issues

Compliance issues remain relatively constant with minor issues continuing to dominate annually. Enforcement allocation of resources to this fishery increased in 2010 and has been relatively stable since that time.

The following review is based on all violations recorded by Fishery Officers from 2005 to November 2012, information from observer reports and data from other sources such as DFO’s Fishery Officer time tracking system as well as catch and effort data. Issues associated with incidental catches of tuna and shark species are included.

This review identified a total of 98 violations during the review period. Although this number may seem large, roughly half the cases concerned issues with little conservation impact such as personal registrations or hail time (a common problem across a broad spectrum of fisheries). A limited number of these cases (±10) can be considered serious and mostly focused on closed areas or attempts to misreport a range of species including bluefin tuna under the guise of a swordfish longline fishery. A list of violations according to compliance issue appears in the appendix.

Whereas the swordfish fishery is little different from other adjacent activities (e.g.: groundfish, scallops) in that there is always room for improved compliance, it is also fair to state DFO requires harvesters to maintain a high standard in terms of the rules that govern this fishery. In its enforcement, C&P has on occasion found evidence of illegal practices and will target its effort to address these issues.

Of the cases reviewed, 22 resulted in charges and 14 of these ended with a conviction and fine. In terms of assessing deterrent value, the level of enforcement and number of actions is probably insufficient but it is safe to assume the trend in other fisheries also applies to swordfish. Somewhat higher fines in other fisheries such as lobster are likely a consideration for those who would engage in harmful practices for swordfish. However, the lack of an effective licence sanction regime (licence suspension) or absence of ticketing for low end offences also take away from C&P’s effort to establish an effective balance.

9.6. Compliance Strategy

For swordfish, Canada’s compliance management must meet an international standard and reflect conservation measures established by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). While ensuring adequate attention to swordfish is a challenge in view of the compliance risks C&P must address elsewhere, it appears C&P exceeds international norms in its enforcement program for this fishery.

C&P Detachment Supervisors prepare a work plan each year in which they allocate human, material and fiscal resources, weigh the compliance risks in each fishery and establish priorities. Table 24 is a summary of that process. C&P cannot be effective without the commitment on the part of the fishing industry to conservation of this valuable resource.

Table 24. Compliance Risks and Mitigating Strategies
Compliance Risks Mitigating Strategies

Illegal Use of Gear

  • Illegal use of trolling gear
  • Gear marking
  • Lack of at-sea deterrence

Closed Area and Time Issues

  • Unlicensed fishing
  • Fishing in closed area/time
  • VMS problems

Catch and Reporting Issues

  • Fraud and collusion
  • Misreporting
  • Unreported landings of bluefin tuna
  • Unauthorized retention of juvenile swordfish
  • Shark finning
  • Bypass DMP
  • DMP integrity
  • Transshipments
  • Lack of at-sea enforcement presence
  • Inaccurate hail times
  • Poor logbook completion
  • Concurrency provisions in licence conditions
  • Conflicts with SARA protected species
  • More engagement with industry
  • More frequent at-sea checks (subject to vessel availability)
  • Air surveillance
  • Routine plant inspections
  • Increased DMP checks
  • Targeted observer coverage
  • Analysis of VMS records in relation to known areas of by-catch concerns
  • Improved intelligence gathering
  • Major case investigation
  • Catch composition analysis
  • Risk assessment
  • Post season analysis
Swordfish Enforcement Hours By Calendar Year
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
552 186.5 692.5 341.5 269.5 723 634.25 751
Note: The hours above are for all Maritimes Region C&P.
Patrol Vessel Days
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
11.33 1.8 10.5 1.4 3.21 6.4 5.8 4.7
Aerial Surveillance Hours
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
22.07 29.42 17.23 22.56 35.85 27.5 45.32 33.77
Swordfish Violations by Issue and Calendar Year - 2005/2012
Issue 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Grand Total
Bluefin exclusion zone         1 1     2
Bypass DMP           1     1
Closed area or time       1         1
Fail to appear for court   1             1
Fail to hail bluefin capture         1       1
Fail to submit logs 1               1
Failed to carry observer when requested 1               1
Fishing in US waters         1       1
Gear marking   1 3 1         5
Inside Gully MPA Zone 1       1         1
Hail out < 6 hours           10     10
Illegal possession of bluefin         1 1     2
Illegal release     2           2
Illegal use of harpoon         1       1
Inaccurate hail   1     2 1 1 2 7
Licensing Issue               1 1
Logbook not accurate         1 2     3
Misreporting     1         1 2
No personal fisher’s registration   4     13 7 7 6 37
No SARA record   1           1 2
Nonfunctional VMS     2 1   1 1 4 9
Removing pectoral fins of tuna by-catch     1           1
Shark finning     1           1
Turtle Dehooking Equipment               1 1
US vessel illegal zone or port entry           1 1   2
US vessel misreporting           1     1
Vessel marking 1               1
Grand Total 3 8 10 4 21 26 10 16 98
Compliance Index – Numbers of Violations per Hour of Enforcement
Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
# Hours 552 186.5 692.5 341.5 269.5 696.5 723 634.25
# Violations 3 8 10 4 21 26 10 16
Compliance Index 0.0054 0.0429 0.0144 0.0117 0.0779 0.0373 0.0138 0.0252
Note: This index is derived from the Fishery Officer time tracking system. Violations include all violations observed by officers and not just those that resulted in an apprehension. This index does not consider severity.
At-Sea Observer Coverage (% Longline Trips Covered)
  2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Observed Trips 15 8 8 12 20 12 13 14
Total Trips (MARFIS) 256 287 231 183 176 207    
Approx. % Coverage 5.9% 2.8% 3.5% 6.6% 11.4% 5.6%    
Note: The number of trips is based on numbers of longline landings taken from DFO’s MARFIS database. There was no coverage on harpoon vessels
SWORDFISH VIOLATIONS BY ACTIONS TAKEN - 2005 TO 2012
DISPOSITION 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 TOTAL
CHARGES LAID 1 5   1 7 4 3 1 22
NO FURTHER ACTION OR STILL PENDING   2 2 1   15 3 2 25
WARNING ISSUED 2 1 8 2 14 7 4 13 51
TOTAL 3 8 10 4 21 26 10 16 98
SWORDFISH CONVICTIONS - 2005 TO 2012
DISPOSITION 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 TOTAL
CASES THAT RESULTED IN FINES 1 5   1 4 2   1 14
NUMBERS OF SWORDFISH CONVICTIONS CASES ACCORDING TO RANGE OF FINES
  2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
<$1000   4     4 1    
$1000 to $5000 1 1       1   1
≥$5000       1        
Note: Some 2011 and 2012 cases are still pending.

10. MONITORING AND EVALUATION

Management of the swordfish fishery relies first and foremost on the best available science advice. Canadian scientists are leading international efforts to learn more about swordfish migration and biology. They are supported in those efforts by Canadian swordfish harvesters, who understand the importance of sustainability for the future of the fisheries.

All fishing activities are monitored through a number of management measures all requiring rigorous data collection. Mandatory reporting requirements for all licence holders include the completion of Commercial and Species at Risk DFO-approved logbooks. Logbooks provide information on the landings, fishing activity (i.e. position, depth, and gear) and discards.

Scientists rely primarily on data derived from the commercial fishery. Canada, as a member of ICCAT, is obligated under ICCAT Tasks 1 and 2 to provide catch, catch-at-size, and effort information on catch and discards annually to ICCAT. CPUE information is calculated and submitted for stock assessments every 2 to 4 years.

As a member of ICCAT Canada provides fishery statistics which are coordinated for research and stock assessments, and used to develop scientific-based management advice to mitigate ecosystem impacts of the fishery. The management objective of ICCAT is Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY).

Hail in and Hail out requirements identify vessel activity and provide for scheduling of dockside monitoring and enforcement personnel. Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) requirements for longline gear allow for the monitoring of compliance with closed areas which protect swordfish broodstock, to prevent by-catch of bluefin tuna, and to protect sensitive areas like the Gully Marine Protected Area on the Scotian Shelf.

Mandatory at-sea observer coverage requirements (10%) and taking biologists aboard on the longline vessels identify catch composition, and encounters with all by-catch species, including SARA-listed species. Industry provides funding for these independent at-sea observers to monitor the fishery. Science uses discard information recorded by observers to determine estimates of discards, dead or alive within and across fisheries.

The at-sea monitoring assists in the monitoring of proper handling and release of identified Species at Risk, including leatherback turtles, and developing protocols to improve disentanglement and de-hooking to enhance post-capture survival. In addition at-sea observers assist in the monitoring the extent of seabird interaction and to ensure that further mitigation measures are not required in the Canadian longline fisheries.

In 2012 the longline fleet was required to hail out using the “Just Talk” system which immediately identified whether an at-sea observer would be required. This change improved the coverage distribution on all vessel sizes. Biweekly reviews were conducted of the geographical distribution of the at-sea observer coverage in comparison to the distribution of the entire fleet. Observer coverage was then shifted as required to ensure that all areas were adequately covered. In addition, if portions of the fleet shifted effort to new fishing areas the level of observer coverage in those areas would be in addition to the general 5% level of coverage.

Dockside Monitoring provides landing information including weight and catch at size.

11. PLAN ENHANCEMENT

The Atlantic longline fleets have been very proactive in introducing measures to protect the productivity of these fisheries as well as the potential impacts on the biodiversity of the ecosystem. The additional enhancements noted below will be evaluated and where viable implemented in order to improve the potential of meeting our objectives under an ecosystem approach to management.

Productivity objectives will be enhanced with an increased use of the Precautionary Approach as Fisheries and Oceans Canada has officially endorsed implementation of the Precautionary Approach. ICCAT work to develop Limit Reference Points for Swordfish is scheduled began in March 2011.

Plans will be developed to monitor and evaluate the amount of lost gear in this fishery. With the use of radio transmitters by the fleet the amount of lost gear is low but if required additional procedures will be developed to minimize lost gear and encourage gear recovery to increase habitat protection through the reduction of disturbed habitat.

Biodiversity impacts are primarily associated with the interactions with by-catch species. The potential impact is particularly important with SARA species such as turtles. With the ongoing replacement of captains and crew the fleet needs to ensure that training in the use of de-hooking gear for turtles is continued and expanded. Previously certification in the use of this gear was conducted by US interests. The Canadian Sea Turtle Network has agreed to conduct training for all licence holders, crew and Fisheries Officers as part of a National certification processes that will reduce delays in the introduction of training.

Data on the effect of fishing activities on SARA-listed species is often limited, and observer data and SARA logbooks will be monitored over time to estimate the contribution that the fishery makes to mortality of these species. This information will be used to evaluate potential research programs to further reduce impacts of by-catch through the promotion of avoidance of by-catch species. Useful tactics may include reduced soak times or the identification of temporal or geographical areas of high by-catch.

DFO has developed a work plan to address incidental by-catch and discarding of non-target and target species in the Canadian large pelagic longline fishery. Continued partnership is encouraged for the improvement and implementation of this plan.

Additional research programs such as tagging using PSAT may increase the knowledge on the biology of the animals which could further improve the management measures in these fisheries.

12. GLOSSARY

Abundance: Number of individuals in a stock or a population.

Biomass: total weight of all individuals in a stock or a population.

By-catch: The unintentional catch of one species when the target is another.

Catch per Unit Effort (CPUE): The amount caught for a given fishing effort. Ex: tons of shrimp per tow, kilograms of fish per hundred longline hooks.

Communal Commercial Licence: Licence issued to Aboriginal organizations pursuant to the Aboriginal Communal Fishing Licences Regulations for participation in the general commercial fishery.

Conservation Harvesting Plan (CHP): Fishing plans submitted by all gear sectors which identify harvesting methods aimed at minimizing the harvest of small fish and by-catch of groundfish.

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC): Committee of experts that assess and designate which wild species are in some danger of disappearing from Canada.

Discards: The portion of a catch thrown back into the water after they are caught in fishing gear.

Dockside Monitoring Program (DMP): A monitoring program that is conducted by a company that has been designated by the Department, which verifies the species composition and landed weight of all fish landed from a commercial fishing vessel.

EBSA (Ecologically and Biologically Significant Area): an EBSA is an area that has particularly high Ecological or Biological Significance, and should receive a greater-than-usual degree of risk aversion in management of activities in order to protect overall ecosystem structure and function within the LOMA.

Ecosystem-Based Management: Taking into account of species interactions and the interdependencies between species and their habitats when making resource management decisions.

Fishing Effort: The quantity of effort using a given fishing gear over a given period of time.

Fishing Mortality: Death caused by fishing, often symbolized by the Mathematical symbol F.

Food, Social and Ceremonial (FSC): A fishery conducted by Aboriginal groups for food, social and ceremonial purposes.

Landings: Quantity of a species caught and landed.

Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY): Largest average catch that can continuously be taken from a stock.

Observer Coverage: When a licence holder is required to carry an officially recognized observer onboard their vessel for a specific period of time to verify the amount of fish caught, the area in which it was caught and the method by which it was caught.

Population: Group of individuals of the same species, forming a breeding unit, and sharing a habitat.

Precautionary Approach: Set of agreed cost-effective measures and actions, including future courses of action, which ensures prudent foresight, reduces or avoids risk to the resource, the environment, and the people, to the extent possible, taking explicitly into account existing uncertainties and the potential consequences of being wrong.

Quota: Portion of the total allowable catch that a unit such as vessel class, country, etc. is permitted to take from a stock in a given period of time.

Recruitment: Amount of individuals becoming part of the exploitable stock e.g. that can be caught in a fishery.

Research Survey: Survey at sea, on a research vessel, allowing scientists to obtain information on the abundance and distribution of various species and/or collect oceanographic data. (Ex: bottom trawl survey, plankton survey, hydroacoustic survey).

Species at Risk Act (SARA): The Act is a federal government commitment to prevent wildlife species from becoming extinct and secure the necessary actions for their recovery. It provides the legal protection of wildlife species and the conservation of their biological diversity.

Spawning Stock: Sexually mature individuals in a stock.

Stock: Describes a population of individuals of one species found in a particular area, and is used as a unit for fisheries management. Ex: NAFO area 4R herring.

Stock Assessment: Scientific evaluation of the status of a species belonging to a same stock within a particular area in a given time period.

Total Allowable Catch (TAC): The amount of catch that may be taken from a stock.

Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK): A cumulative body of knowledge and beliefs handed down through generations by cultural transmission, about the relationship of living beings (including humans) with one another and with their environment.

Tonne: Metric tonne, which is 1000kg or 2204.6lbs.

APPENDIX 1: Summary of EAM Framework As It Applies To The Atlantic Swordfish And Other Tunas - (DRAFT)

This appendix summarizes the framework adopted by DFO Maritimes Region for implementing an Ecosystem Approach to Management (EAM) in all activities for which the department has management responsibility. It also discusses application of the framework more specifically to fisheries management.

Introduction to EAM

An ecosystem approach to managing human activity requires consideration of an activity’s impact on all components of the ecosystem – including its structure, function and overall quality – and not just on the resource being used. It also means accounting for the cumulative effects of multiple uses, and accounting for how environmental forces, such as climate change, might be affecting how we should manage.

Fully implementing EAM will be a large undertaking. Progress will happen in a step-by-step, evolutionary way. In the short-term, the Department will work on implementing EAM in the context of discrete activities, such as fishing. In the long-term, a diversity of ocean users and regulators will need to come together to draw up plans for the integrated management of all ocean activities. First attention will be given to impacts of the highest importance and offering the greatest scope for improvement.

EAM in the Context of Fisheries Management

Consensus is growing within Canada and internationally that the sustainability of fish stocks and fisheries requires an ecosystem approach to management. Traditionally, fisheries management has focused on regulating the impact of fishing on the targeted species. Under an ecosystem approach, managers consider impacts not only on the target species but also on non-target species and habitat. Some of these impacts will be direct, such as impacts on the populations of non target species that suffer mortality incidentally because of interactions with fishing gear. Other impacts may be indirect, such as the effects of mortality on predator-prey relationships. IFMPs will document the main impacts on the ecosystem from fishing activities and outline how these pressures will be managed.

Main Elements of the Framework

EAM is a management planning framework. Management planning requires the specification of objectives (what you want to achieve), of strategies (what you will do to manage human induced pressures so that you can achieve your objectives), and tactics (how you will implement your strategies). These elements are presented in the table overleaf. They are the foundation of the Region’s EAM framework and have been developed to cover the full range of potential impacts on the ecosystem resulting from the various activities managed by the Department. (Not all strategies will be relevant to all activities.)

