ANNEX I

SEA TURTLES CONSERVATION: International Agreements

Fish and Fishing, Maritime affairs, 16USC 1537 note

SEC. 609. (a) The Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, shall, with respect to those species of sea turtles the conservation of which is the subject of regulations promulgated by the Secretary of Commerce on June 29, 1987:

SEC. 609. (b)(1) IN GENERAL. The importation of shrimp or products from shrimp which have been harvested with commercial fishing technology which may affect adversely such species of sea turtles shall be prohibited not later than May 1, 1991, except as provided in paragraph (2).

SEC. 609. (b)(2) CERTIFICATION PROCEDURE. The ban on importation of shrimp or products from shrimp pursuant to paragraph (1) shall not apply if the President shall determine and certify to the Congress not later than May 1, 1991, and annually thereafter that:

ANNEX II

Appendix 1

THE ISSUE OF BYCATCH IN MODERN FISHERIES, WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO SHRIMP TRAWLS

By Dr. J. Frazier

Definition of "Bycatch":

1. The term "bycatch" has been used in different ways, and there may be some confusion over its meaning. When applied to contemporary fisheries, the word refers to animals (and plants to a much lesser extent) which are caught incidental to attempts to catch a "target species".

2. A prime example of bycatch comes from the shrimp/prawn trawl, a type of gear which is dragged along the sea bottom to catch shrimps and prawns; on retrieving the trawl nets, the catch typically includes not just shrimp and prawns, but other organisms which were in the way of the nets as they were trawled. Dividing the catch into target species (shrimp and prawns) and bycatch (animals other than shrimp and prawns), there is sometimes a ratio of 1 to 10 or even 1 to 20, indicating that for every kilogram of shrimp, 10 or 20 kilograms of other animals were extracted from the sea. Sea turtles, when caught in shrimp trawls, form part of the bycatch.

3. The present dispute before the Panel is a bycatch issue: marine turtles caught in shrimp trawls constitute an important component of the bycatch of shrimp trawling. Indeed, the problem of sea turtles drowning in shrimp trawls is the classical "tip of the bycatch iceberg".

Fate of Bycatch:

4. Once they have been caught and landed, the animals in the bycatch can be utilized, thus, becoming a "byproduct" of the fishing operation. Alternatively, organisms in the bycatch can be discarded, and thrown back into the sea as "discards".

Global Relevance of Bycatch:

5. A recent report by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that the annual bycatch in world fisheries totals 29 million metric tons; of this, an estimated 27 million metric tons are discarded. Shrimp trawling - notably shrimp trawling in the tropics - accounts for some 35 per cent of the total world bycatch (Alverson et. al., 1994). To put these numbers in perspective, according to the FAO, the annual total for marine fisheries landings during recent years has been between 80 and 90 million metric tons. In other words, annual discards are equivalent to about a third of the total annual catch that is brought to port.

Status of Knowledge on Bycatch:

6. Despite the obvious importance - economic, environmental and social - of bycatch in contemporary fisheries, it is a subject which is little understood and poorly documented. Various recent publications, especially by fisheries experts at the FAO, make it clear that there is a general lack of systematic - and reliable - information on the problem of bycatch, or bycatch utilization (e.g., Andrew and Pepperell, 1992; Everett, 1995:280; Teutscher, 1995a:4; 1995b:16; Eyabi-Eyabi, 1995:19; FAO, 1997a:3-7; Clucas, 1997a:8; Everett, 1997:46; 55; Prado, 1997:42). Likewise, there is a general lack of awareness of the magnitude and gravity of the problem (Everett, 1997:55), and this involves policy makers in various regions, including Southeast and South Asia (Prado and Rahman, 1995:24-25). Although there are very few systematic studies on the levels of mortality due to bycatch, it is widely accepted that this is a major source of fisheries mortality. Hence, experts in the evaluation of global bycatch have summarized the dilemma: "[Fisheries] Management for the better part of this century has operated largely in ignorance of many of the mortality coefficients". (Alverson and Hughes, 1995:17).

