WWF concerned about EU fisheries deal

Environmental lobby group the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) has expressed concern over the latest European Union (EU) fishing agreement with Angola saying that while Angola needs the money, the deal is not in line with sustainable fisheries. The EU and Angola renewed a US $15.3 million fisheries agreement in August for two years and also increased to 35 percent the share allocated to measures that would benefit Angola's fisheries sector. Just under US $1 million per year was earmarked for the development of small-scale fishing and support for fishing communities as Angola seeks to help people resettle in the aftermath of its civil war. Other benefits include training, institutional support for Angola's participation in regional fisheries organisations and the monitoring and control of fisheries activities and aquaculture. However, WWF said the deal did not support sustainability, and unless certain changes were made, Angola's fish stocks risked being exhausted. A major concern was the lack of catch limits for all species except shrimp. "Imagine being able to pay to enter a supermarket and then loading up your trolley with almost anything you wanted. That's what the EU has negotiated with famine-hit Angola," Julie Cantor, WWF European fisheries coordinator said. "Angola needs the hard currency but the EU should work towards assisting Angola with a long term management plan. South Africa put a lot of work into a long term management plan for their fisheries. Where is Angola's? How do they monitor and control the agreement?" Cantor told IRIN. There was also no final agreement on biological rest periods for the fish, only that a biological rest period "may" be put in place for shrimp. She said that although the agreement made provision for measures like satellite monitoring to make sure trawlers stayed within the agreed fishing limits, there did not appear to be a clear infrastructure to monitor these agreements. This also applied to trawlers from countries outside the EU. Cantor added that although the deal specified that 35 percent of the funds went to Angola's fishing industry, the money would pass through the national treasury and there was no way to check if it reached the intended beneficiaries. The WWF was also concerned about the inconsistency between the EU fisheries policy and EU development policy. "The EU have a good relationship with Angola through its development policies and it needs to have the same attitude with fisheries," said Cantor. "There has to be a change of attitude, instead of just taking the fish and going." A recent WWF report highlighted the plight of Angola's artisanal fishermen who functioned with a minimum of resources, and were finding it increasingly difficult to feed themselves. One of their main obstacles was commercial drag fishermen whose nets were "catching everything" and stripping the nurseries. Their predicament was compounded by a lack of equipment, leaving them unable to compete against the large-scale industrial fishermen. They also said that there was no surveillance to prevent some of the foreign and commercial trawlers from fishing closer to shore than the agreed 12 mile coastal limit. CARE International have completed a proposal for the African Development Bank (ADB) on measures to help Angola's artisanal fishermen. The proposal would centre on developing much needed credit for the fishermen to enable them to buy equipment such as new nets, motors for their boats and refrigerators and refrigerated trucks to preserve their catch. "It is a very poor community and the [artisanal] industry needs improvement," said Robert Bulten, CARE International's head of programmes in Angola. More details