Table 1A: Framework for an Ecosystem Approach to Management (Resource Management, Maritimes Region)
ATTRIBUTES OBJECTIVES
  • STRATEGIES with associated pressures
MANAGED ACTIVITIES TACTICS
  Groundfish
Fishery
Herring
Fishery
Salmon
Aquaculture
etc.
  CUMULATIVE EFFECTS  
E
X
P
A
N
S
I
O
N

O
F

A
T
T
R
I
B
U
T
E
S

C
O
N
S
I
D
E
R
E
D
air quality
biomass
breeding behavior
community assemblage
genetic structure
habitat structure
organism health
population richness
forage predators
primary production
recruitment
sediment quality
size spectrum
size/age structure
spatial extent
spatial occupancy
‘special places’
‘special species’
trophic structure
water quality
yield
traditional Aboriginal use
efficiency
market access
Productivity: Do not cause unacceptable reduction in productivity so that components can play their role in the functioning of the ecosystem E
X
P
A
N
S
I
O
N

O
F

P
E
S
S
U
R
E
S

C
O
N
S
I
D
E
R
E
D
catch control
effort control
gear specification,
size-based release
area/season closure
ballast water control
recreational fisheries awards
FSC licences
community quota management
transferable quotas
license combining
exempted licenses
multi-licensing
certification data
stabilized fisheries
transparency in ministerial decisions
  • Keep fishing mortality moderate
  • Allow sufficient escapement from exploitation for spawning
  • Limit disturbing activity in important reproductive areas/seasons
  • Control alteration of nutrient concentrations affecting primary production
Biodiversity: Do not cause unacceptable reduction in biodiversity in order to preserve the structure and natural resilience of the ecosystem
  • Control unintended incidental mortality for all species
  • Distribute population component mortality in relation to component biomass
  • Minimize unintended introduction and transmission of invasive species
  • Control introduction and proliferation of disease/pathogens
  • Minimize aquaculture escapes
Habitat: Do not cause unacceptable modification to habitat in order to safeguard both physical and chemical properties of the ecosystem
  • Manage area disturbed of habitat
  • Limit introduction of pollutants
  • Minimize introduction of debris
  • Control noise disturbance
  • Control light disturbance
Culture & Sustenance: Respect Aboriginal and treaty rights to fish
  • Provide access for food, social and ceremonial purposes
Prosperity: Create the circumstances for economically prosperous fisheries
  • Limit inflexibility in policy & licensing among individual enterprises/license holders
  • Minimize instability in access to resources and allocations
  • Limit inability for self-adjustment to overcapacity relative to resource availability
  • Support certification for sustainability

Note: Elements associated with culture, sustenance and prosperity are provisional and at present are being applied only in fisheries management

Objectives

Under EAM, management planning within the Region will be guided by three ecosystem objectives:

It is impractical to pursue conservation in isolation from the economic, social and cultural aspirations of users, and these must be recognized in any plan if it is to be successful. The Region intends to develop a set of economic, social and cultural objectives in the near future that will be common to all activities managed by the Department. In the meantime, Resource Management has developed the following, provisional objectives for application in fisheries management:

Attributes

Attributes are traits of the ecosystem that we value. They are the means by which the broadly stated objectives are given specificity. We might be interested in the condition of many ecosystem attributes. Those listed in the first column of Table 1A are ones that respond to human induced pressures. Examples of attributes of fish populations are yield, breeding behavior, biomass and genetic structure. Examples of ecosystem attributes are population richness, spatial occupancy and trophic structure. There are initiatives also by DFO to identify ecologically or biologically sensitive areas (EBSAs), ecologically or biologically sensitive species (EBSSs), Depleted Species and Degraded Areas. These too can be viewed as attributes of an ecosystem.

Strategies and References

As stated, objectives are very general statements that are translated into practical terms through the definition of strategies. Strategies state “what” will be done to manage pressures from human activities. Common pressures from fishing activities are fishing mortality, incidental mortality, and disturbance of bottom habitat. The strategies aim to control the impact of these pressures on the valued ecosystem attributes.

Strategies define how the pressures imposed by human activities will be managed. For example, what level of fishing mortality is viewed as acceptable? How much bottom habitat disturbance is too much? This is done by using references that define pressure levels that cause unacceptable or undesirable impacts on the attributes. The basis for determining references will vary depending on the state of knowledge. Some may be chosen fairly arbitrarily when knowledge is weak, perhaps based on historical trends. When more is known, their determination may involve evaluation of alternative population/ecosystem dynamics models, ranging from 'single species' to 'full ecosystem' models. There are many gaps in scientific knowledge of ecosystem structure and function, and, no matter how references are determined, they will need revision as the human and environmental factors affecting ecosystems become better understood.

Tactics

Tactics are sometimes referred to as tactical management measures. They are “how” the strategies will be implemented to manage the pressures imposed by fishery activities. Examples of common tactics in fisheries management are total allowable catches, individual or community quotas, seasonal closures, gear restrictions, minimum fish sizes and dockside monitoring.

Monitoring and Evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation are necessary for ensuring management plans are working as intended. Monitoring involves collecting data that will provide information on how well or badly the various features of the plan are performing. Evaluation involves determining whether strategies are being implemented adequately and whether they are doing their job in meeting the plan objectives. Evaluation also involves assessing whether the plan identifies and addresses all the important impacts on the ecosystem.

In fisheries management plans, strategies and references for pressures are likely to remain unchanged for the duration of the plan. However, as new understanding is gained, or when prevailing conditions alter the productivity of the resource, review and evaluation of strategies and references may be warranted. Tactics may be specified for the duration of the plan, or they may require regular intervention to set appropriate levels.

Plan Enhancement

Developing a robust plan that addresses the full range of ecosystem impacts of a given activity will take time and resources, and it is unlikely that data to support all elements will be available at the outset. In recognition of this, management plans should identify the main weaknesses of the plan, including weaknesses in the data needed for setting references for strategies, evaluating pressures relative to the references, and checking compliance with tactics.

Management plans should also outline any data collection that is underway and the research required to make advances, noting the risks if not done.

APPENDIX 2: 2013 Canadian Atlantic Swordfish Longline Conditions

PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION 22.(1) OF THE FISHERY (GENERAL) REGULATIONS, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE SPECIFIED FOR PERSON(S) FISHING UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF SWORDFISH LICENCE NO. , ISSUED IN RESPECT OF THE FISHING VESSEL , VESSEL REGISTRATION NUMBER (HEREINAFTER KNOWN AS THE "VESSEL"), BEING A VESSEL CLASS, .

ISSUE DATE: YYYY/MM/DD

DEFINITIONS

WHEN THE GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY OF AN AREA IN THESE LICENCE CONDITIONS ARE EXPRESSED IN LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE, THOSE POINT REFERENCES ARE BASED ON THE GEODESIC SYSTEM NORTH AMERICAN DATUM 1927 (NAD27), UNLESS EXPRESSED OTHERWISE.

FLANK LENGTH – IS IDENTIFIED IN THE LOGBOOK INSTRUCTIONS

TOTAL LENGTH - IS MEASURED IN A STRAIGHT LINE, ALONG THE SIDE OF THE BODY, FOLLOWING THE CURVE OF THE BODY FROM THE TIP OF LOWER JAW TO FORK OF THE TAIL

DRESSED LENGTH - IS MEASURED IN A STRAIGHT LINE, ALONG THE SIDE OF THE BODY, FOLLOWING THE CURVE OF THE BODY FROM THE LEADING EDGE OF THE CLEITHRUM TO THE ANTERIOR ORIGIN OF THE CAUDAL KEEL.

DRESSED WEIGHT - FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS LICENCE CONDITION, IS DEFINED AS HEAD OFF, TAIL OFF AND GUTTED.

FISHING SEASON AND AREAS

  1. SUBJECT TO ANY VARIATION ORDER PRESENTLY IN EFFECT OR ANY VARIATION ORDER WHICH MAY BE ISSUED IN THE FUTURE, THESE CONDITIONS OF LICENCE ARE VALID FROM DATE OF ISSUANCE AND ENDING MARCH 31, 2014.

  2. (A) SUBJECT TO ITEMS 2(B), 2(C), 2(D) AND 2(E), THESE CONDITIONS OF LICENCE ARE VALID IN THE ATLANTIC OCEAN, NORTH OF 5º00'00''NORTH LATITUDE AND WEST OF 54º30'00''WEST LONGITUDE, AND INSIDE A CENTRAL NORTH ATLANTIC AREA DEFINED AS NORTH OF 10º00'00''NORTH LATITUDE AND BETWEEN 54º30'00''WEST LONGITUDE AND 30º00'00''WEST LONGITUDE, HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS “ICCAT AREA 3”.

    (b) NO PERSON SHALL FISH IN FISHING ZONES 1 AND 2 OF CANADA.

    (c) NO PERSON SHALL FISH WITH LONGLINE GEAR INSIDE THAT PORTION OF DIVISIONS 4X AND 5Z KNOWN AS THE HELL HOLE, DEFINED AS THE AREA ENCLOSED BY STRAIGHT LINES JOINING THE FOLLOWING POINTS IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE LISTED DURING THE PERIOD JULY 1 TO NOVEMBER 30:

    POINT
    1.
    2.
    3.
    4.
    5.
    LATITUDE (N)
    42°06'00"
    42°06'00"
    41°55'48"
    41°55'48"
    42°06'00"
    LONGITUDE (W)
    65°41'24''
    65°27'30''
    65°27'30''
    65°41'24''
    65°41'24''

    (d) NO PERSON SHALL FISH IN THAT PORTION OF DIVISIONS 4WX COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE BLUEFIN EXCLUSION ZONE ENCLOSED BY THE COASTLINE OF NOVA SCOTIA AND STRAIGHT LINES JOINING THE FOLLOWING POINTS IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE LISTED DURING THE PERIOD AUGUST 1 TO DECEMBER 31 EACH YEAR:

    POINT
    1.
    2.
    3.
    4.
    LATITUDE (N)
    43°23'18''
    43°10'48'''
    44°42'00''
    45°00'00''
    LONGITUDE (W)
    65°37'10'' (CAPE SABLE NS)
    65°37'10''
    62°00'00''
    62°00'00'' (LISCOMB POINT)

    (e) NO PERSON SHALL FISH IN THE WATERS OF DIVISION 4VSW (ZONE 1 OF THE GULLY MARINE PROTECTED AREA) ENCLOSED BY RHUMB LINES (SIMILAR TO STRAIGHT LINES PLOTTED ON A NAUTICAL CHART) JOINING THE FOLLOWING POINTS IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE LISTED, DURING THE PERIOD JANUARY 1 TO DECEMBER 31 EACH YEAR:

    POINT
    1.
    2.
    3.
    4.
    5.
    6.
    7.
    8.
    9.
    10.
    11.
    12.
    13.
    14.
    15.
    16.
    17.
    18.
    19.
    20.
    21.
    22.
    23.
    24.
    25.
    26.
    LATITUDE (N)
    44°07'06"
    44°05'28"
    44°00'18"
    43°56'19"
    43°54'13"
    43°53'13"
    43°50'52"
    43°52'07"
    43°52'55"
    43°42'00"
    43°42'00"
    43°46'20"
    43°46'38"
    43°49'40"
    43°49'56"
    43°52'20"
    43°53'59"
    43°55'50"
    43°57'53"
    43°58'56"
    43°58'56"
    44°00'38"
    44°02'02"
    44°04'51"
    44°06'29"
    44°07'06"
    LONGITUDE (W)
    59°08'14"
    59°04'20"
    58°57'54"
    58°57'20"
    58°52'56"
    58°51'52"
    58°51'51"
    58°50'45"
    58°48'00"
    58°48'00"
    59°02'16"
    58°59'12"
    59°00'43"
    59°01'07"
    58°59'52"
    58°59'48"
    59°01'52"
    59°02'10"
    59°01'13"
    59°02'40"
    59°00'27"
    59°01'34"
    59°03'31"
    59°05'02"
    59°08'14"
    59°08'14"

NOTE: WHEN THE GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY OF THE GULLY MARINE PROTECTED AREA IS EXPRESSED IN LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE, THOSE POINT REFERENCES ARE BASED ON THE GEODESIC SYSTEM NORTH AMERICAN DATUM 1983 (NAD83).

  1. WHEN FISHING WITH AUTHORIZED GEAR OTHER THAN LONGLINE IN AREAS CLOSED TO THE USE OF LONGLINE GEAR, OR WHEN TRANSITING THROUGH AREAS CLOSED TO THE USE OF LONGLINE GEAR, ALL LONGLINE GEAR ON BOARD THE VESSEL MUST BE UNCLIPPED AND ALL REMOVABLE COMPONENTS STOWED BELOW DECK OR OTHERWISE REMOVED FROM THE PLACE WHERE IT IS NORMALLY USED FOR FISHING, OR PLACED WHERE IT IS NOT READILY AVAILABLE FOR FISHING AND COVERED AND TIED. FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS LICENCE CONDITION, LONGLINE GEAR INCLUDES GANGIONS, BUOY DROP LINES, HOOKS, SNAPS AND MAINLINE. THE MAINLINE IS CONSIDERED STOWED WHEN IT IS ON THE SPOOL.

    QUOTA

  2. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS ONLY AUTHORIZED TO CATCH AND RETAIN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF INDIVIDUAL QUOTA FOR SWORDFISH IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE 1A THAT MAY BE AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME.

    SPECIES AND BYCATCH

  3. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS AUTHORIZED TO RETAIN SWORDFISH AND TUNA SPECIES (ALBACORE, BIGEYE AND YELLOWFIN) OTHER THAN BLUEFIN TUNA PROVIDED ALL TUNA LANDED HAVE AT LEAST ONE PECTORAL FIN ATTACHED TO THE FISH.

  4. (I) MEASURE IS DEFINED FOR THE PURPOSE OF THESE CONDITIONS AS: TOTAL LENGTH IS MEASURED IN A STRAIGHT LINE, ALONG THE SIDE OF THE BODY, FOLLOWING THE CURVE OF THE BODY FROM THE TIP OF LOWER JAW TO FORK OF THE TAIL; AND DRESSED LENGTH IS MEASURED IN A STRAIGHT LINE, ALONG THE SIDE OF THE BODY, FOLLOWING THE CURVE OF THE BODY FROM THE LEADING EDGE OF THE CLEITHRUM TO THE ANTERIOR ORIGIN OF THE CAUDAL KEEL.

    (II) SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION 6(III) NO PERSON SHALL BE IN POSSESSION OF ANY SWORDFISH THAT IS LESS THAN 125CM IN LENGTH. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS AUTHORIZED TO RETAIN DRESSED SWORDFISH OF 79CM OR GREATER IN LENGTH OR IF IT WEIGHS 17.2 KILOGRAMS (38 POUNDS) OR GREATER WHEN DRESSED.

    (III) SUBSECTION 6(II) DOES NOT APPLY WHERE (A) THE CATCHING OF SWORDFISH LESS THAN 125CM IN TOTAL LENGTH OR 79 CM IN DRESSED LENGTH IS INCIDENTAL TO THE CATCHING OF SWORDFISH GREATER THAN 125CM IN TOTAL LENGTH OR 79 CM IN DRESSED LENGTH; AND (B) THE NUMBER OF SWORDFISH LESS THAN 125CM IN TOTAL LENGTH OR 79 CM IN DRESSED LENGTH THAT ARE RETAINED DURING ANY ONE FISHING TRIP DOES NOT EXCEED 15% OF THE NUMBER OF SWORDFISH GREATER THAN 125CM IN TOTAL LENGTH OR 79 CM IN DRESSED LENGTH RETAINED DURING THE SAME FISHING TRIP.

  5. WHEN FISHING THIS LICENCE WITH PELAGIC LONGLINE GEAR, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS AUTHORIZED TO RETAIN AN INCIDENTAL CATCH OF SHARK, EXCEPT WHITE SHARK (CARCHARODON CARCHARIAS). THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR MAY REMOVE FINS FROM ANY SHARK THAT IS RETAINED. HOWEVER, THE WEIGHT OF ANY FINS SO REMOVED CANNOT EXCEED 5% OF THE WEIGHT OF THE CORRESPONDING DRESSED SHARK CARCASSES THAT ARE RETAINED. BOTH SHARK FINS AND CARCASSES MUST BE OFFLOADED AT THE SAME TIME, BUT WEIGHED SEPARATELY. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO LAND ALL OF THE SHARK CATCH WITH THE CAUDAL PEDUNCLE INCLUDING THE LATERAL RIDGE AND THE PELVIC FINS (THE PAIRED FINS ADJACENT TO THE CLOACA OR "VENT") LEFT INTACT AND ATTACHED TO THE CARCASS. NO PERSON SHALL UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES RETURN, RELEASE OR DISCARD A SHARK CARCASS TO THE WATER.