Reactions by Fishers and the Fishing Industry to Bycatch:

7. When confronted with bycatch, there are several ways in which fishers can respond. The issue may be ignored, and the unwanted animals and plants may simply be discarded and thrown back into the sea. Shrimp fisheries target one of the most commercially lucrative of all fisheries products - shrimp, so the operation is focused on catching, handling, sorting, conserving, storing, transporting, and marketing shrimp. "Typically, if the bycatch from shrimp trawling has any value at all, it can be twenty or thirty times less valuable than the shrimp" (Clucas, 1997c:6); hence, there is often no, or insufficient, economic incentive to deal bycatch, and it is simply discarded. "Various studies on fishery bycatch have made it clear that discarding is pervasive in world fisheries ..." (Alverson and Hughes, 1995:26).

8. Alternately, the fishers may look for a way of using the bycatch, or a part of it. Thus, the bycatch is separated into "other food fish" and "trash fish". The ways in which these components are dealt with is then determined by market prices and/or regulations.

9. Finally, attempts can be made to avoid the bycatch. This may involve modifying the gear so that it does not capture the "non-target" species (for example, by altering the dimensions or other characteristics of nets, using excluder devices, etc.). It is also possible to change the way, place and time that fishing is carried out; for example, fishing can be banned from an area, either on a long term or a seasonal basis.

10. If endangered species are part of the bycatch, other factors come to bear. "The incidental capture of prohibited or endangered species as bycatch is potentially a very serious problem for the future of the fisheries." (Prado, 1997:25). "Avoidance of by-catch through selective trawl designs is considered a high priority in many fisheries, particularly where the incidental capture of turtles is controversial". (Andrew and Pepperell, 1992:527). Hence, when endangered species are involved, solutions to bycatch problems normally involve reglamentation by governing authorities, as dictated by society (see Hall, 1995).

Implications of Discarding, or "Wastage":

11. Despite its pervasive nature, there are few detailed scientific studies of the effects of discarding, or wastage of bycatch; and although little is known about the proportion of discards that die, bycatch mortality is regarded to be high (except in certain resistant species, such as crabs). At an ecological level, even less is known about what happens when large numbers of dead and mauled marine animals are thrown, en masse, back into the sea. It has been argued that the biotic composition of the area changes, not only from the mortality caused by fishing but from the introduction of large quantities of dead animals. Physical and chemical characteristics of the sea floor may also be affected, particularly if discarding is done in shallow waters (Harris and Poiner, 1990).

12. Because of a lack of basic information, there are no simple scientific pronouncements about the impacts of discarding. However, in terms of social and economic considerations, many societies do not accept the present degree of wastage in modern fisheries, and have called upon their governments to find solutions to this practice (e.g., Alverson and Hughes, 1995:13; Dilday, 1995; Everett, 1995; Olsen, 1995; Clucas, 1997c:47-49). The number of international accords, as well as statements from concerned citizens, which focus on this issue is large and growing (see sections below on International Accords Regarding Bycatch and International Concern Over the State of the Oceans, Bycatch and Sea Turtles).

13. In relation to the five countries directly involved in the present dispute, a recent report by the FAO indicates that 90 per cent of the bycatch is discarded in India, Malaysia, Pakistan and the United States, while 50 per cent is discarded in Thailand (Teutscher, 1995b: Table 6).

Implications of Utilization of Bycatch:

14. Over the last few years, technologies have been developed to utilize fishes which were formerly regarded as "trash fish" (Clucas, 1997c:32). Indeed, as world fisheries production reached a plateau - despite tremendous advances in technology and capital investment in modern vessels, gear and advanced electronics, competition for fisheries resources became "increasingly acute" (Alverson and Hughes, 1995:14), and as a result, there were countless initiatives to utilize more of what was caught during fishing operations. For example, in 1981 the FAO together with the International Development Research Centre sponsored an international technical consultation "Fish By-Catch ... Bonus from the Sea", which resulted in a 163-page proceedings of technical information and recommendations on exploiting more bycatch (IDRC, 1982).

