For years I have been a bit reticent on the general criminalisation of fishers where IUU fishing is railed down as being de facto seen as involving crimes like drugs, arms trafficking.. which from my experience can happen, but that is not ALWAYS the case.
Stern talks are part of the life on board
This recent paper “Fish crimes in the global ocean” by Dyhia Belhabib (whom I have corresponded with and have tons of respect, she published this article we wrote with my friends) and Phillipe Le Billion (whom I don't know) proves my point above… the majority of IUU events happen as only IUU, with a minority involving other forms of crime
Is a big paper that needs substantial digestion, but is interesting for its ambition.
While I have issues with papers that look at global aspects (as it always implies compromises) I’m absolutely aware of my minimal academic credential (I only have 2 masters) so I would not dare comment on the methods.
Coming from an operational background, in my experiences, the realities of tuna fishing are totally different between Purse Seiners and Longliners to point of difficult comparison, furthermore different areas of the oceans are totally different in terms of the level of governance and MCS, and even in these specific areas the difference in between coastal states jurisdiction and high seas is vastly different, albeit being in many cases vessels flagged to the same DWFN
Yet I get two main points:
Our analysis reveals that the most common offense remains fishing without a license or permit, with 48% of all offenses, and other fishing offenses (31%) including gear, season- and zone-related, underreporting, and quota-related offenses, followed by human rights and labor abuse (11%); transshipment (3%); and smuggling of drugs, arms, and other goods and products (4%)
From a IUU fishing this tells me of all the offences they analysed (48% unlicensed +31% gear seasons reporting, etc + 3% transhipments related) 82% are fisheries-related issues, 11% labour / human rights and only 4% are for smuggling drugs, arms, etc…
Later the paper says
Of the 6853 incidents recorded, 6003 incidents (88%) involved fishing vessels caught for a single type of offense: 4954 for one illegal fishing, 140 for illegal transshipment; 66 for illegal diversion including noncompliance strategies, forgery, or the illegal use of flags;
While I would add those categories under IUU fishing … in any case, the paper recognises that 11% (772 events) included at least two types of offences. And of those Illegal fishing is linked to other non–fishing-related offences in 57% (around 360?) of the cases with two or more offences.
While this may not be the aim of the paper, (around 360 out of over 6500 even if my calculations are wrong) I think is good news as it shows that the vast majority (80%+) of the vessel engaged in IUU do not partake in other crimes.
From the perspective of someone that works against IUU (which is already hard) but has no legal capacity to tackle the other issues, it means to me that I can focus on IUU as that is most of the work and then expand into joint work with other authorities (always complicated) for the minority of cases.
Yet there is one part that I disagree with, based on my local experience, is under the title
Interactions with labor abuses and slavery at sea
Our analysis shows that these cases are notably reported for slavery aboard occurring in the territorial waters and EEZ of Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Somalia, South Africa, and Thailand with over 291 cases globally where illegal fishing was linked to forced labor. All of these cases occurred on industrial vessels and by their crewing companies involving either companies or individual recruiters.
I don't know about the other countries… But Papua New Guinea has some of the strictest controls on its tuna fleet in the region and I have worked on their vessels… so unless this refers to the illegal inclusions of Indonesian vessels over the EEZ borders of the smaller scale fleet, I’m not sure where that reference came from
Anyway… other than my personal uneducated take on these issues, and areas one may or may not agree, the paper is a good read, since it makes you think! And in my small fisherman head, thinking is always a good thing.