  6. SUBJECT TO ANY ITEMS LISTED HEREIN REGARDING THE RETENTION OR RELEASE OF SPECIFIC SPECIES OR GROUPS OF SPECIES, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS AUTHORIZED TO RETAIN AN INCIDENTAL CATCH OF OTHER PELAGIC FINFISH SPECIES, EXCLUDING THOSE SPECIES FOR WHICH OTHER COMMERCIAL LICENCES EXIST OR SPECIES FOR WHICH OTHER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN PLACE (E.G. UNDER THE SPECIES AT RISK ACT, OR ICCAT REQUIREMENTS). PELAGIC SPECIES PERMITTED TO BE RETAINED UNDER THIS ITEM INCLUDE MAHI-MAHI/DOLPHINFISH (CORYPHAENA HIPPURUS), WHITE MARLIN (TETRAPTURUS ALBIDUS), WAHOO (ACANTHOCYBIUM SOLANDRI), OPAH (LAMPRIDAE SPP.), AND OTHER SPECIES TRADITIONALLY RETAINED IN THIS FISHERY. HOWEVER, ALL LIVE MARLIN SHALL BE RELEASED FORTHWITH TO THE PLACE FROM WHICH IT WAS TAKEN IN A MANNER THAT CAUSES IT THE LEAST HARM.

  7. (A) SUBJECT TO 9(B), NO PERSON SHALL FISH A SWORDFISH LONGLINE LICENCE CONCURRENTLY WITH A BLUEFIN LICENCE.

    WHILE FISHING UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THIS LICENCE USING HARPOON GEAR ONLY, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS AUTHORIZED TO FISH CONCURRENTLY WITH A BLUEFIN TUNA LICENCE. WHEN FISHING THIS LICENCE CONCURRENTLY WITH A BLUEFIN LICENCE, ALL LONGLINE GEAR SHALL BE REMOVED PRIOR TO LEAVING PORT FOR A FISHING TRIP. THE PRESENCE OF ANY LONGLINE GEAR ON BOARD THE VESSEL WILL CONSTITUTE A SWORDFISH LONGLINE FISHING TRIP, AND THEREFORE IT WILL BE PROHIBITED TO FISH THIS LICENCE CONCURRENTLY WITH A BLUEFIN LICENCE.

    LICENCES ARE CONSIDERED TO BE FISHED CONCURRENTLY WHEN THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR HAS HAILED OUT ON MORE THAN ONE LICENCE PRIOR TO COMMENCING A FISHING TRIP.

  8. (A) SUBJECT TO ITEMS 9, 10(B), AND 11, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR WHO POSSESSES A VALID BLUEFIN TUNA LICENCE, WITH ATTACHED CONDITIONS OF LICENCE AND VALID BLUEFIN TUNA TAGS, IS AUTHORIZED TO FISH THEIR BLUEFIN TUNA LICENCE CONCURRENTLY WITH THEIR SWORDFISH LONGLINE LICENCE WHEN HARPOONING ONLY IN ANY AREAS AUTHORIZED FOR BOTH BLUEFIN AND SWORDFISH UNDER THE TWO LICENCES.

    THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR CONFIRMS POSSESSION OF A VALID TUNA LICENCE, CONDITION AND TAGS:

    BLUEFIN TUNA LICENCE ISSUED IN RESPECT OF VESSEL: VRN:

    (b) ONLY THE BLUEFIN TUNA TAGS ISSUED TO AND LISTED UNDER THE CONDITIONS OF BLUEFIN TUNA LICENCE ATTACHED TO THIS LICENCE, ARE TO BE USED ON CONCURRENT TRIPS, AND ARE VALID TO DECEMBER 31, 2013.

    WHEN BLUEFIN TUNA HAS BEEN CAUGHT WHILE FISHING CONCURRENTLY, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR MUST ADHERE TO ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THEIR 2013 BLUEFIN TUNA LICENCE AND CONDITIONS, INCLUDING FOLLOWING ALL HAILING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

  9. WHEN USING HARPOON GEAR TO FISH UNDER THIS LICENCE, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS AUTHORIZED TO DIRECT FOR AND RETAIN SWORDFISH ONLY.

    GEAR

  10. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS AUTHORIZED TO USE HARPOON AND PELAGIC LONGLINE GEAR.

  11. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS ONLY AUTHORIZED TO USE CORRODIBLE, CIRCLE HOOKS.

    HAIL OUT REQUIREMENTS AND AT-SEA OBSERVER COVERAGE

  12. (A) THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A HAIL-OUT REFERENCE NUMBER FROM THE FISHERIES AND OCEANS (DFO) "JUST TALK" HAIL-OUT SYSTEM (1-866-665-4451 FOR ENGLISH OR 1-866-665-4452 FOR FRENCH) PRIOR TO DEPARTURE FOR ANY FISHING TRIP. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR WILL BE ISSUED A HAIL-OUT REFERENCE NUMBER BY THE "JUST TALK" SYSTEM CONFIRMING THAT THE HAIL HAS BEEN RECEIVED. THIS NUMBER IS TO BE ENTERED ON THE SWORDFISH/SHARK LONGLINE AND TROLLING MONITORING DOCUMENT IN THE APPROPRIATE SPACE PROVIDED.

    (b) PURSUANT TO ITEM 14(A), THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR SHALL CALL THE JUST TALK HAIL-OUT SYTEM AT LEAST SIX (6) HOURS PRIOR TO DEPARTURE FOR THE FIRST FISHING TRIP.

    (c) WHEN THE START OF A FISHING TRIP IS DELAYED FOR ANY REASON BY TWELVE (12) HOURS OR MORE FROM THE TIME STATED IN THE HAIL, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR MUST CALL THE "JUST TALK" SYSTEM TO CANCEL THE HAIL AND OBTAIN A NEW HAIL-OUT REFERENCE NUMBER.

    (d) THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR MAY BE REQUIRED TO HAVE AN OBSERVER (AT SEA) ON BOARD THE VESSEL DURING ANY FISHING TRIP WHETHER OR NOT AN ELECTRONIC VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS) IS INSTALLED ON THE VESSEL. THE HAIL-OUT SYSTEM WILL NOTIFY THE OPERATOR OF THE LICENCE WHEN AN AT-SEA OBSERVER IS REQUIRED. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE AT-SEA OBSERVER COMPANY TO ARRANGE TO TAKE AN AT-SEA OBSERVER FOR THAT FISHING TRIP. WHEN THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO TAKE AN OBSERVER (AT-SEA) NO PERSON SHALL DEPART FROM PORT FOR A FISHING TRIP UNTIL THE AT-SEA OBSERVER IS ON BOARD THE VESSEL.

    (e) FOR THE PURPOSE OF THESE LICENCE CONDITIONS, AN AT-SEA OBSERVER IS AN INDIVIDUAL OR CORPORATION DESIGNATED AS AN AT-SEA OBSERVER BY THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR-GENERAL FOR THE MARITIMES REGION PURSUANT TO THE FISHERY (GENERAL) REGULATIONS. BEFORE THE COMMENCEMENT OF A FISHING TRIP THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR SHALL HAVE ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH AN AT-SEA OBSERVER COMPANY.

    DFO VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS)

  13. A) SUBJECT TO ITEM 15B THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO HAVE AN APPROVED VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS) AUTHORIZED BY DFO ON THE VESSEL AUTHORIZED TO FISH UNDER THIS LICENCE.

    (b) IF THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS FISHING THIS LICENCE WITH HARPOON GEAR ONLY THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS). THE PRESENCE OF ANY LONGLINE

    GEAR ON BOARD THE VESSEL WILL CONSTITUTE A LONGLINE TRIP, IE VMS WILL BE MANDATORY.

  14. THE VESSEL MUST BE FITTED WITH THE APPROVED VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS) PROVIDING DATA TO THE DFO VESSEL MONITORING OPERATIONS CENTRE.

  15. WHERE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITEM 15 AN ELECTRONIC VMS IS IN USE ON THE VESSEL, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR SHALL ENSURE THE SYSTEM IS FULLY OPERATIONAL, TURNED ON AND IN USE FROM THE TIME THE VESSEL LEAVES PORT UNTIL IT RETURNS TO PORT AND ALL OF THE FISH ON BOARD THE VESSEL IS OFFLOADED.

  16. THE LICENCE HOLDER / OPERATOR OF THE VESSEL AUTHORIZED TO USE AN ELECTRONIC VMS, SHALL DURING ANY FISHING TRIP, IMMEDIATELY CEASE ALL FISHING ACTIVITY SHOULD ANY OR ALL OF THIS EQUIPMENT BECOME INOPERATIVE, IS TURNED OFF OR MALFUNCTION IN ANY WAY. THE LICENCE HOLDER / OPERATOR OF THE VESSEL SHALL NOT RESUME ANY FISHING ACTIVITY WHILE THE ELECTRONIC VMS IS INOPERATIVE, TURNED OFF OR IS MALFUNCTIONING IN ANY WAY. THE LICENCE HOLDER / OPERATOR SHALL NOTIFY DFO OF ANY SUCH MALFUNCTION BY TELEPHONE AT (709) 772-2083 AND PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION:

    1. NAME OF MASTER,
    2. NAME OF VESSEL AND VESSEL REGISTRATION NUMBER,
    3. DATE AND TIME OF SAILING,
    4. PRT OF LANDING, AND
    5. TELEPHONE NUMBER WHERE THE MASTER CAN BE REACHED.

  17. FISHING IS ONLY AUTHORIZED WHEN THE ELECTRONIC VMS IS FUNCTIONAL, FULLY OPERATIONAL AND TURNED ON OR WHEN THE LICENCE HOLDER / OPERATOR RECIEVES APPROVAL FROM DFO TO RESUME FISHING.

  18. WHERE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITEM 15, AN ELECTRONIC VMS IS USED ON THE VESSEL DURING ANY FISHING TRIP UNDER THIS LICENCE AND CONDITIONS, NO PERSON SHALL:

    1. ALTER OR TAMPER WITH THAT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM;
    2. DESTROY, DISPOSE OF OR REMOVE THE ELECTRONIC MONITORING SYSTEM OR ASSOCIATED ELECTRONIC RECORDS OR STORAGE MEDIA;
    3. EMIT, OR CAUSE TO BE EMITTED, ANY ELECTRONIC OR ELECTRIC SIGNAL THAT RENDERS THE EQUIPMENT OR SYSTEM INOPERATIVE OR INACCURATE; OR
    4. INTERFERE WITH OR BLOCK ANY SIGNALS REQUIRED BY THE ELECTRONIC MONITORING SYSTEM TO GATHER, RECORD, OR TRANSMIT INFORMATION;
    5. TURN OFF THE VMS FROM THE TIME THE VESSEL LEAVES PORT UNTIL ALL OF THE FISH ON BOARD THE VESSEL IS OFFLOADED.

  19. FOR EACH VMS TRANSPONDER OR SERVICE PROVIDER INITIATION, REPLACEMENT, TRANSFER OR RESUMPTION, A COMPLETED (DFO) NATIONAL VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS) FORM MUST BE FORWARDED BY FAX TO 709-772-5787 AT LEAST TWO FULL BUSINESS DAYS BEFORE COMMENCING FISHING OPERATIONS.

  20. THE VMS TRANSPONDER ON THE VESSEL MUST REPORT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION AUTOMATICALLY TO DFO EACH HOUR:

    • VMS IDENTIFICATION NUMBER AND COMMUNICATION SERVICE PROVIDER (CSP) (NAME & CSP NUMBER)
    • GEOGRAPHIC POSITION (LATITUDE/LONGITUDE) OF THE VESSEL, AND
    • DATE AND TIME CORRESPONDING TO THE ABOVE POSITION.

  21. SHOULD THE VMS EQUIPMENT OR SYSTEM BECOME INOPERATIVE OR MALFUNCTION IN ANY WAY WHILE A VESSEL IS FISHING IN THE NAFO REGULATORY AREA, IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 18 ABOVE, THAT VESSEL MUST CEASE FISHING AND RETURN TO CANADIAN FISHERIES WATERS.

  22. WHERE A VESSEL CARRIES TWO OR MORE APPROVED VMS UNITS ON BOARD, ONE MUST BE IDENTIFIED AS THE PRIMARY VMS UNIT, AND ALL OTHER UNITS MUST BE REGISTERED WITH DFO AS BACKUP UNITS. IN THE EVENT OF FAILURE OF THE PRIMARY UNIT, IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR TO IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY DFO THAT A BACK-UP UNIT IS BEING ACTIVATED AND SUBSEQUENTLY ENSURE IT IS FULLY OPERATIONAL BEFORE RESUMING FISHING ACTIVITY.

    REPORTING AND HAIL IN REQUIREMENTS

  23. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A HAIL-IN REFERENCE NUMBER PRIOR TO LANDING BY CALLING A MARITIMES REGION (SCOTIA-FUNDY FISHERIES) DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY THAT HAS BEEN DESIGNATED BY FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA. THE HAIL-IN REFERENCE NUMBER MUST BE ENTERED ON THE SWORDFISH/SHARK LONGLINE AND TROLLING MONITORING DOCUMENT IN THE APPROPRIATE SPACE PROVIDED.

  24. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO HAIL TO A DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY THAT HAS BEEN DESIGNATED BY THE DEPARTMENT AT LEAST THREE (3) HOURS PRIOR TO RETURNING TO PORT, WHETHER OR NOT ANY FISH HAS BEEN CAUGHT. THE HAIL MUST INCLUDE THE FULL NAME OF THE PERSON MAKING THE HAIL, THE VESSEL NAME, THE VESSEL REGISTRATION NUMBER, THE CAPTAIN’S NAME, THE SWORDFISH LICENCE NUMBER, THE HAIL OUT CONFIRMATION NUMBER, THE SERIAL NUMBER OF THE SWORDFISH/SHARK LONGLINE AND TROLLING MONITORING DOCUMENT PAGE THAT IS USED ON THAT FISHING TRIP, THE ACCURATE DRESSED WEIGHT OF ALL SPECIES OF FISH IN POUNDS BY SPECIES AND THE NUMBER OF FISH BY SPECIES ON BOARD THE VESSEL, THE NAFO DIVISION OR OTHER WATERS WHERE THE FISH WERE TAKEN, THE DATE AND ESTIMATED LOCAL TIME OF ARRIVAL (USING THE 24 HOUR SYSTEM), THE PLACE WHERE THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR SHALL LAND (OFFLOAD) THE FISH, THE BUYER OF THE FISH IF KNOWN, THE DATE AND ESTIMATED LOCAL TIME OF OFFLOADING (USING THE 24 HOUR SYSTEM), AND REPORT THE PRESENCE OF AN AT-SEA OBSERVER IF ONE IS ON BOARD.

  25. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR WILL BE ISSUED A CONFIRMATION NUMBER BY THE DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY CONFIRMING THAT THE HAIL HAS BEEN RECEIVED. THIS NUMBER IS TO BE ENTERED ON THE SWORDFISH/SHARK LONGLINE AND TROLLING MONITORING DOCUMENT IN THE APPROPRIATE SPACE PROVIDED.

    OFFLOADING

  26. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO HAVE THE WEIGHT AND SPECIES OF FISH LANDED FROM THE VESSEL VERIFIED BY AN OBSERVER (DOCKSIDE). THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR OR MASTER OF THE VESSEL IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE VESSEL AND THE FISHING RECORDS TO THE ASSIGNED OBSERVER (DOCKSIDE). FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS LICENCE CONDITION, AN OBSERVER (DOCKSIDE) IS AN INDIVIDUAL OR CORPORATION DESIGNATED AS AN OBSERVER BY THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR-GENERAL FOR THE MARITIMES REGION PURSUANT TO SUBSECTIONS 39. (1) AND 39.1 (1) OF THE FISHERY (GENERAL) REGULATIONS AND WHO HAS BEEN APPOINTED TO MONITOR THE LANDING OF FISH AND TO VERIFY THE WEIGHT AND SPECIES OF FISH CAUGHT AND RETAINED.