15. There are numerous "success stories" of technological advancements and consequent increases in utilization of bycatch. The marketing and consumption of what were considered to be "trash fish" in Southeast Asia, using technologies promoted by the Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center, in Bangkok (SEAFDEC), is a clear example (Clucas, 1997a:12). It has been reported that, in some instances, very little of the bycatch from the Thai shrimp fishery is now discarded at sea (Kungsuwan, 1996), and recent descriptions of the fishes utilized from trawling activities in both Thailand and Malaysia indicate that they are removing virtually everything which gets into the nets (Chee, 1997; Clucas, 1997c:32-33).

16. Clearly, utilization of bycatch - and avoiding the tremendous wastage involved in discards - is now a major priority in fishery policy around the world (Teutscher, 1995a), yet, there are many diverse issues which complicate the implementation of policies to reduce discards. Ironically, one of the factors which favors more efficient bycatch utilization is the demise of inshore fisheries (Bostock and Ryder, 1995:47). Clucas (1997b:65) identified this phenomenon in the trawl fishery for finfish in Malaysia: "As 'traditional' food fish sources become increasingly under pressure because of scarcity of stock and growing human populations more unusual species will be taken into the [human] food chain and change from being discarded bycatch to incidental catch". In those cases where effective at-sea bycatch collection procedures have developed, there has regularly been a decrease in inshore harvests, frequently related to conflicts with mechanized trawlers. Two clear examples are India (Bostock and Ryder, 1995:47) and Gambia (Jallow, 1995:32). Other prime examples of this phenomenon are Cameroon (Eyabi-Eyabi, 1995:22) and Mozambique (Kelleher and Mussa, 1995:66), where artisanal fisheries are no longer lucrative, and the fishers have turned to collecting bycatch from shrimp trawlers.

17. In other words, in these cases of "efficient bycatch utilization" what were once self-sufficient inshore fishers, have now been reduced to the role of bycatch collectors, dependent on discards, or low-value sales, of what are regarded as "trash fish" from other fisheries. As the phenomenon takes place within national borders, it is seen as progress and efficiency: if the producers of bycatch were instead from one nation and the artisanal fishermen, converted to "trash fish" collectors, were from another nation, the relationship would be perceived in totally different light, and with considerable alarm.

18. Another question that needs to be considered is just what the bycatch is used for. For example, during the 1990�s in Thailand, the bycatch which has been used "has usually ended up at fishmeal factories... as an important ingredient for animal feed" (Kungsuwan, 1995:87-88). At the same time, a significant (but unknown) part of the utilized bycatch in Viet Nam is used for animal food or as fertilizer for agriculture (Tuoc, 1995:97). Nearly 85 per cent of the utilized bycatch in Cuba is destined for animal feed (García-Rodríguez, 1995:25). This pattern is repeated on a world level, and it estimated that a third of the production from modern fisheries is destined for use as fishmeal or other secondary products. As a matter of course, this involves the export of fishmeal and oil from the "Third World" to be used as animal feed and fertilizer in the "First World". Needless to say, many people concerned with food security in the poorer countries are deeply alarmed by this mercantile arrangement of "the poor feeding the rich" (e.g., Kent, 1980; 1983; 1984; 1985; 1986; 1987; 1989; 1994; McGoodwin, 1990). This is to say nothing of ecological and social costs of processing and transporting animal protein to be used as animal feeds (e.g., Folke and Kautsky, 1989; Barraclough and Finger-Stich, 1995).

19. At one level, the extensive utilization of bycatch could be used to argue that fishing is more efficient, because there are fewer discards. However, both the ecological and the sociological consequences of this form of intensive exploitation are likely to be disastrous. Indeed, publications representing the small-scale fisheries (which constitutes the vast majority of the world's fishers), leave little doubt about the problems generated by trawling activities and near complete utilization of their bycatch, particularly in Southeast Asia (e.g., Pauly, 1988; 1995; Pauly and Neal, 1985; Pauly and Chua, 1988; Mathew, 1990).