  27. NO PERSON SHALL LAND (OFFLOAD) ANY FISH OR PORTIONS THEREOF FROM THE VESSEL UNLESS ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE ADHERED TO:

    1. THE OBSERVER(S) (DOCKSIDE) IS PRESENT ONBOARD THE VESSEL TO VERIFY THE SWORDFISH/SHARK LONGLINE AND TROLLING MONITORING DOCUMENT IS FULLY COMPLETED BY THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR AND VERIFY THE WEIGHT AND SPECIES OF THE CATCH IN THE VESSEL;
    2. ALL FISH LANDED MUST BE WEIGHED ON AN ACCURATE CALIBRATED SCALE AT DOCKSIDE POINT OF LANDING (OFFLOADING);
    3. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO ENSURE THAT THE OBSERVER(S) (DOCKSIDE) IS ABLE TO MAINTAIN VISUAL CONTINUITY OF THE FISH BEING REMOVED FROM THE VESSEL AT THE DOCKSIDE POINT OF LANDING (OFFLOADING); AND
    4. AN ACCURATE WEIGHT IS SUPPLIED TO THE DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY IMMEDIATELY AFTER LANDING (OFFLOADING) THE FISH FROM THE VESSEL.

  28. PURSUANT TO SECTION 61 OF THE FISHERIES ACT, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE INFORMATION REGARDING THE FISHING ACTIVITIES IN THE SWORDFISH/SHARK LONGLINE AND TROLLING MONITORING DOCUMENT (THE VERSION ANNOTATED REVISED 2003) (“DOCUMENT”) AND TALLY SHEET DOCUMENT AVAILABLE FROM FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THE DOCUMENT, AND SUPPLY THE OBSERVER (DOCKSIDE) AT THE END OF EACH FISHING TRIP WITH AN ORIGINAL COPY OF ALL MONITORING DOCUMENTS. A COMPLETED SWORDFISH, TUNA, AND SHARK RECEIVING TALLY MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH THIS SWORDFISH/SHARK LONGLINE AND TROLLING MONITORING DOCUMENT FOR EACH TRIP.

  29. IF THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS LANDING AT A PORT OUTSIDE OF THE MARITIMES REGION, ALL DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED IN SECTION 30 ABOVE MUST BE SUPPLIED BY MAIL TO A MARITIMES REGION DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY WITHIN 30 DAYS OF LANDING AND OFFLOADING.

    SPECIES AT RISK ACT

  30. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOVERY STRATEGY FOR THE LEATHERBACK TURTLE (DERMOCHELYS CORIACEA) IN ATLANTIC CANADA, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS PERMITTED TO CARRY OUT FISHING ACTIVITIES AUTHORIZED UNDER THE FISHERIES ACT THAT MAY INCIDENTALLY KILL, HARM, HARASS, CAPTURE OR TAKE LEATHERBACK TURTLES, AS PER SUBSECTION 83(4) OF THE SPECIES AT RISK ACT (SARA).

    THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY:

    1. THIS PERMISSION IS ONLY VALID WHILE FISHING IS CONDUCTED UNDER THIS LICENCE ISSUED TO YOU UNDER THE FISHERIES ACT IN ALL AUTHORIZED WATERS UNDER THIS LICENCE.
    2. ) THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO ENSURE THAT, WHILE THE FISHING ACTIVITIES ARE CONDUCTED, EVERY PERSON ON BOARD THE VESSEL WHO CAPTURES A LEATHERBACK TURTLE INCIDENTALLY FORTHWITH RETURNS IT TO THE PLACE FROM WHICH IT WAS TAKEN, AND WHERE IT IS ALIVE, IN A MANNER THAT CAUSES IT THE LEAST HARM.
    3. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE INFORMATION REGARDING INTERACTIONS WITH SPECIES AT RISK WHILE CONDUCTING FISHING OPERATIONS, IN THE SARA MONITORING DOCUMENT AVAILABLE FROM FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED WITH THE DOCUMENT AND SUPPLY THE OBSERVER (DOCKSIDE) AT THE END OF EACH FISHING TRIP WITH A COPY OF ALL MONITORING DOCUMENTS.

  31. IF LANDING AT A PORT OUTSIDE OF THE MARITIMES REGION, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE SARA MONITORING DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED WITH THE DOCUMENT AND SUPPLY A COPY OF ALL MONITORING DOCUMENTS BY MAIL TO A MARITIMES REGION DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY WITHIN 30 DAYS OF LANDING AND OFFLOADING.

    DEHOOKING AND DISENTANGLEMENT GEAR

  32. IF THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS FISHING THIS LICENCE WITH HARPOON GEAR ONLY AND NO LONGLINE GEAR ONBOARD THE VESSEL THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR DEHOOKING/DISENTANGLEMENT EQUIPMENT TO BE ON BOARD. THE PRESENCE OF ANY LONGLINE GEAR ON BOARD THE VESSEL WILL CONSTITUTE A LONGLINE TRIP, IE DEHOOKING/DISENTANGLEMENT EQUIPMENT WILL BE MANDATORY.

  33. DEHOOKING/DISENTANGLEMENT EQUIPMENT MUST BE CARRIED ONBOARD THE VESSEL AT ALL TIMES WHEN FISHING USING LONGLINE GEAR TO BE USED IN THE SAFE HANDLING AND RELEASE OF SEA TURTLES AND OTHER INCIDENTALLY CAUGHT SPECIES. THE LIST OF EQUIPMENT INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO: A LONG HANDLED DEHOOKING DEVICE, A SHORT HANDLED DEHOOKING DEVICE WITH BITE BLOCKER, A DIP-NET, LONG HANDLED LINE CUTTER, BOLT CUTTER AND MONOFILAMENT CUTTER AND A SEA TURTLE SPECIES IDENTIFICATION CHART.

  34. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR MUST HOLD A CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE OR THE CANADIAN SEA TURTLE NETWORK IDENTIFYING THAT THEY HAVE SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED A DEHOOKING/DISENTANGLEMENT COURSE.

    GENERAL

  35. WHILE FISHING UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THIS LICENCE, NO PERSON ONBOARD THE VESSEL SHALL PARTICIPATE IN RECREATIONAL FISHING OF ANY KIND.

  36. THE LICENCE HOLDER REQUESTED, RECEIVED AND UNDERSTOOD THESE LICENCE CONDITIONS ISSUED IN ENGLISH.

  37. THE LICENCE HOLDER IS REQUIRED TO ATTACH THESE LICENCE CONDITIONS TO THE 2013/2014 SWORDFISH LICENCE.

NOTE: FOR INFORMATION REGARDING AREAS OPEN OR CLOSED TO FISHING, VARIATION ORDERS AND FOR CLARIFICATION OF ANY POINTS CONTAINED IN THIS LICENCE CONDITION, CONTACT THE FOLLOWING; MARITIMES REGION - CONTACT THE LOCAL FISHERY OFFICER;
NEWFOUNDLAND REGION - CONTACT THE NEAREST CONSERVATION AND PROTECTION OFFICE, DFO.
DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANIES ARE NOT AGENTS OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA. DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANIES ARE NOT AUTHORIZED, ON BEHALF OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA, TO PROVIDE ANY INFORMATION TO FISHERS.

WHILE FISHING UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THIS LICENCE, ALL LICENCE HOLDERS/OPERATORS SHOULD ADHERE TO THE “CODE OF CONDUCT FOR RESPONSIBLE SEA TURTLE HANDLING AND MITIGATIVE MEASURES” AS PROVIDED BY THE NOVA SCOTIA SWORDFISHERMEN’S ASSOCIATION. THIS INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING MEASURES:

  1. AREAS OF HIGH SEA TURTLE CAPTURE RATES SHOULD BE AVOIDED.
  2. SEA TURTLE SPECIES IDENTIFICATION CHART AND SEA TURTLE HANDLING GUIDELINES SHOULD BE CARRIED ON EACH TRIP.
  3. WHERE WEATHER AND CIRCUMSTANCES PERMIT, DE-HOOK OR DISENTANGLE ALL SEA TURTLES AND OTHER INCIDENTALLY CAUGHT SPECIES. NOTE THAT A TURTLE’S REFLEX IS TO TWIST ITSELF INTO THE ROPE.
  4. BRING THE ANIMAL ALONG THE VESSEL OR WHERE POSSIBLE, BRING A TURTLE ON BOARD THE VESSEL USING A DIP NET (DO NOT RETRIEVE USING A GAFF OR FISHING LINE). REMOVE HOOK FROM ANIMAL USING THE DEHOOKING DEVICES. IF IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO REMOVE THE HOOK, CUT THE LINE AS CLOSE TO THE HOOK AS POSSIBLE. WHERE POSSIBLE, REMOVE ALL GEAR ATTACHED TO THE ANIMAL PRIOR TO RELEASE.
  5. RELEASE ACTIVE TURTLES HEAD FIRST INTO THE WATER WITH THE VESSEL IN A STATIONARY POSITION.

APPENDIX 3: 2013 Swordfish Harpoon A IQ Condition

PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION 22.(1) OF THE FISHERY (GENERAL) REGULATIONS, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE SPECIFIED FOR PERSON(S) FISHING UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF SWORDFISH LICENCE NO. ISSUED IN RESPECT OF THE FISHING VESSEL VESSEL REGISTRATION NUMBER , BEING A VESSEL CLASS ^VESSEL.

ISSUE DATE: YYYY/MM/DD

DEFINITIONS:

DRESSED WEIGHT - FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS LICENCE CONDITION, DRESSED WEIGHT MEANS HEAD OFF, TAIL OFF AND GUTTED.

FISHING SEASON AND AREAS

  1. SUBJECT TO ANY VARIATION ORDERS THAT ARE PRESENTLY IN EFFECT OR ANY VARIATION ORDER WHICH MAY BE ISSUED IN THE FUTURE, THESE LICENCE CONDITIONS ARE VALID FROM THE DATE OF ISSUANCE AND ENDING ON DECEMBER 31, 2013.

  2. THESE LICENCE CONDITIONS ARE VALID IN SUBAREAS 3, 4 AND 5 OF THE NAFO CONVENTION AREA, EXCLUDING FISHING ZONES 1 AND 2 OF CANADA.

  3. (A) NO PERSON SHALL BE AUTHORIZED TO FISH AFTER SEPTEMBER 1 EACH YEAR IN THE WATERS ENCLOSED BY THE COASTLINE OF NOVA SCOTIA AND STRAIGHT LINES JOINING THE FOLLOWING POINTS IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE LISTED:

    POINT
    1.
    2.
    3.
    4.
    5.
    LATITUDE (N)
    43°23’18”
    43°12’
    43°11’
    44°13’
    45°00’
    LONGITUDE (W)'
    65°37’10” (CAPE SABLE NS)
    65°36’
    63°24’
    62°00’
    62°00’ (LISCOMB POINT NS)

    (B) NO PERSON SHALL BE AUTHORIZED TO FISH IN THE WATERS OF DIVISION 4VSW (ZONE 1 OF THE GULLY MARINE PROTECTED AREA) ENCLOSED BY RHUMB LINES (SIMILAR TO STRAIGHT LINES PLOTTED ON A NAUTICAL CHART) JOINING THE FOLLOWING POINTS IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE LISTED, DURING THE PERIOD JANUARY 1 TO DECEMBER 31 EACH YEAR:

    POINT
    1.
    2.
    3.
    4.
    5.
    6.
    7.
    8.
    9.
    10.
    11.
    12.
    13.
    14.
    15.
    16.
    17.
    18.
    19.
    20.
    21.
    22.
    23.
    24.
    25.
    26.
    LATITUDE (N)
    44°07'06"
    44°05'28"
    44°00'18"
    43°56'19"
    43°54'13"
    43°53'13"
    43°50'52"
    43°52'07"
    43°52'55"
    43°42'00"
    43°42'00"
    43°46'20"
    43°46'38"
    43°49'40"
    43°49'56"
    43°52'20"
    43°53'59"
    43°55'50"
    43°57'53"
    43°58'56"
    43°58'56"
    44°00'38"
    44°02'02"
    44°04'51"
    44°06'29"
    44°07'06"
    LONGITUDE (W)
    59°08'14"
    59°04'20"
    58°57'54"
    58°57'20"
    58°52'56"
    58°51'52"
    58°51'51"
    58°50'45"
    58°48'00"
    58°48'00"
    59°02'16"
    58°59'12"
    59°00'43"
    59°01'07"
    58°59'52"
    58°59'48"
    59°01'52"
    59°02'10"
    59°01'13"
    59°02'40"
    59°00'27"
    59°01'34"
    59°03'31"
    59°05'02"
    59°08'14"
    59°08'14"

NOTE: WHEN THE GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY OF AN AREA IS EXPRESSED IN LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE, THOSE POINT REFERENCES ARE BASED ON THE GEODESIC SYSTEM NORTH AMERICAN DATUM 1927 (NAD27) UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. IN THE GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY OF THE GULLY MARINE PROTECTED AREA EXPRESSED ABOVE, THOSE POINT REFERENCES ARE BASED ON THE GEODESIC SYSTEM NORTH AMERICAN DATUM 1983 (NAD83).

13. QUOTAS & SIZE

  1. (A) MEASURE IS DEFINED FOR THE PURPOSE OF THESE CONDITIONS AS: TOTAL LENGTH IS MEASURED IN A STRAIGHT LINE, ALONG THE SIDE OF THE BODY, FOLLOWING THE CURVE OF THE BODY FROM THE TIP OF LOWER JAW TO FORK OF THE TAIL; AND DRESSED LENGTH IS MEASURED IN A STRAIGHT LINE, ALONG THE SIDE OF THE BODY, FOLLOWING THE CURVE OF THE BODY FROM THE LEADING EDGE OF THE CLEITHRUM TO THE ANTERIOR ORIGIN OF THE CAUDAL KEEL.

    (B) NO PERSON SHALL BE IN POSSESSION OF ANY SWORDFISH THAT IS LESS THAN 125CM IN LENGTH. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS AUTHORIZED TO RETAIN DRESSED SWORDFISH OF 79CM OR GREATER IN LENGTH OR IF IT WEIGHS 17.2 KILOGRAMS (38 POUNDS) OR GREATER WHEN DRESSED.

    (C) SUBSECTION 4(B) DOES NOT APPLY WHERE (A) THE CATCHING OF SWORDFISH LESS THAN 125CM IN TOTAL LENGTH OR 79 CM IN DRESSED LENGTH IS INCIDENTAL TO THE CATCHING OF SWORDFISH GREATER THAN 125CM IN TOTAL LENGTH OR 79 CM IN DRESSED LENGTH; AND (B) THE NUMBER OF SWORDFISH LESS THAN 125CM IN TOTAL LENGTH OR 79 CM IN DRESSED LENGTH THAT ARE RETAINED DURING ANY ONE FISHING TRIP DOES NOT EXCEED 15% OF THE NUMBER OF SWORDFISH GREATER THAN 125CM IN TOTAL LENGTH OR 79 CM IN DRESSED LENGTH RETAINED DURING THE SAME FISHING TRIP.

13.1. GEAR

  1. WHILE FISHING UNDER THESE LICENCE CONDITIONS, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS ONLY AUTHORIZED TO USE SWORDFISH HARPOONS.

    SPECIES

  2. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS AUTHORIZED TO DIRECT FOR AND RETAIN SWORDFISH ONLY.

    HAIL OUT REQUIREMENTS AND AT-SEA OBSERVER COVERAGE

  3. (A) THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A HAIL-OUT REFERENCE NUMBER FROM THE FISHERIES AND OCEANS (DFO) "JUST TALK" HAIL-OUT SYSTEM (1-866-665-4451 FOR ENGLISH OR 1-866-665-4452 FOR FRENCH) PRIOR TO DEPARTURE FOR ANY FISHING TRIP. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR WILL BE ISSUED A HAIL-OUT REFERENCE NUMBER BY THE "JUST TALK" SYSTEM CONFIRMING THAT THE HAIL HAS BEEN RECEIVED. THIS NUMBER IS TO BE ENTERED ON THE SWORDFISH HARPOON MONITORING DOCUMENT IN THE APPROPRIATE SPACE PROVIDED.