20. Pronouncements of the FAO, based on regional fisheries meetings, make this point very clear: "It was recognized however that there are particular problems associated with the use of shrimp bycatch. The catch consists of a large number of small fish of many species, which are being caught at maturity or as juveniles, which makes conventional methods of utilization problematical." (FAO, 1997a:11). "It should be noted that the fuller utilization of incidental catches and the consequent decline in discards does not necessarily indicate an improvement in fisheries conservation of the ecological impact of the fishery. In some cases this may lead to increased pressure on some stocks of species and to increases in unidentified species mixes in reported landings" (FAO, 1997a:12). Clucas (1997c:47) discusses several critical points relevant to this issue, showing that much more is involved in conserving marine resources than just utilizing everything that is caught.

21. "The expert consultations leading up to the adoption of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries gave definitive priority status to the avoidance of fish that might be subsequently discarded and only as the last resort to marketing and utilisation issues. The rational behind this was that little is known about the effects of removal of the discards on the ecosystem and if a market is generated it is going to be difficult to reverse the situation." (see FAO, 1994).

Implications of Taking Bycatch:

22. Independently of whether or not bycatch is utilized, or discarded, the simple act of taking it has both ecological and social implications. Even critiques from a strictly economic stand point, have conceded that lessening incidental capture reduces costs to those fishers who depend on the species taken as bycatch in other fisheries, and this "benefits the traditional harvesters". (Smith, 1995).

23. The ecological impacts of taking bycatch are not well understood, but are usually thought to be substantial (Andrew and Pepperell, 1992). "If large quantities of bycatch are taken important parts of the marine ecosystem may be affected. If the taking of bycatch removes a fish habitat such as corals, sponges and seaweed, this may also affect fish populations". (Prado, 1997:41).

24. Many authors have explained that the gravity of the bycatch problem is a symptom of the contemporary dilemma with overfishing (e.g., Romine, 1995): "One of the major contributing factors to the significance of the bycatch problem is systematic overfishing" (Murawski, 1995:7); "The easiest solution to discard problems involving overexploited species may be a reduction in fishing effort". (Alverson and Hughes, 1995:27). "The single action that will provide the greatest improvement to the bycatch and discard problem in certain fisheries is the reduction of these effort levels. Without such control, other solutions to the bycatch and discard problem will be less effective, and real success in efforts to better manage the ocean's resources will be more difficult to attain". (Everett, 1995:280).

25. The importance of reducing bycatch and minimizing ecological impacts from fishing operations have been emphasized by a long list of people, in diverse occasions and in diverse fora (e.g., Andrew and Pepperell, 1992; Alverson et al., 1994; R. Bin Ali, 1995b; R. Alverson, 1995; Alverson and Hughes, 1995; Dilday, 1995; Fairley, 1995; FAO, 1995; 1997a; Laist, 1995; Murawski, 1995; Olsen, 1995; Prado and Rahman, 1995; 1996; Romine, 1995; Kungsuwan, 1996; Everett, 1997; Norse, 1997a; Prado, 1997).

26. This has led to the conclusion that managing fisheries, protecting marine organisms and ecosystems cannot be done by just considering one species at a time, out of context with other species and the marine environment: "The commonly referred to 'ecosystem approach' to fishery management is now necessitating that research extends beyond the emphasis on target species and single species approaches to stock assessment, and that rather more emphasis be given to determine optimal relationships among populations in the same ecosystem". (Everett, 1997:47). Species that are components of bycatch, need to be managed and conserved by resolving the bycatch problem, together with other more conventional conservation activities.

Avoidance and Exclusion of Bycatch:

27. The reduction of bycatch has been given priority status by various specialists and agencies, both national and international. In the parlance of fisheries biology and management, this means using fishing gear and techniques which are more "selective", and today this is one of the great challenges before modern fisheries (see, for example, Andrew and Pepperell, 1992; FAO, 1994; 1995; 1997a; Fairley, 1995; Prado and Rahman, 1995; 1996; Wray, 1995; Clucas, 1997c).