    (B) PURSUANT TO ITEM 7(A), THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR SHALL CALL THE JUST TALK HAIL-OUT SYTEM AT LEAST SIX (6) HOURS PRIOR TO DEPARTURE FOR THE FIRST FISHING TRIP.

    (C) WHEN THE START OF A FISHING TRIP IS DELAYED FOR ANY REASON BY TWELVE (12) HOURS OR MORE FROM THE TIME STATED IN THE HAIL, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR MUST CALL THE "JUST TALK" SYSTEM TO CANCEL THE HAIL AND OBTAIN A NEW HAIL-OUT REFERENCE NUMBER.

    (D) THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR MAY BE REQUIRED TO HAVE AN OBSERVER (AT SEA) ON BOARD THE VESSEL DURING ANY FISHING TRIP WHETHER OR NOT AN ELECTRONIC VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS) IS INSTALLED ON THE VESSEL. THE HAIL-OUT SYSTEM WILL NOTIFY THE OPERATOR OF THE LICENCE WHEN AN AT-SEA OBSERVER IS REQUIRED. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE AT-SEA OBSERVER COMPANY TO ARRANGE TO TAKE AN AT-SEA OBSERVER FOR THAT FISHING TRIP. WHEN THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO TAKE AN OBSERVER (AT-SEA) NO PERSON SHALL DEPART FROM PORT FOR A FISHING TRIP UNTIL THE AT-SEA OBSERVER IS ON BOARD THE VESSEL.

    (E) FOR THE PURPOSE OF THESE LICENCE CONDITIONS, AN AT-SEA OBSERVER IS AN INDIVIDUAL OR CORPORATION DESIGNATED AS AN AT-SEA OBSERVER BY THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR-GENERAL FOR THE MARITIMES REGION PURSUANT TO THE FISHERY (GENERAL) REGULATIONS. BEFORE THE COMMENCEMENT OF A FISHING TRIP THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR SHALL HAVE ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH AN AT-SEA OBSERVER COMPANY.

    REPORTING AND HAIL IN REQUIREMENTS

  4. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A HAIL-IN REFERENCE NUMBER PRIOR TO LANDING BY CALLING A MARITIMES REGION (SCOTIA-FUNDY FISHERIES) DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY THAT HAS BEEN DESIGNATED BY FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA. THE HAIL-IN REFERENCE NUMBER MUST BE ENTERED ON THE SWORDFISH HARPOON MONITORING DOCUMENT IN THE APPROPRIATE SPACE PROVIDED.

  5. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO HAIL TO A DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY THAT HAS BEEN DESIGNATED BY FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA AT LEAST THREE (3) HOURS PRIOR TO RETURNING TO PORT, WHETHER OR NOT ANY FISH HAS BEEN CAUGHT. THE HAIL MUST INCLUDE THE NAME OF THE PERSON MAKING THE HAIL, THE VESSEL NAME, THE VESSEL REGISTRATION NUMBER, THE CAPTAIN’S NAME, THE SWORDFISH LICENCE NUMBER, THE HAIL OUT CONFIRMATION NUMBER, THE SERIAL NUMBER OF THE SWORDFISH HARPOON MONITORING DOCUMENT PAGE THAT IS USED ON THAT FISHING TRIP, THE ACCURATE DRESSED WEIGHT OF ALL SPECIES OF FISH IN POUNDS BY SPECIES AND THE NUMBER OF FISH BY SPECIES ON BOARD THE VESSEL, THE NAFO DIVISION OR OTHER WATERS WHERE THE FISH WERE TAKEN, THE DATE AND ESTIMATED LOCAL TIME OF ARRIVAL (USING THE 24 HOUR SYSTEM), THE PLACE WHERE THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR SHALL LAND (OFFLOAD) THE FISH, THE BUYER OF THE FISH IF KNOWN, THE DATE AND ESTIMATED LOCAL TIME OF OFFLOADING (USING THE 24 HOUR SYSTEM), AND REPORT THE PRESENCE OF AN AT-SEA OBSERVER IF ONE IS ON BOARD.

  6. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR WILL BE ISSUED A CONFIRMATION NUMBER BY THE DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY CONFIRMING THAT THE HAIL HAS BEEN RECEIVED. THIS NUMBER IS TO BE ENTERED ON THE SWORDFISH HARPOON MONITORING DOCUMENT IN THE APPROPRIATE SPACE PROVIDED.

13.1.1. OFFLOAD REQUIREMENTS

  1. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO HAVE THE WEIGHT AND SPECIES OF FISH LANDED FROM THE VESSEL VERIFIED BY AN OBSERVER (DOCKSIDE). THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR OR MASTER OF THE VESSEL IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE VESSEL AND THE FISHING RECORDS TO THE ASSIGNED OBSERVER (DOCKSIDE). FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS LICENCE CONDITION, AN OBSERVER (DOCKSIDE) IS AN INDIVIDUAL OR CORPORATION DESIGNATED AS AN OBSERVER BY THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR-GENERAL FOR THE MARITIMES REGION PURSUANT TO SUBSECTIONS 39. (1) AND 39.1 (1) OF THE FISHERY (GENERAL) REGULATIONS AND WHO HAS BEEN APPOINTED TO MONITOR THE LANDING OF FISH AND TO VERIFY THE WEIGHT AND SPECIES OF FISH CAUGHT AND RETAINED.

  2. NO PERSON SHALL LAND (OFFLOAD) ANY FISH OR PORTIONS THEREOF FROM THE VESSEL UNLESS ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE ADHERED TO:

    (e) THE OBSERVER(S) (DOCKSIDE) IS PRESENT ONBOARD THE VESSEL TO VERIFY THE SWORDFISH HARPOON MONITORING DOCUMENT IS FULLY COMPLETED BY THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR AND VERIFY THE WEIGHT AND SPECIES OF THE CATCH IN THE VESSEL;

    (f) ALL FISH LANDED MUST BE WEIGHED ON AN ACCURATE CALIBRATED SCALE AT DOCKSIDE POINT OF LANDING (OFFLOADING);

    (g) THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO ENSURE THAT THE OBSERVER(S) (DOCKSIDE) IS ABLE TO MAINTAIN VISUAL CONTINUITY OF THE FISH BEING REMOVED FROM THE VESSEL AT THE DOCKSIDE POINT OF LANDING (OFFLOADING); AND

    (h) AN ACCURATE WEIGHT IS SUPPLIED TO THE DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY IMMEDIATELY AFTER LANDING (OFFLOADING) THE FISH FROM THE VESSEL.

13.1.2. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

  1. PURSUANT TO SECTION 61 OF THE FISHERIES ACT, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE INFORMATION REGARDING THE FISHING ACTIVITIES IN THE SWORDFISH HARPOON MONITORING DOCUMENT AVAILABLE FROM FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS ALSO REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE DOCUMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THE SWORDFISH HARPOON MONITORING DOCUMENT, INCLUDING ANY OTHER INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS LICENCE CONDITION. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS FURTHER REQUIRED TO SUPPLY THE OBSERVER (DOCKSIDE) AT THE END OF EACH FISHING TRIP WITH THE ORIGINALS OF ALL MONITORING DOCUMENTS. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS ALSO REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ANY DOCUMENTS REQUESTED BY A FISHERY OFFICER IMMEDIATELY UPON DEMAND.

  2. THE LICENCE HOLDER IS REQUIRED TO ENTER INFORMATION REGARDING FISHING ACTIVITIES IN THE SWORDFISH HARPOON MONITORING DOCUMENT BY THE END OF EACH DAY THAT FISHING ACTIVITY OCCURS TO ENSURE THAT UP TO DATE INFORMATION IS MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF THE FISHING TRIP.

13.1.3. CONCURRENT LICENCES

  1. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS AUTHORIZED TO CONCURRENTLY OPERATE THIS LICENCE AND CONDITIONS IN ADHERENCE WITH THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE BLUEFIN TUNA LICENCE AND CONDITIONS. HOWEVER, NO PERSON SHALL BE AUTHORIZED TO FISH A SWORDFISH HARPOON LICENCE CONCURRENTLY WITH ANY SWORDFISH LONGLINE, SHARK OR OTHER TUNA LICENCES AND CONDITIONS OF LICENCES. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS CONSIDERED TO BE FISHING CONCURRENTLY WITH ANOTHER LICENCE IF THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR HAS HAILED OUT ON ANOTHER LICENCE NUMBER ALONG WITH THE SWORDFISH HARPOON LICENCE NUMBER ON THE SAME TRIP.

    GENERAL

  2. WHILE FISHING UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THIS LICENCE, NO PERSON ONBOARD THE VESSEL SHALL PARTICIPATE IN RECREATIONAL FISHING OF ANY KIND.

  3. THE LICENCE HOLDER REQUESTED, RECEIVED AND UNDERSTOOD THESE LICENCE CONDITIONS ISSUED IN ENGLISH.

PLEASE NOTE - FOR INFORMATION REGARDING AREAS OPEN OR CLOSED TO FISHING, VARIATION ORDERS AND FOR CLARIFICATION OF ANY POINTS CONTAINED IN THIS LICENCE CONDITION, CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FISHERY OFFICER. DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANIES ARE NOT AGENTS OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA. DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANIES ARE NOT AUTHORIZED, ON BEHALF OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA, TO PROVIDE ANY INFORMATION TO FISHERS.

APPENDIX 4: 2013 Canadian Atlantic Other Tuna Longline Licence Condition

PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION 22.(1) OF THE FISHERY (GENERAL) REGULATIONS, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE SPECIFIED FOR PERSON(S) FISHING UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF OTHER TUNA LICENCE NO. , ISSUED IN RESPECT OF THE FISHING VESSEL , VESSEL REGISTRATION NUMBER , (HEREINAFTER KNOWN AS THE "VESSEL"): VESSEL CLASS .

ISSUE DATE: YYYY/MM/DD

DEFINITIONS

WHEN THE GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY OF AN AREA IN THESE LICENCE CONDITIONS ARE EXPRESSED IN LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE, THOSE POINT REFERENCES ARE BASED ON THE GEODESIC SYSTEM NORTH AMERICAN DATUM 1927 (NAD27), UNLESS EXPRESSED OTHERWISE.

FLANK LENGTH – IS IDENTIFIED IN THE LOGBOOK INSTRUCTIONS

TOTAL LENGTH - IS MEASURED IN A STRAIGHT LINE, ALONG THE SIDE OF THE BODY, FOLLOWING THE CURVE OF THE BODY FROM THE TIP OF LOWER JAW TO FORK OF THE TAIL

DRESSED LENGTH - IS MEASURED IN A STRAIGHT LINE, ALONG THE SIDE OF THE BODY, FOLLOWING THE CURVE OF THE BODY FROM THE LEADING EDGE OF THE CLEITHRUM TO THE ANTERIOR ORIGIN OF THE CAUDAL KEEL.

DRESSED WEIGHT - FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS LICENCE CONDITION, IS DEFINED AS HEAD OFF, TAIL OFF AND GUTTED.

TROLLING GEAR - IS DEFINED AS MULTIPLE LINES AND MULTIPLE HOOKS TOWED FROM OUTRIGGER POLES, CENTER RIGGER POLES, SIDES OR STERNS OF VESSELS WITH A LURE WITH A HOOK ATTACHED TO EACH LINE. HOOKLESS TEASERS, AS DEFINED BELOW ARE PERMITTED TO BE ATTACHED TO EACH LINE.

LURE - IS DEFINED AS A VINYL OR RUBBER SKIRT EITHER ATTACHED TO A WEIGHTED TROLLING HEAD OF METAL, PLASTIC, OR WOODEN CONSTRUCTION, A VINYL OR RUBBER SKIRT BY ITSELF, FEATHERS ATTACHED TO A METAL, PLASTIC, OR WOODEN TROLLING HEAD, WOODEN, METAL, OR PLASTIC PLUGS WITH SINGLE OR DUAL HOOKS ATTACHED, METAL SPOONS, DEAD BAITS RIGGED WITH HOOKS SUCH AS MACKEREL, HERRING, MULLET, BALLYHOO, OR OTHER BAIT FISH;

TEASER - IS DEFINED AS A TROLLING DEVICE CONSISTING OF MULTIPLE LURES ATTACHED TO A SPREADER BAR OR CONNECTED TO EACH OTHER WITH EITHER ONE LURE CONTAINING A HOOK OR NO LURES CONTAINING A HOOK.

FISHING SEASON AND AREAS

  1. SUBJECT TO ANY VARIATION ORDER PRESENTLY IN EFFECT OR ANY VARIATION ORDER WHICH MAY BE ISSUED IN THE FUTURE, THESE CONDITIONS OF LICENCE ARE VALID FROM DATE OF ISSUANCE AND ENDING MARCH 31, 2014.

  2. (A) SUBJECT TO ITEMS 2(B), 2(C), 2(D), 2(E) AND 2(F) THESE CONDITIONS OF LICENCE ARE VALID IN THE NORTH ATLANTIC OCEAN, NORTH OF 5º00'00''NORTH LATITUDE AND WEST OF 54º30'00''WEST LONGITUDE, AND INSIDE A CENTRAL NORTH ATLANTIC AREA DEFINED AS NORTH OF 10º00'00''NORTH LATITUDE AND BETWEEN 54º30'00''WEST LONGITUDE AND 30º00'00''WEST LONGITUDE, HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS “ICCAT AREA 3”.

    (b) NO PERSON SHALL FISH IN FISHING ZONES 1 AND 2 OF CANADA.

    (c) NO PERSON SHALL FISH WITH LONGLINE GEAR INSIDE THAT PORTION OF DIVISIONS 4X AND 5Z KNOWN AS THE HELL HOLE, DEFINED AS THE AREA ENCLOSED BY STRAIGHT LINES JOINING THE FOLLOWING POINTS IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE LISTED, DURING THE PERIOD JULY 1 TO NOVEMBER 30 EACH YEAR:

    POINT
    1.
    2.
    3.
    4.
    5.
    LATITUDE (N)
    42°06'00''
    42°06'00''
    41°55'48''
    41°55'48''
    42°06'00''
    LONGITUDE (W)
    65°41'24''
    65°27'30''
    65°27'30''
    65°41'24''
    65°41'24''

    (d) NO PERSON SHALL FISH IN THAT PORTION OF DIVISIONS 4WX COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE BLUEFIN EXCLUSION ZONE ENCLOSED BY THE COASTLINE OF NOVA SCOTIA AND STRAIGHT LINES JOINING THE FOLLOWING POINTS IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE LISTED DURING THE PERIOD AUGUST 1 TO DECEMBER 31 EACH YEAR:

    POINT
    1.
    2.
    3.
    4.
    LATITUDE (N)
    43°23'18''
    43°10'48''
    44°42'00''
    45°00'00''
    LONGITUDE (W)
    65°37'10'' (CAPE SABLE NS)
    65°37'10''
    62°00'00''
    62°00'00'' (LISCOMB POINT)

    (e) NO PERSON SHALL FISH IN THAT PORTION OF DIVISION 4W KNOWN AS 4WD ENCLOSED BY LINES JOINING THE FOLLOWING POINTS DURING THE PERIOD APRIL 1 TO MARCH 31 EACH YEAR:

    POINT
    1.
    2.
    3.
    4.
    5.
    LATITUDE (N)
    45°43'00''
    45°40'00''
    44°50'00''
    44°50'00''
    45°05'24''
    LONGITUDE (W)
    60°15'00''
    60°00'00''
    60°00'00''
    61°30'00''
    61°42'00''

    (f) NO PERSON SHALL FISH IN THE WATERS OF DIVISION 4VSW (ZONE 1 OF THE GULLY MARINE PROTECTED AREA) ENCLOSED BY RHUMB LINES (SIMILAR TO STRAIGHT LINES PLOTTED ON A NAUTICAL CHART) JOINING THE FOLLOWING POINTS IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE LISTED, DURING THE PERIOD JANUARY 1 TO DECEMBER 31 EACH YEAR:

    POINT
    1.
    2.
    3.
    4.
    5.
    6.
    7.
    8.
    9.
    10.
    11.
    12.
    13.
    14.
    15.
    16.
    17.
    18.
    19.
    20.
    21.
    22.
    23.
    24.
    25.
    26.
    LATITUDE (N)
    44°07'06"
    44°05'28"
    44°00'18"
    43°56'19"
    43°54'13"
    43°53'13"
    43°50'52"
    43°52'07"
    43°52'55"
    43°42'00"
    43°42'00"
    43°46'20"
    43°46'38"
    43°49'40"
    43°49'56"
    43°52'20"
    43°53'59"
    43°55'50"
    43°57'53"
    43°58'56"
    43°58'56"
    44°00'38"
    44°02'02"
    44°04'51"
    44°06'29"
    44°07'06"
    LONGITUDE (W)
    59°08'14"
    59°04'20"
    58°57'54"
    58°57'20"
    58°52'56"
    58°51'52"
    58°51'51"
    58°50'45"
    58°48'00"
    58°48'00"
    59°02'16"
    58°59'12"
    59°00'43"
    59°01'07"
    58°59'52"
    58°59'48"
    59°01'52"
    59°02'10"
    59°01'13"
    59°02'40"
    59°00'27"
    59°01'34"
    59°03'31"
    59°05'02"
    59°08'14"
    59°08'14"

NOTE: WHEN THE GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY OF THE GULLY MARINE PROTECTED AREA IS EXPRESSED IN LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE, THOSE POINT REFERENCES ARE BASED ON THE GEODESIC SYSTEM NORTH AMERICAN DATUM 1983 (NAD83).

QUOTA

  1. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS ONLY AUTHORIZED TO CATCH AND RETAIN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF INDIVIDUAL QUOTA FOR SWORDFISH IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE 1A.

  2. WHEN CLOSE TIMES ARE IN EFFECT FOR SWORDFISH, NO PERSON SHALL BE PERMITTED TO FISH FOR ANY OF THE TUNA SPECIES THAT HAVE BEEN AUTHORIZED BY THIS LICENCE CONDITION. IF A VARIATION ORDER IS ISSUED CLOSING FISHING TO THE VESSEL CLASS LISTED IN THE LICENCE HOLDER’S SWORDFISH LONGLINE LICENCE CONDITION, BEING VESSEL CLASS,, NO PERSON SHALL BE PERMITTED TO FISH USING THESE CONDITIONS OF LICENCE.

    GEAR

  3. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS ONLY AUTHORIZED TO FISH WITH PELAGIC LONGLINE, HARPOON OR TROLLING GEAR OR HAVE THESE GEARS ON BOARD THE VESSEL.

  4. WHEN USING:

    1. TROLLING GEAR, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR MAY FISH USING KEGGING TECHNIQUES (WHEREBY BUOYED LINES ARE RELEASED FROM THE VESSEL DURING HOOK UPS).
    2. LONGLINE GEAR THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS ONLY AUTHORIZED TO USE CORRODIBLE, CIRCLE HOOKS.

  5. WHEN FISHING AUTHORIZED GEAR OTHER THAN LONGLINE IN AREAS CLOSED TO THE USE OF LONGLINE OR WHEN TRANSITING THROUGH AREAS CLOSED TO THE USE OF LONGLINE GEAR, ALL LONGLINE GEAR ON BOARD THE VESSEL MUST BE UNCLIPPED AND ALL REMOVABLE COMPONENTS STOWED BELOW DECK OR OTHERWISE REMOVED FROM THE PLACE WHERE IT IS NORMALLY USED FOR FISHING OR PLACED WHERE IT IS NOT READILY AVAILABLE FOR FISHING AND COVERED AND TIED. FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS LICENCE CONDITION, LONGLINE GEAR INCLUDES GANGIONS, BUOY DROP LINES, HOOKS, SNAPS AND MAINLINE. THE MAINLINE IS CONSIDERED STOWED WHEN IT IS ON THE SPOOL.

    SPECIES AND BYCATCH

  6. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS AUTHORIZED TO RETAIN TUNA SPECIES (ALBACORE, BIGEYE AND YELLOWFIN) AND AN INCIDENTAL CATCH OF SWORDFISH PROVIDED ALL TUNA LANDED HAVE AT LEAST ONE PECTORAL FIN ATTACHED TO THE FISH. BLUEFIN TUNA CAN ONLY BE CAUGHT AND RETAINED SUBJECT TO ITEMS 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, AND 17.

  7. (I) NO PERSON SHALL BE IN POSSESSION OF ANY SWORDFISH THAT IS LESS THAN 125CM IN LENGTH. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS AUTHORIZED TO RETAIN DRESSED SWORDFISH OF 79CM OR GREATER IN LENGTH OR IF IT WEIGHS 17.2 KILOGRAMS (38 POUNDS) OR GREATER WHEN DRESSED.

    (II) SUBSECTION 9(I) DOES NOT APPLY WHERE (A) THE CATCHING OF SWORDFISH LESS THAN 125CM IN TOTAL LENGTH OR 79 CM IN DRESSED LENGTH IS INCIDENTAL TO THE CATCHING OF SWORDFISH GREATER THAN 125CM IN TOTAL LENGTH OR 79 CM IN DRESSED LENGTH; AND (B) THE NUMBER OF SWORDFISH LESS THAN 125CM IN TOTAL LENGTH OR 79 CM IN DRESSED LENGTH THAT ARE RETAINED DURING ANY ONE FISHING TRIP DOES NOT EXCEED 15% OF THE NUMBER OF SWORDFISH GREATER THAN 125CM IN TOTAL LENGTH OR 79 CM IN DRESSED LENGTH RETAINED DURING THE SAME FISHING TRIP.

  8. WHEN FISHING THIS LICENCE WITH PELAGIC LONGLINE OR TROLLING GEAR, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS AUTHORIZED TO RETAIN AN INCIDENTAL CATCH OF SHARK, EXCEPT WHITE SHARK (CARCHARODON CARCHARIAS). THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR MAY REMOVE FINS FROM ANY SHARK THAT IS RETAINED. HOWEVER, THE WEIGHT OF ANY FINS SO REMOVED CANNOT EXCEED 5% OF THE WEIGHT OF THE CORRESPONDING DRESSED SHARK CARCASSES THAT ARE RETAINED. BOTH SHARK FINS AND CARCASSES MUST BE OFFLOADED AT THE SAME TIME, BUT WEIGHED SEPARATELY. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO LAND ALL OF THE SHARK CATCH WITH THE CAUDAL PEDUNCLE INCLUDING THE LATERAL RIDGE AND THE PELVIC FINS (THE PAIRED FINS ADJACENT TO THE CLOACA OR "VENT") LEFT INTACT AND ATTACHED TO THE CARCASS. NO PERSON SHALL UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES RETURN, RELEASE OR DISCARD A SHARK CARCASS TO THE WATER.

  9. SUBJECT TO ANY ITEMS LISTED HEREIN REGARDING THE RETENTION OR RELEASE OF SPECIFIC SPECIES OR GROUPS OF SPECIES, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS AUTHORIZED TO RETAIN AN INCIDENTAL CATCH OF OTHER PELAGIC FINFISH SPECIES, EXCLUDING THOSE SPECIES FOR WHICH OTHER COMMERCIAL LICENCES EXIST OR SPECIES FOR WHICH OTHER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN PLACE (E.G. UNDER THE SPECIES AT RISK ACT, OR ICCAT REQUIREMENTS). PELAGIC SPECIES PERMITTED TO BE RETAINED UNDER THIS ITEM INCLUDE MAHI-MAHI/DOLPHINFISH (CORYPHAENA HIPPURUS), WHITE MARLIN (TETRAPTURUS ALBIDUS), WAHOO (ACANTHOCYBIUM SOLANDRI), OPAH (LAMPRIDAE SPP), AND OTHER SPECIES TRADITIONALLY RETAINED IN THIS FISHERY. HOWEVER, ALL LIVE MARLIN SHALL BE RELEASED FORTHWITH TO THE PLACE FROM WHICH IT WAS TAKEN IN A MANNER THAT CAUSES IT THE LEAST HARM.

  10. WHEN AUTHORIZED TO FISH WITH TROLLING GEAR ONLY OR WITH HARPOON GEAR ONLY, AS INDICATED IN ITEM 5, NO PERSON SHALL RETAIN ANY BLUEFIN TUNA CAUGHT INCIDENTALLY WHILE FISHING FOR ALBACORE, BIGEYE AND YELLOWFIN TUNAS OR HAVE BLUEFIN TUNA TAGS ON BOARD THE VESSEL.

    RETENTION OF BLUEFIN BY-CATCH ON CONCURRENT TRIPS

  11. (a) SUBJECT TO ITEMS 13(B), 13(C), 15, 16, AND 17, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR WHO POSSESSES A VALID BLUEFIN TUNA LICENCE, WITH ATTACHED CONDITIONS OF LICENCE AND VALID BLUEFIN TUNA TAGS, IS AUTHORIZED TO FISH THEIR BLUEFIN TUNA LICENCE CONCURRENTLY ONLY WITH THEIR OTHER TUNA LICENCE WHEN FISHING IN ANY AREAS AUTHORIZED FOR OTHER TUNAS, AND MAY RETAIN BLUEFIN TUNA CAUGHT INCIDENTALLY ON LONGLINE GEAR.

    BLUEFIN TUNA AND OTHER TUNA LICENCES ARE CONSIDERED TO BE FISHED CONCURRENTLY WHEN THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR HAS HAILED OUT ON BOTH LICENCES PRIOR TO COMMENCING A FISHING TRIP.

    (c) ONLY THE BLUEFIN TUNA TAGS ISSUED TO AND LISTED UNDER THE CONDITIONS OF BLUEFIN TUNA LICENCE ATTACHED TO THIS LICENCE, ARE TO BE USED ON CONCURRENT TRIPS, AND ARE VALID TO DECEMBER 31, 2013.

    (d) NOTWITHSTANDING THE MODIFIED CATCH NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE UNDER ITEMS 16 AND 17, WHEN BLUEFIN HAS BEEN CAUGHT INCIDENTALLY ON LONGLINE GEAR WHILE FISHING CONCURRENTLY, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR MUST ADHERE TO ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF THEIR 2013 BLUEFIN TUNA LICENCE AND CONDITIONS.

    RETENTION OF BLUEFIN BY-CATCH ON BYCATCH OR TRANSFERED TAGS

  12. (A) SUBJECT TO ITEMS 14(B), 15, 16, AND 17, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR WHO POSSESSES VALID BLUEFIN TUNA TAGS IS AUTHORIZED TO USE THESE TAGS TO RETAIN BLUEFIN TUNA CAUGHT INCIDENTALLY ON LONGLINE GEAR.

    (b) ONLY THE BLUEFIN TUNA TAGS WITH THE NUMBERS LISTED IN APPENDIX 1 OF THIS CONDITION OF LICENCE ARE TO BE USED, AND ARE VALID TO DECEMBER 31, 2013.

  13. THE CATCH AND RETENTION OF BLUEFIN TUNA WEIGHING LESS THAN 30KG (ROUND WEIGHT) AND/OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE HAVING A FLANK LENGTH OF LESS THAN 115CM IS PROHIBITED. ALL BLUEFIN TUNA HAVING A FLANK LENGTH OF 115CM OR GREATER MUST BE BROUGHT ON BOARD THE VESSEL IMMEDIATELY. ALL BLUEFIN TUNA SHALL BE TAGGED IMMEDIATELY WITH A VALID BLUEFIN TUNA TAG, PRIOR TO ANY PROCESSING OR PREPARING OF THE BLUEFIN TUNA. THE TAG MUST BE ATTACHED TO THE NINTH FINLET FROM THE TAIL OF THE BLUEFIN TUNA IN A MANNER IN WHICH THE TAG IS DESIGNED. ALL FISH MUST BE KEPT ONBOARD THE VESSEL UNTIL THE COMPLETION OF EACH FISHING TRIP OR FISHING PERIOD. IN ADDITION, AT LEAST ONE PECTORAL FIN MUST REMAIN ATTACHED TO THE BLUEFIN TUNA AT ALL TIMES.

  14. WHEN A BLUEFIN TUNA HAS BEEN CAUGHT INCIDENTALLY ON LONGLINE GEAR, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO HAIL FROM SEA TO A DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY THAT HAS BEEN DESIGNATED BY FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA (DFO), IMMEDIATELY UPON COMPLETION OF EACH LONGLINE SET HAULBACK WHEN A BLUEFIN TUNA HAS BEEN CAUGHT AND TAGGED. THE HAIL MUST INCLUDE THE FULL NAME OF THE PERSON MAKING THE HAIL, VESSEL NAME, THE OTHER TUNA LICENCE NUMBER AND HAIL-OUT CONFIRMATION NUMBER, THE BLUEFIN TUNA LICENCE NUMBER AND HAIL-OUT CONFIRMATION NUMBER IF YOU ARE ON A CONCURRENT TRIP, THE SERIAL NUMBER OF THE BLUEFIN TUNA TAG OR TAGS, THE ACCURATE ROUND WEIGHT OF EACH BLUEFIN TUNA BY TAG NUMBER, THE FLANK AND DRESSED LENGTH OF THE TUNA, THE DATE AND ESTIMATED LOCAL TIME THAT THE FISH WAS CAUGHT (USING THE 24 HOUR SYSTEM), AREA FISHED, AND PLACE WHERE THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR INTENDS TO LAND THE FISH.

    A BLUEFIN TUNA IS CONSIDERED CAUGHT WHEN THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS ABLE TO BRING THE FISH ALONGSIDE THE VESSEL.

  15. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR WILL BE ISSUED A CONFIRMATION NUMBER BY THE DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY CONFIRMING THAT THE HAIL IN ITEM 16 HAS BEEN RECEIVED. THIS NUMBER IS TO BE ENTERED IMMEDIATELY IN THE COMMENT FIELD OF THE SWORDFISH/SHARK LONGLINE AND TROLLING MONITORING DOCUMENT.

    HAIL OUT REQUIREMENTS AND AT-SEA OBSERVER COVERAGE

  16. (A) THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A HAIL-OUT REFERENCE NUMBER FROM THE FISHERIES AND OCEANS (DFO) "JUST TALK" HAIL-OUT SYSTEM (1-866-665-4451 FOR ENGLISH OR 1-866-665-4452 FOR FRENCH) PRIOR TO DEPARTURE FOR ANY FISHING TRIP. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR WILL BE ISSUED A HAIL-OUT REFERENCE NUMBER BY THE "JUST TALK" SYSTEM CONFIRMING THAT THE HAIL HAS BEEN RECEIVED. THIS NUMBER IS TO BE ENTERED ON THE SWORDFISH/SHARK LONGLINE AND TROLLING MONITORING DOCUMENT IN THE APPROPRIATE SPACE PROVIDED.

    (f) PURSUANT TO ITEM 18(A), THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR SHALL CALL THE JUST TALK HAIL-OUT SYTEM AT LEAST SIX (6) HOURS PRIOR TO DEPARTURE FOR THE FIRST FISHING TRIP.

    (g) WHEN THE START OF A FISHING TRIP IS DELAYED FOR ANY REASON BY TWELVE (12) HOURS OR MORE FROM THE TIME STATED IN THE HAIL, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR MUST CALL THE "JUST TALK" SYSTEM TO CANCEL THE HAIL AND OBTAIN A NEW HAIL-OUT REFERENCE NUMBER.

    (h) THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR MAY BE REQUIRED TO HAVE AN OBSERVER (AT SEA) ON BOARD THE VESSEL DURING ANY FISHING TRIP WHETHER OR NOT AN ELECTRONIC VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS) IS INSTALLED ON THE VESSEL. THE HAIL-OUT SYSTEM WILL NOTIFY THE OPERATOR OF THE LICENCE WHEN AN AT-SEA OBSERVER IS REQUIRED. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE AT-SEA OBSERVER COMPANY TO ARRANGE TO TAKE AN AT-SEA OBSERVER FOR THAT FISHING TRIP. WHEN THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO TAKE AN OBSERVER (AT-SEA) NO PERSON SHALL DEPART FROM PORT FOR A FISHING TRIP UNTIL THE AT-SEA OBSERVER IS ON BOARD THE VESSEL.

    (i) FOR THE PURPOSE OF THESE LICENCE CONDITIONS, AN AT-SEA OBSERVER IS AN INDIVIDUAL OR CORPORATION DESIGNATED AS AN AT-SEA OBSERVER BY THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR-GENERAL FOR THE MARITIMES REGION PURSUANT TO THE FISHERY (GENERAL) REGULATIONS. BEFORE THE COMMENCEMENT OF A FISHING TRIP THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR SHALL HAVE ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH AN AT-SEA OBSERVER COMPANY.