28. Aside from the technological and scientific challenges, there are other basic matters that must be resolved. For example, during the FAO/INFOFISH/SEAFDEC Workshop on Research in Selectivity of Fishing Gear and Methods in South East Asia and Selective Shrimp Fishing, fisheries experts from Southeast and South Asia observed that "in general, research in fishing technology, including fishing gear selectivity, was not given priority". With special reference to shrimp fisheries, they recommended that: there should be modifications to some gear to reduce bycatch; traditional fishing methods should be studied to improve resource conservation; and "state authorities should implement suggestions made by the researchers" (Prado and Rahman, 1995:24-25). (As usual, people with technical expertise provide basic information, but are rarely part of the decision making process for national policy, so it is not surprising to see the level of frustration expressed in this last statement. This situation is seen by the fact that numerous biologists, conservationists and fisheries officers - many of them from the countries involved in the present dispute - have for decades been trying to and promote more selective fishing and the use of TEDs, often with negligible results at the policy making level - see Annex II).

29. One of the most succinct summaries of the discussion on bycatch comes from two, forward-looking members of the fishing industry: "The merits of a fisherman can no longer be measured solely by how much he catches, but also on what he does not". (Paine and Gruver, 1995).

Environmental Impacts of Bottom Trawling:

30. For more than 600 years, bottom trawling has been claimed to be deleterious to fishers and fisheries, but there have been few systematic studies on this complex issue (McGoodwin, 1990). "As an efficient but unselective fishing method, this [bottom trawling] has led to the capture of numerous small sized species as well as juveniles of the larger species taken by other fishery sectors". "Many bycatch species are exploited at a small size and the yield of the resource could increase if [they could be] exploited at a larger species size which may also increase the landed value". (FAO, 1997a:7).

31. One of the earliest signs of effects of trawling is changes in the species composition and/or size composition of the organisms captured in the nets. Sainsbury (1987; 1989), working in Northwestern Australia, reported that as a trawl fishery developed in time, the occurrence of sponges and other emergent organisms that anchor to the sea floor decreased. At the same time, those species of fishes which associate with dense emergent organisms also declined in abundance. Routinely, as in Sainsbury's study, the fishes which decrease in numbers are of commercial value.

32. Nichols (1989) showed that with increased shrimp trawling in the Gulf of Mexico, some species of fishes dropped dramatically in abundance; Atlantic croaker, for example, dropped to 20 per cent of what they were in the 1970s. Furthermore, mean weight per individual for these species followed the same sharp decline, and instead of being composed of several age classes, by the mid 1980s the catch was mainly first year fish. These are both clear signs of intensified mortality - in this case attributed to bycatch problems.

33. There are few systematic studies of the effects of trawling, especially in tropical fisheries stocks, but where there is information, it shows that fishes preferred for food by people decrease, while fishes not normally consumed increase. Chan and Liew (1986) did a detailed study off the coast of Terengganu, Malaysia, comparing the fishes caught in trawls with what was known of the fish fauna 18 years before trawling was introduced. They found that fishes of the family Leiognathidae (food fishes), dropped from 12.79 per cent to 2.70 per cent of the biomass. In addition, their analysis of the trophic structure of the fish assemblages sampled indicated that they were relatively simple; this may also be an effect of the ecological impacts of 18 years of bottom trawling. Pauly and Neal (1985) reported similar changes in fish assemblages after shrimp trawling in other areas of Southeast Asia.

34. To a great extent, these ecological changes are attributed to mortality of bycatch. However, there are other, less evident but pernicious effects of bottom trawling. Norse (1997a) reported on the results of an international workshop on bottom trawling, in which it was concluded that this form of fishing "is the most important source of human-caused physical disturbance on the world's continental shelves". The participants determined that this disturbance results, among other things, in the crushing of marine animals and their habitats, greatly reducing the complexity of the sea floor; furthermore, trawling can cause major changes in biogeochemistry, water clarity, and other abiotic features. The reduction in biological and textural diversity is a major deterrent in the survival and recruitment of countless marine organisms, including many species that are commercially important.