    DFO VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS)

  17. A) SUBJECT TO ITEM 19B THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO HAVE AN APPROVED VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS) AUTHORIZED BY DFO ON THE VESSEL AUTHORIZED TO FISH UNDER THIS LICENCE.

    (c) VMS IS NOT REQUIRED WHEN FISHING WITH ONLY TROLLING OR HARPOON GEAR.

  18. THE VESSEL MUST BE FITTED WITH THE APPROVED VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS) PROVIDING DATA TO THE DFO VESSEL MONITORING OPERATIONS CENTRE.

  19. WHERE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITEM 19 AN ELECTRONIC VMS IS IN USE ON THE VESSEL, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR SHALL ENSURE THE SYSTEM IS FULLY OPERATIONAL, TURNED ON AND IN USE FROM THE TIME THE VESSEL LEAVES PORT UNTIL IT RETURNS TO PORT AND ALL OF THE FISH ON BOARD THE VESSEL IS OFFLOADED.

  20. THE LICENCE HOLDER / OPERATOR OF THE VESSEL AUTHORIZED TO USE AN ELECTRONIC VMS, SHALL DURING ANY FISHING TRIP, IMMEDIATELY CEASE ALL FISHING ACTIVITY SHOULD ANY OR ALL OF THIS EQUIPMENT BECOME INOPERATIVE, IS TURNED OFF OR MALFUNCTION IN ANY WAY. THE LICENCE HOLDER / OPERATOR OF THE VESSEL SHALL NOT RESUME ANY FISHING ACTIVITY WHILE THE ELECTRONIC VMS IS INOPERATIVE, TURNED OFF OR IS MALFUNCTIONING IN ANY WAY. THE LICENCE HOLDER / OPERATOR SHALL NOTIFY DFO OF ANY SUCH MALFUNCTION BY TELEPHONE AT (709) 772-2083 AND PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION:

    6. NAME OF MASTER,
    7. NAME OF VESSEL AND VESSEL REGISTRATION NUMBER,
    8. DATE AND TIME OF SAILING,
    9. PORT OF LANDING, AND
    10. TELEPHONE NUMBER WHERE THE MASTER CAN BE REACHED.

  21. FISHING IS ONLY AUTHORIZED WHEN THE ELECTRONIC VMS IS FUNCTIONAL, FULLY OPERATIONAL AND TURNED ON OR WHEN THE LICENCE HOLDER / OPERATOR RECIEVES APPROVAL FROM DFO TO RESUME FISHING.

  22. WHERE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITEM 19, AN ELECTRONIC VMS IS USED ON THE VESSEL DURING ANY FISHING TRIP UNDER THIS LICENCE AND CONDITIONS, NO PERSON SHALL:

    (f) ALTER OR TAMPER WITH THAT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM;

    (g) DESTROY, DISPOSE OF OR REMOVE THE ELECTRONIC MONITORING SYSTEM OR ASSOCIATED ELECTRONIC RECORDS OR STORAGE MEDIA;

    (h) EMIT, OR CAUSE TO BE EMITTED, ANY ELECTRONIC OR ELECTRIC SIGNAL THAT RENDERS THE EQUIPMENT OR SYSTEM INOPERATIVE OR INACCURATE; OR

    (i) INTERFERE WITH OR BLOCK ANY SIGNALS REQUIRED BY THE ELECTRONIC MONITORING SYSTEM TO GATHER, RECORD, OR TRANSMIT INFORMATION;

    (j) TURN OFF THE VMS FROM THE TIME THE VESSEL LEAVES PORT UNTIL ALL OF THE FISH ON BOARD THE VESSEL IS OFFLOADED.

  1. FOR EACH VMS TRANSPONDER OR SERVICE PROVIDER INITIATION, REPLACEMENT, TRANSFER OR RESUMPTION, A COMPLETED (DFO) NATIONAL VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS) FORM MUST BE FORWARDED BY FAX TO 709-772-5787 AT LEAST TWO FULL BUSINESS DAYS BEFORE COMMENCING FISHING OPERATIONS.

  2. THE VMS TRANSPONDER ON THE VESSEL MUST REPORT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION AUTOMATICALLY TO DFO EACH HOUR:
    • VMS IDENTIFICATION NUMBER AND COMMUNICATION SERVICE PROVIDER (CSP) (NAME & CSP NUMBER)
    • GEOGRAPHIC POSITION (LATITUDE/LONGITUDE) OF THE VESSEL, AND
    • DATE AND TIME CORRESPONDING TO THE ABOVE POSITION.
  3. SHOULD THE VMS EQUIPMENT OR SYSTEM BECOME INOPERATIVE OR MALFUNCTION IN ANY WAY WHILE A VESSEL IS FISHING IN THE NAFO REGULATORY AREA, IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 22 ABOVE, THAT VESSEL MUST CEASE FISHING AND RETURN TO CANADIAN FISHERIES WATERS.

  4. WHERE A VESSEL CARRIES TWO OR MORE APPROVED VMS UNITS ON BOARD, ONE MUST BE IDENTIFIED AS THE PRIMARY VMS UNIT, AND ALL OTHER UNITS MUST BE REGISTERED WITH DFO AS BACKUP UNITS. IN THE EVENT OF FAILURE OF THE PRIMARY UNIT, IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR TO IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY DFO THAT A BACK-UP UNIT IS BEING ACTIVATED AND SUBSEQUENTLY ENSURE IT IS FULLY OPERATIONAL BEFORE RESUMING FISHING ACTIVITY.

    REPORTING AND HAIL IN REQUIREMENTS

  5. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO HAIL TO A DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY THAT HAS BEEN DESIGNATED BY THE DEPARTMENT AT LEAST THREE (3) HOURS PRIOR TO RETURNING TO PORT, WHETHER OR NOT ANY FISH HAS BEEN CAUGHT. THE HAIL MUST INCLUDE THE FULL NAME OF THE PERSON MAKING THE HAIL, THE VESSEL NAME, THE VESSEL REGISTRATION NUMBER, THE CAPTAIN’S NAME, THE SWORDFISH LICENCE NUMBER, THE HAIL OUT CONFIRMATION NUMBER, THE SERIAL NUMBER OF THE SWORDFISH/SHARK LONGLINE AND TROLLING MONITORING DOCUMENT PAGE THAT IS USED ON THAT FISHING TRIP, THE ACCURATE DRESSED WEIGHT OF ALL SPECIES OF FISH IN POUNDS BY SPECIES AND THE NUMBER OF FISH BY SPECIES ON BOARD THE VESSEL, THE NAFO DIVISION OR OTHER WATERS WHERE THE FISH WERE TAKEN, THE DATE AND ESTIMATED LOCAL TIME OF ARRIVAL (USING THE 24 HOUR SYSTEM), THE PLACE WHERE THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR SHALL LAND (OFFLOAD) THE FISH, THE BUYER OF THE FISH IF KNOWN, THE DATE AND ESTIMATED LOCAL TIME OF OFFLOADING (USING THE 24 HOUR SYSTEM), AND REPORT THE PRESENCE OF AN AT-SEA OBSERVER IF ONE IS ON BOARD.

  6. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR WILL BE ISSUED A CONFIRMATION NUMBER BY THE DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY CONFIRMING THAT THE HAIL HAS BEEN RECEIVED. THIS NUMBER IS TO BE ENTERED ON THE SWORDFISH/SHARK LONGLINE AND TROLLING MONITORING DOCUMENT IN THE APPROPRIATE SPACE PROVIDED.

    OFFLOADING

  7. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO HAVE THE WEIGHT AND SPECIES OF FISH LANDED FROM THE VESSEL VERIFIED BY AN OBSERVER (DOCKSIDE). THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR OR MASTER OF THE VESSEL IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE VESSEL AND THE FISHING RECORDS TO THE ASSIGNED OBSERVER (DOCKSIDE). FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS LICENCE CONDITION, AN OBSERVER (DOCKSIDE) IS AN INDIVIDUAL OR CORPORATION DESIGNATED AS AN OBSERVER BY THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR-GENERAL FOR THE MARITIMES REGION PURSUANT TO SUBSECTIONS 39. (1) AND 39.1 (1) OF THE FISHERY (GENERAL) REGULATIONS AND WHO HAS BEEN APPOINTED TO MONITOR THE LANDING OF FISH AND TO VERIFY THE WEIGHT AND SPECIES OF FISH CAUGHT AND RETAINED.

  8. NO PERSON SHALL LAND (OFFLOAD) ANY FISH OR PORTIONS THEREOF FROM THE VESSEL UNLESS ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE ADHERED TO:

    (i) THE OBSERVER(S) (DOCKSIDE) IS PRESENT ONBOARD THE VESSEL TO VERIFY THE SWORDFISH/SHARK LONGLINE AND TROLLING MONITORING DOCUMENT IS FULLY COMPLETED BY THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR AND VERIFY THE WEIGHT AND SPECIES OF THE CATCH IN THE VESSEL;

    (j) ALL FISH LANDED MUST BE WEIGHED ON AN ACCURATE CALIBRATED SCALE AT DOCKSIDE POINT OF LANDING (OFFLOADING);

    (k) THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO ENSURE THAT THE OBSERVER(S) (DOCKSIDE) IS ABLE TO MAINTAIN VISUAL CONTINUITY OF THE FISH BEING REMOVED FROM THE VESSEL AT THE DOCKSIDE POINT OF LANDING (OFFLOADING); AND

    (l) AN ACCURATE WEIGHT IS SUPPLIED TO THE DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY IMMEDIATELY AFTER LANDING (OFFLOADING) THE FISH FROM THE VESSEL.

  9. PURSUANT TO SECTION 61 OF THE FISHERIES ACT, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE INFORMATION REGARDING THE FISHING ACTIVITIES IN THE SWORDFISH/SHARK LONGLINE AND TROLLING MONITORING DOCUMENT (“DOCUMENT”) AND TALLY SHEET DOCUMENT AVAILABLE FROM DFO. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THE DOCUMENT, AND SUPPLY THE OBSERVER (DOCKSIDE) AT THE END OF EACH FISHING TRIP WITH THE ORIGINAL COPY OF ALL MONITORING DOCUMENTS. A COMPLETED SWORDFISH, TUNA, AND SHARK RECEIVING TALLY MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH THIS SWORDFISH/SHARK LONGLINE AND TROLLING MONITORING DOCUMENT FOR EACH TRIP.

  10. IF THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS LANDING AT A PORT OUTSIDE OF THE MARITIMES REGION, ALL DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED IN SECTION 35 ABOVE MUST BE SUPPLIED BY MAIL TO A MARITIMES REGION DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY WITHIN 30 DAYS OF LANDING AND OFFLOADING.

  11. FURTHER PURSUANT TO SECTION 61 OF THE FISHERIES ACT THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE A BLUEFIN TUNA CATCH DOCUMENT THAT IS AVAILABLE FROM THE DEPARTMENT. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THIS DOCUMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS SUPPLIED IN THE BLUEFIN TUNA CATCH DOCUMENT. THE LICENCE HOLDER IS ONLY REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE BLUEFIN TUNA CATCH DOCUMENT FOR TRIPS WHERE BLUEFIN TUNA HAVE BEEN CAUGHT.

    SPECIES AT RISK ACT

  12. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOVERY STRATEGY FOR THE LEATHERBACK TURTLE (DERMOCHELYS CORIACEA) IN ATLANTIC CANADA, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS PERMITTED TO CARRY OUT FISHING ACTIVITIES AUTHORIZED UNDER THE FISHERIES ACT THAT MAY INCIDENTALLY KILL, HARM, HARASS, CAPTURE OR TAKE LEATHERBACK TURTLES, AS PER SUBSECTION 83(4) OF THE SPECIES AT RISK ACT (SARA).

    THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY:

    A) THIS PERMISSION IS ONLY VALID WHILE FISHING IS CONDUCTED UNDER THIS LICENCE ISSUED TO YOU UNDER THE FISHERIES ACT IN ALL AUTHORIZED WATERS UNDER THIS LICENCE.

    B) THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO ENSURE THAT, WHILE THE FISHING ACTIVITIES ARE CONDUCTED, EVERY PERSON ON BOARD THE VESSEL WHO CAPTURES A LEATHERBACK TURTLE INCIDENTALLY FORTHWITH RETURNS IT TO THE PLACE FROM WHICH IT WAS TAKEN, AND WHERE IT IS ALIVE, IN A MANNER THAT CAUSES IT THE LEAST HARM.

    C) THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE INFORMATION REGARDING INTERACTIONS WITH SPECIES AT RISK WHILE CONDUCTING FISHING OPERATIONS, IN THE SARA MONITORING DOCUMENT AVAILABLE FROM FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED WITH THE DOCUMENT AND SUPPLY THE OBSERVER (DOCKSIDE) AT THE END OF EACH FISHING TRIP WITH A COPY OF ALL MONITORING DOCUMENTS.

  13. IF LANDING AT A PORT OUTSIDE OF THE MARITIMES REGION, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE SARA MONITORING DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED WITH THE DOCUMENT AND SUPPLY A COPY OF ALL MONITORING DOCUMENTS BY MAIL TO A MARITIMES REGION DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY WITHIN 30 DAYS OF LANDING AND OFFLOADING.

    DEHOOKING AND DISENTANGLEMENT GEAR

  14. IF THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS FISHING THIS LICENCE WITH HARPOON GEAR ONLY AND NO LONGLINE GEAR ONBOARD THE VESSEL THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR DEHOOKING/DISENTANGLEMENT EQUIPMENT TO BE ON BOARD. THE PRESENCE OF ANY LONGLINE GEAR ON BOARD THE VESSEL WILL CONSTITUTE A LONGLINE TRIP, IE DEHOOKING/DISENTANGLEMENT EQUIPMENT WILL BE MANDATORY.

  15. DEHOOKING/DISENTANGLEMENT EQUIPMENT MUST BE CARRIED ONBOARD THE VESSEL AT ALL TIMES WHEN FISHING USING LONGLINE GEAR TO BE USED IN THE SAFE HANDLING AND RELEASE OF SEA TURTLES AND OTHER INCIDENTALLY CAUGHT SPECIES. THE LIST OF EQUIPMENT INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO: A LONG HANDLED DEHOOKING DEVICE, A SHORT HANDLED DEHOOKING DEVICE WITH BITE BLOCKER, A DIP-NET, A LONG HANDLED LINE CUTTER, BOLT CUTTER AND MONOFILAMENT CUTTER AND A SEA TURTLE SPECIES IDENTIFICATION CHART.

  16. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR MUST HOLD A CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE OR THE CANADIAN SEA TURTLE NETWORK IDENTIFYING THAT THEY HAVE SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED A DEHOOKING/DISENTANGLEMENT COURSE.

    GENERAL

  17. THE LICENCE HOLDER WILL BE REQUIRED TO RETURN ALL UNUSED BLUEFIN TUNA TAGS TO A FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA LICENSING OFFICE WITHIN SEVEN DAYS AFTER COMPLETION OF FISHING FOR THE SEASON OR WITHIN SEVEN DAYS OF THE EXPIRY OF THIS CONDITION, WHICHEVER COMES FIRST.

  18. WHILE FISHING UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THIS LICENCE, NO PERSON ONBOARD THE VESSEL SHALL PARTICIPATE IN RECREATIONAL FISHING OF ANY KIND.

  19. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR REQUESTED, RECEIVED AND UNDERSTOOD THESE LICENCE CONDITIONS ISSUED IN ENGLISH.

  20. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO ATTACH THESE LICENCE CONDITIONS TO THE 2013/2014 OTHER TUNA LICENCE.

  21. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR WILL REQUIRE A SEPARATE ADDENDUM CONDITION AND TAGS WHEN FISHING IN THE CENTRAL NORTH ATLANTIC (ICCAT AREA 3) BLUEFIN AREA. THIS CENTRAL NORTH ATLANTIC (ICCAT AREA 3) BLUEFIN TUNA ADDENDUM MUST BE ATTACHED TO THIS OTHER TUNA LICENCE CONDITION.

NOTE: FOR INFORMATION REGARDING AREAS OPEN OR CLOSED TO FISHING, VARIATION ORDERS AND FOR CLARIFICATION OF ANY POINTS CONTAINED IN THIS LICENCE CONDITION, CONTACT THE FOLLOWING; MARITIMES REGION - CONTACT THE LOCAL FISHERY OFFICER;
NEWFOUNDLAND REGION - CONTACT THE NEAREST CONSERVATION AND PROTECTION OFFICE, DFO.
DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANIES ARE NOT AGENTS OF THE FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA. DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANIES ARE NOT AUTHORIZED, ON BEHALF OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA, TO PROVIDE ANY INFORMATION TO FISHERS.