35. Of those detailed investigations on the physical effects of bottom trawling, that reported by Auster et. al. (1996) is most remarkable. These authors explained that although it is widely known that the use of "mobile fishing gear" (which includes bottom trawls and dredges) alters sea floor habitats, few studies have attempted to quantify these effects. They used a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) to obtain video images of the sea bed in the Gulf of Maine. Indices of bottom cover were calculated for transects inside an area that had been closed to mobile fishing gear for 10 years, as well as for other transects just outside the closed area. In addition, they compared images of a second area taken before trawling occurred there, and then six years later after the bottom had been exposed to trawling. The evidence clearly shows, both visually and statistically, that these gear greatly reduce the diversity of organisms living on the sea bed, as well as the textural complexity of the bottom. The authors explained how deterioration in sea floor complexity directly affects the survival of juvenile target species and hence, productivity from the fisheries point of view. Thus, effects of fishing gear must be evaluated not simply in terms of the removal of target and non-target species, but also taking into account other impacts on the environment.

36. Although there is a clear need for systematic studies comparing trawled and un-trawled sea bottoms, Auster et. al., (1996:197) argue that in some fishing grounds "no sufficiently large areas exist that can act as true non-impacted reference sites". Concluding that habitat-based management should take into account the impacts of mobile fishing gear, they explain: "Clearly, mobile gear provide efficient ways to harvest living marine resources in the short-term, but economic efficiency may have an ecological price that requires restriction of the activity in select areas".

The Relevance of Shrimp Trawling to Bycatch Problems:

37. Of the various types of bottom trawling, shrimp trawling is one of the best known. This is not only because of the high monetary value of the target species - shrimp and prawns - but also because of the relatively high environmental impact of shrimp trawling, as indicated especially by the amount of bycatch and discards that it produces. Shrimp fisheries are estimated to contribute some 1.8 million tons of landed catch, or about 2.3 per cent of the total of annual marine catch. At the same time, it has been estimated that shrimp fisheries produce 9.5 million tons of discards, or 35 per cent of the annual world total (Alverson et al., 1994; Teutscher, 1995b:11; Clucas, 1997a:7). Hence, 2.3 per cent of total marine production results in 35 per cent of the total discards. (Since nearly half the weight of a shrimp is "head", and this part of the animal is usually discarded before consumption, if shrimp with "heads" were included in the calculations for landed catch, the contribution of food for human consumption will be considerably less than indicated by the above figures.)

38. Considering the way in which shrimp trawlers operate, it is not difficult to understand why they produce so much bycatch. Take for example a typical "twin trawler" from Malaysia (R. Bin Ali, 1995b). It is equipped with two trawl nets, each about 13 meters wide. If the boat steams at 1.25 knots while trawling, and one trawling session lasts for 3 hours, during one trawl (also called "tow" or "drag") the boat would advance nearly 7 km. With both nets open, the total width covered would be about 26 meters, giving an area of 175,500 square meters of sea floor that would be dragged during one trawl. With an average of 4 trawls a day and 20 days a month of active fishing, one single shrimp trawler would scrape and drag 168 square kilometers of sea floor in a year. (Ali [1997:5] reported trawling speeds of 2.5 to 3.0 knots and nets that were 18.0 and 23.9 m wide; using these higher values, the calculated area covered would be 744 square kilometers per year per boat.) When thousands of such trawlers are operating, the area impacted is enormous.

39. In shrimp trawl fisheries the catch is separated into shrimp and prawns (the "target species") and bycatch; the latter can be proportioned into: "food fish" and "trash fish". "Food fish" are usually sold directly for human consumption, either fresh or preserved, for example by salting and drying. Those fishes separated as "trash fish" have no conventional market for human food, so their commercial value is low or non existent. When they are utilized, "trash fish" species are normally processed into a secondary product, such as fishmeal or fish oil, and then employed in animal foods or agricultural fertilizers. Since the monetary value of bycatch can be less than a twentieth that of bycatch (Clucas, 1997c:6), there is often little economic incentive for marketing non-target species.