WHILE FISHING UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THIS LICENCE, ALL LICENCE HOLDERS/OPERATORS SHOULD ADHERE TO THE “CODE OF CONDUCT FOR RESPONSIBLE SEA TURTLE HANDLING AND MITIGATIVE MEASURES” AS PROVIDED BY THE NOVA SCOTIA SWORDFISHERMEN’S ASSOCIATION. THIS INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING MEASURES:

(F) AREAS OF HIGH SEA TURTLE CAPTURE RATES SHOULD BE AVOIDED.
(G) SEA TURTLE SPECIES IDENTIFICATION CHART AND SEA TURTLE HANDLING GUIDELINES SHOULD BE CARRIED ON EACH TRIP.
(H) WHERE WEATHER AND CIRCUMSTANCES PERMIT, DE-HOOK OR DISENTANGLE ALL SEA TURTLES AND OTHER INCIDENTALLY CAUGHT SPECIES. NOTE THAT A TURTLE’S REFLEX IS TO TWIST ITSELF INTO THE ROPE.
(I) BRING THE ANIMAL ALONG THE VESSEL OR WHERE POSSIBLE, BRING A TURTLE ON BOARD THE VESSEL USING A DIP NET (DO NOT RETRIEVE USING A GAFF OR FISHING LINE). REMOVE HOOK FROM ANIMAL USING THE DEHOOKING DEVICES. IF IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO REMOVE THE HOOK, CUT THE LINE AS CLOSE TO THE HOOK AS POSSIBLE. WHERE POSSIBLE, REMOVE ALL GEAR ATTACHED TO THE ANIMAL PRIOR TO RELEASE.
(J) RELEASE ACTIVE TURTLES HEAD FIRST INTO THE WATER WITH THE VESSEL IN A STATIONARY POSITION.

APPENDIX 5: 2013 Central North Atlantic (ICCAT Area 3) Bluefin Tuna Addendum

(VALID ONLY WITH CANADIAN ATLANTIC OTHER TUNA LONGLINE LICENCE CONDITIONS)

IN ADDITION TO THE 2013 OTHER TUNA LONGLINE LICENCE CONDITIONS, AND PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION 22.(1) OF THE FISHERY (GENERAL) REGULATIONS, THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS ARE SPECIFIED FOR PERSON(S) FISHING UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF OTHER TUNA LICENCE NO. , ISSUED IN RESPECT OF THE FISHING VESSEL , VESSEL REGISTRATION NUMBER , (HEREINAFTER KNOWN AS THE "VESSEL"):

DEFINITIONS

WHEN THE GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY OF AN AREA IN THESE LICENCE CONDITIONS ARE EXPRESSED IN LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE, THOSE POINT REFERENCES ARE BASED ON THE GEODESIC SYSTEM NORTH AMERICAN DATUM 1927 (NAD27), UNLESS EXPRESSED OTHERWISE.

FLANK LENGTH – IS IDENTIFIED IN THE LOGBOOK INSTRUCTIONS

DRESSED LENGTH - IS IDENTIFIED IN THE LOGBOOK INSTRUCTIONS.

DRESSED WEIGHT - FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS LICENCE CONDITION, IS DEFINED AS HEAD OFF, TAIL OFF AND GUTTED.

ISSUE DATE: YYYY/MM/DD

  1. THIS LICENCE ADDENDUM IS VALID FROM DATE OF ISSUANCE TO MARCH 31, 2014, OR UNTIL THE INDIVIDUAL QUOTA IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE IA HAS BEEN REACHED, OR UNTIL NOTICE IS GIVEN THAT NO FURTHER FISHING IS TO TAKE PLACE IN ICCAT AREA 3 DESCRIBED AS THOSE WATERS NORTH OF 10º0'00''NORTH LATITUDE AND BETWEEN 54º30'00''WEST LONGITUDE AND 30º0'00''WEST LONGITUDE BECAUSE THE CANADIAN BLUEFIN BYCATCH QUOTA THAT APPLIES TO ICCAT AREA 3 HAS BEEN OR IS ABOUT TO BE REACHED, WHICHEVER COMES FIRST. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE METHODS THAT MAY BE USED TO NOTIFY THE LICENCE HOLDERS AND OPERATORS THAT THEY ARE TO STOP FISHING IN ICCAT AREA 3:

    (a) BROADCASTING THE NOTICE OVER A COMMERCIAL OR MARINE RADIO STATION, A RADIO STATION OPERATED BY FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA (“DEPARTMENT”) OR A RADIO STATION LOCATED ON A VESSEL UNDER CONTRACT TO THE DEPARTMENT THAT BROADCASTS IN THE AREA OR VICINITY OF THE AREA AFFECTED BY THE CLOSURE NOTICE; OR

    (b) TRANSMITTING THE NOTICE BY ELECTRONIC MEANS TO THOSE PERSONS; OR

    (c) HAVING A FISHERY OFFICER OR FISHERY GUARDIAN GIVE ORAL NOTICE THEREOF

  2. (A) SUBJECT TO ITEMS 2(B), (C), (D) (E) AND (F), WHILE DIRECTING FOR OTHER TUNA (BIGEYE, YELLOWFIN, ALBACORE), THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS AUTHORIZED TO RETAIN BLUEFIN TUNA CAUGHT INCIDENTALLY ON LONGLINE GEAR IN THE AREA EAST OF 54º30'00''WEST LONGITUDE AND INSIDE THOSE WATERS KNOWN AS ICCAT AREA 3.

    (b) THE CATCH AND RETENTION OF BLUEFIN TUNA WEIGHING LESS THAN 30KG (ROUND WEIGHT) AND/OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE HAVING A FLANK LENGTH OF LESS THAN 115CM IS PROHIBITED. ALL BLUEFIN TUNA HAVING A FLANK LENGTH OF 115CM OR GREATER MUST BE BROUGHT ON BOARD THE VESSEL IMMEDIATELY. ALL BLUEFIN TUNA SHALL BE TAGGED IMMEDIATELY WITH A VALID BLUEFIN TUNA TAG, PRIOR TO ANY PROCESSING OR PREPARING OF THE BLUEFIN TUNA. THE TAG MUST BE ATTACHED TO THE NINTH FINLET FROM THE TAIL OF THE BLUEFIN TUNA IN A MANNER IN WHICH THE TAG IS DESIGNED. ALL FISH MUST BE KEPT ONBOARD THE VESSEL UNTIL THE COMPLETION OF EACH FISHING TRIP OR FISHING PERIOD. IN ADDITION, AT LEAST ONE PECTORAL FIN MUST REMAIN ATTACHED TO THE BLUEFIN TUNA AT ALL TIMES.

    (c) ONLY THE BLUEFIN TUNA TAGS WITH THE NUMBERS LISTED IN APPENDIX 1 OF THIS LICENCE CONDITION ARE TO BE USED, AND ARE VALID TO DECEMBER 31, 2013. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO HAVE AT LEAST ONE VALID BLUEFIN TUNA TAG AT THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY FISHING PERIOD AND MUST CEASE FISHING IN ICCAT AREA 3 WHEN ALL TAGS HAVE BEEN USED.

    (d) THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO HAIL FROM SEA TO A DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY THAT HAS BEEN DESIGNATED BY FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA IMMEDIATELY UPON COMPLETION OF EACH LONGLINE SET HAULBACK WHEN A BLUEFIN TUNA HAS BEEN CAUGHT AND TAGGED. THE HAIL MUST INCLUDE THE FULL NAME OF THE PERSION MAKING THE HAIL; THE VESSEL NAME, THE OTHER TUNA LICENCE NUMBER, THE HAIL OUT CONFIRMATION NUMBER, THE SERIAL NUMBER OF THE BLUEFIN TUNA TAG OR TAGS, THE ACCURATE ROUND WEIGHT OF EACH BLUEFIN TUNA BY TAG NUMBER, THE FLANK AND DRESSED LENGTH OF THE TUNA, THE DATE AND LOCAL TIME THAT THE FISH WAS CAUGHT (USING THE 24 HOUR SYSTEM), AREA FISHED, AND PLACE WHERE THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR INTENDS TO LAND THE FISH.

    A BLUEFIN TUNA IS CONSIDERED CAUGHT WHEN THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS ABLE TO BRING THE FISH ALONGSIDE THE VESSEL.

    (e) THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR WILL BE ISSUED A CONFIRMATION NUMBER BY THE DOCKSIDE MONITORING COMPANY CONFIRMING THAT THE HAIL IN ITEM (D) HAS BEEN RECEIVED. THIS NUMBER IS TO BE ENTERED IMMEDIATELY IN THE COMMENT FIELD OF THE SWORDFISH/SHARK LONGLINE AND TROLLING MONITORING DOCUMENT.

    (f) THE LICENCE HOLDER WILL BE REQUIRED TO RETURN ALL UNUSED TAGS TO A FISHERIES AND OCEANS CANADA LICENSING OFFICE WITHIN SEVEN DAYS AFTER FISHING IS COMPLETED FOR THE SEASON OR WITHIN SEVEN DAYS OF THE EXPIRY OF THIS CONDITION, WHICHEVER COMES FIRST.

  3. IN ADDITION TO THE TRIP SUMMARY HAIL-IN REQUIREMENTS STIPULATED IN THE 2013 OTHER TUNA LICENCE CONDITION, AT LEAST THREE (3) HOURS PRIOR TO RETURNING TO PORT, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS ALSO REQUIRED TO HAIL-IN THE NUMBER OF BLUEFIN ON BOARD, THEIR TAG NUMBERS AND AREA OF CAPTURE, THE ACCURATE ROUND WEIGHT IN POUNDS OF EACH BLUEFIN TUNA ON BOARD THE VESSEL, AND THE FLANK LENGTH AND DRESSED LENGTH OF EACH BLUEFIN TUNA.

    DFO VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS)

  1. THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO HAVE AN APPROVED VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS) AUTHORIZED BY DFO ON THE VESSEL AUTHORIZED TO FISH UNDER THIS LICENCE.

  2. THE VESSEL MUST BE FITTED WITH THE APPROVED VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS) PROVIDING DATA TO THE DFO VESSEL MONITORING CENTRE.

  3. WHERE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITEM 4 AN ELECTRONIC VMS IS IN USE ON THE VESSEL, THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR SHALL ENSURE THE SYSTEM IS FULLY OPERATIONAL, TURNED ON AND IN USE FROM THE TIME THE VESSEL LEAVES PORT UNTIL IT RETURNS TO PORT AND ALL OF THE FISH ON BOARD THE VESSEL IS OFFLOADED.

  4. THE LICENCE HOLDER / OPERATOR OF THE VESSEL AUTHORIZED TO USE AN ELECTRONIC VMS, SHALL DURING ANY FISHING TRIP, IMMEDIATELY CEASE ALL FISHING ACTIVITY SHOULD ANY OR ALL OF THIS EQUIPMENT BECOME INOPERATIVE, IS TURNED OFF OR MALFUNCTION IN ANY WAY. THE LICENCE HOLDER / OPERATOR OF THE VESSEL SHALL NOT RESUME ANY FISHING ACTIVITY WHILE THE ELECTRONIC VMS IS INOPERATIVE, TURNED OFF OR IS MALFUNCTIONING IN ANY WAY. THE LICENCE HOLDER / OPERATOR SHALL NOTIFY DFO OF ANY SUCH MALFUNCTION BY TELEPHONE AT (709) 772-2083 AND PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION:

    11. NAME OF MASTER,
    12. NAME OF VESSEL AND VESSEL REGISTRATION NUMBER,
    13. DATE AND TIME OF SAILING,
    14. PORT OF LANDING, AND
    15. TELEPHONE NUMBER WHERE THE MASTER CAN BE REACHED.

  5. FISHING IS ONLY AUTHORIZED WHEN THE ELECTRONIC VMS IS FUNCTIONAL, FULLY OPERATIONAL AND TURNED ON OR WHEN THE LICENCE HOLDER / OPERATOR RECIEVES APPROVAL FROM DFO TO RESUME FISHING.

  6. WHERE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITEM 4, AN ELECTRONIC VMS IS USED ON THE VESSEL DURING ANY FISHING TRIP UNDER THIS LICENCE AND CONDITIONS, NO PERSON SHALL:
    1. ALTER OR TAMPER WITH THAT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM;
    2. DESTROY, DISPOSE OF OR REMOVE THE ELECTRONIC MONITORING SYSTEM OR ASSOCIATED ELECTRONIC RECORDS OR STORAGE MEDIA;
    3. EMIT, OR CAUSE TO BE EMITTED, ANY ELECTRONIC OR ELECTRIC SIGNAL THAT RENDERS THE EQUIPMENT OR SYSTEM INOPERATIVE OR INACCURATE; OR
    4. INTERFERE WITH OR BLOCK ANY SIGNALS REQUIRED BY THE ELECTRONIC MONITORING SYSTEM TO GATHER, RECORD, OR TRANSMIT INFORMATION;
    5. TURN OFF THE VMS FROM THE TIME THE VESSEL LEAVES PORT UNTIL ALL OF THE FISH ON BOARD THE VESSEL IS OFFLOADED.
  1. FOR EACH VMS TRANSPONDER OR SERVICE PROVIDER INITIATION, REPLACEMENT, TRANSFER OR RESUMPTION, A COMPLETED (DFO) NATIONAL VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS) FORM MUST BE FORWARDED BY FAX AT 709-772-5787 AT LEAST TWO FULL BUSINESS DAYS BEFORE COMMENCING FISHING OPERATIONS.

  2. THE VMS TRANSPONDER ON THE VESSEL MUST REPORT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION AUTOMATICALLY TO DFO EACH HOUR:

    5. VMS IDENTIFICATION NUMBER AND COMMUNICATION SERVICE PROVIDER (CSP) (NAME & CSP NUMBER)
    6. GEOGRAPHIC POSITION (LATITUDE/LONGITUDE) OF THE VESSEL, AND
    7. DATE AND TIME CORRESPONDING TO THE ABOVE POSITION.

  3. SHOULD THE VMS EQUIPMENT OR SYSTEM BECOME INOPERATIVE OR MALFUNCTION IN ANY WAY WHILE A VESSEL IS FISHING IN THE NAFO REGULATORY AREA, IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 7 ABOVE, THAT VESSEL MUST CEASE FISHING AND RETURN TO CANADIAN FISHERIES WATERS.

  4. WHERE A VESSEL CARRIES TWO OR MORE APPROVED VMS UNITS ON BOARD, ONE MUST BE IDENTIFIED AS THE PRIMARY VMS UNIT, AND ALL OTHER UNITS MUST BE REGISTERED WITH DFO AS BACKUP UNITS. IN THE EVENT OF FAILURE OF THE PRIMARY UNIT, IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LICENCE HOLDER/OPERATOR TO IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY DFO THAT A BACK-UP UNIT IS BEING ACTIVATED AND SUBSEQUENTLY ENSURE IT IS FULLY OPERATIONAL BEFORE RESUMING FISHING ACTIVITY.

    QUOTA

14. THE TOTAL BLUEFIN BYCATCH QUOTA ("QUOTA") FOR ICCAT AREA 3 IS 30.621 TONNES.
15. THE LICENCE HOLDER REQUESTED AND RECEIVED THIS LICENCE ADDENDUM IN ENGLISH.
16. THE LICENCE HOLDER IS REQUIRED TO ATTACH THIS ADDENDUM TO THEIR OTHER TUNA LICENCE AND LICENCE CONDITIONS TO BE VALID.

APPENDIX 6: Swordfish Dependency by Port

Map of Swordfish Dependency by Port

See table 10 for details of this map

APMap of Tuna dependency by portPENDIX 7: Tuna Dependency by Port

See table 21 for details of this map

APPENDIX 8: History of Document Modifications
Version Modification Date
1.0 Initial signed copy November 2011
1.1 Updated to 2013 including:
  • TACs
  • # of licences
  • Introduction of transport licence for harpoon caught fish in the longline fleet
  • Introduction of IQ in harpoon fishery
  • MSC certification for longline
  • NPOA for sharks
  • Code of conduct
  • Transfer rules and introduction of harvest benefit combining
  • Compliance tables
April 2013