40. The proportion of "trash fish" in the catch varies depending on place, time, fishery and other factors. For example, a recent report from the Department of Fisheries, Thailand (Kungsuwan, 1996: Tables 3 and 4) shows that 75 per cent of the production from all fishing activities in the Gulf of Thailand (excluding shrimp culture) was "true trash fish", while in the Andaman Sea 76 per cent was "true trash fish". As usual, the proportion of "trash fish" produced from shrimp trawling is much higher than for the other fisheries. In the Gulf of Thailand, 82 per cent of the catch from shrimp trawling was "true trash fish", while in the Andaman Sea the "true trash fish" component was 85 per cent of the catch of shrimp trawlers.

41. Of the different types of shrimp fisheries, it is the industrialized tropical fishery that is most typically characterized as highly destructive to marine resources, with relatively high levels of discards (e.g., Andrew and Pepperell, 1992; Teutscher, 1995b:12; Clucas, 1997a:7). This has been documented in many nations (Alverson et. al., 1994), including: Cameroon (Eyabi-Eyabi, 1995:20); India (Bostock and Ryder, 1995:41 ff.); Malaysia (R. Bin Ali, 1995b); Nigeria (Akande and Tobor, 1995:72); Suriname (Lieveld, 1995: Tables 1, 4 and 5); Tanzania (Mgawe, 1995:81); and Thailand (Kungsuwan, 1995:87-88);

42. A comparison between two Asian fisheries may help illuminate the gravity of the problem. Annual discards from just the fleet based at Vishakapatnam (East coast of India) are estimated to be between 99,000 and 130,000 metric tons (Gordon, 1990). A number of explanations have been offered for the fact that so much bycatch is discarded, in a land where food, especially protein, is needed by so many people; the main reasons point to the fact that there is little financial incentive to sort, store, transport, handle, and sell most types of bycatch (Bostock and Ryder, 1995:43-45). Yet, it is remarkable that in India, where costs of labor are remarkably low, there is little financial incentive to market bycatch, while in Thailand and Malaysia, where operational costs are considerably higher, a much greater proportion, or virtually all, bycatch is utilized. Two questions arise: Is the efficiency of handling and marketing low value bycatch that much greater in Southeast Asia, despite higher labor and operating costs? or, Is fisheries production from Southeast Asia meager in relation to the Bay of Bengal, resulting in bycatch which would not normally be economically viable, being attractive for a lack of more lucrative alternatives? Indeed, in Thailand it has been stated that "the quality of by-catch and true trash fish is low and unsuitable for human consumption". (see Kungsuwan, 1995:88).

43. Recent information from the FAO (1997b:86) shows that in the Gulf of Thailand demersal fish stocks are now just one tenth of what they were 30 years ago, when trawling began in this area; nearly 70 per cent of the catch today is small, non-edible species of low commercial value and juveniles of species that would be of commercial importance if they were larger. The Gulf of Thailand has been called an "underwater desert" (Mathew, 1990:84), and the intense depletion of marine resources there has become a classic example of overexploitation (Pauly, 1998; 1995; Pauly and Chua, 1988). Hence, in the above case, apparent "economic efficiency" is nothing more than a manifestation of the serial depletion of fisheries resources.

44. Indeed, the concept of "trash fish" - a term incongruous with ecological processes - is evolving as fisheries resources become less available to burgeoning human populations: what was once discarded as worthless is now sought as a source of nutrients. Pauly (1995:287) discussed how this loaded term came about, and explained that it was a creation of the shrimp trawling industry.

45. As stated earlier, there is a long, and growing, list of publications on fisheries that have emphasized the pressing need to reduce bycatch destruction, and it is a widely accepted fact that shrimp trawling is by far one of the most destructive forms of fishing (e.g., Andrew and Pepperell, 1992; Alverson et. al., 1994; Teutscher, 1995a:3; 1995b; Clucas, 1997a; 1997b; Clucas and James, 1997; FAO, 1997a:11).

To Continue With Chapter 46