6th meeting of the United Nations Open-ended Informal Consultative 
Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea  -  Issue #5 

EARTH NEGOTIATIONS BULLETIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR 
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (IISD) <http://www.iisd.org>

Written and edited by:

Alice Bisiaux
Robynne Boyd 
Elisa Morgera 
Cecilia Vaverka 

Editor:

Pamela S. Chasek, Ph.D. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 

Director of IISD Reporting Services:

Langston James "Kimo" Goree VI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


Vol. 25 No. 17
Friday, 10 June 2005

Online at http://www.iisd.ca/oceans/icp6/ 

UNICPOLOS-6 HIGHLIGHTS:

THURSDAY, 9 JUNE 2005

On Thursday, delegates to the sixth meeting of the UN Informal 
Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea (UNICPOLOS-6 
or Consultative Process) reconvened the Discussion Panel on marine 
debris in the morning, addressing national approaches. In the 
afternoon, delegates met in Plenary to exchange views on areas of 
concern and actions needed.

DISCUSSION PANEL ON MARINE DEBRIS

NATIONAL APPROACHES: Keynote presentations: Thomas Cowan, 
Director, Northwest Straits Commission, highlighted the aims of 
the Marine Conservation Initiative's derelict fishing gear removal 
project, including improving public safety and assisting in 
species recovery. He stressed the amount of derelict fishing gear 
that goes unreported, and listed the impacts of marine debris, 
emphasizing human safety, degraded marine ecosystems and 
vulnerable habitats. Cowan outlined additional pilot project 
objectives, namely: developing and testing removal protocols; 
creating a database of marine debris' locations; establishing a 
public reporting system; and educating and involving civil 
society.

Ilse Kiessling, National Oceans Office, Australia, said marine 
debris and derelict fishing gear constitute hazards to vessels, 
human life, and marine species; and stressed their impact on the 
economic viability and sustainability of commercial fisheries. She 
called for a review of the effectiveness of existing measures, 
adding that nearly all debris on remote Australian coastlines 
comes from industrial fishing. She urged industrial fisheries to 
implement Annex V of the International Convention for the 
Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), which regulates 
pollution by garbage from ships. She recommended that fisheries 
not subject to RFMOs carry out inventories of gear, and stated 
that international cooperation is the first step in tackling the 
issue of marine debris.

Laleta Davis-Mattis, Senior Legal Advisor, National Environment 
and Planning Agency, Jamaica, identified high levels of poverty 
and tourism as contributing factors to the production of marine 
debris. She listed its sources, namely: discharges of solid waste 
from storm-water gullies and drains; solids from malfunctioning 
sewage treatment plants; and ship and white wastes. Davis-Mattis 
said priority areas for action include: sewage collection; 
treatment and disposal; wastewater management; agricultural 
practices; and ship waste reception. She underscored the 
importance of public awareness raising and beach cleanups, and 
recommended joint management initiatives between governments and 
the private sector.

The importance of the issue: The Permanent Commission for the 
South Pacific (CPPS) and AUSTRALIA stressed that marine debris is 
one of the main sources of global pollution and, with JAPAN, 
underscored the urgency of tackling this issue. The CPPS 
recommended the adoption of national plans of action for the 
protection of the marine environment against activities carried 
out on land. 

Education and awareness raising: The CPPS said environmental 
education is crucial in tackling the issue of marine debris, and 
the EU underlined the role of volunteers. INDONESIA reported on 
national awareness and education programmes. The UK, on behalf of 
the OSPAR Commission for the Protection of the Marine Environment 
of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR Commission), maintained that 
involvement of local authorities and communities in awareness 
raising is key.

Private sector participation: The CPPS and the EU called for 
increased private sector participation to deal with marine debris 
at all levels. Noting the negative impacts of marine debris on the 
fishing industry, AUSTRALIA supported its involvement in tackling 
the problem.

Legal framework: The EU noted that existing global and regional 
norms prohibiting discharges are inadequate as waste reception 
facilities are lacking in many ports. NORWAY asked whether Annex 
V of the MARPOL Convention relates to lost fishing gear, with 
IMO responding that it only covers the discharge and disposal of 
fishing equipment. CHILE, supported by Kiessling and Cees van de 
Guchte, Senior Programme Officer, UNEP/GPA Coordination Office, 
supported a review of MARPOL Annex V implementation, with 
Davis-Mattis stressing its importance for SIDS. INDONESIA called 
for institutional synergies to control marine debris. The IFCA 
recommended the application of FAO's Code of Conduct on 
Responsible Fisheries to address marine debris.

Management tools: CANADA proposed using economic incentives to 
deal with marine debris. Encouraging a regional approach to port 
reception facilities, NEW ZEALAND outlined an initiative by the 
IMO on reception facilities managed at a regional level. The IFCA 
noted that user rights facilitate seeking compensation from 
polluters. AUSTRALIA urged the application of the polluter pays 
principle. The OSPAR Commission noted the importance of free port 
disposal facilities.

Gear recovery: Further to a comment by NORWAY, Cowan emphasized 
the importance of recovery of fishing gear. Kiessling suggested 
the introduction of compulsory reporting of lost gear within 
RFMOs. The REPUBLIC OF KOREA reported on the use of name tags on 
fishing nets and a debris collection project for fisherman. 
Responding to SENEGAL, Cowan indicated that scuba divers' surveys 
and sonar devices help detect abandoned fishing equipment, and 
Kiessling highlighted the development of a fishing net inventory.

Margareta Wahlstr�m, Assistant Secretary-General for Humanitarian 
Affairs and UN Special Coordinator for Tsunami Response, 
identified immediate financial resource mobilization as one of the 
reasons for the success of relief efforts since the December 2004 
tsunami. She stressed the importance of sustaining monetary relief 
throughout the recovery phase to support: food, temporary shelter, 
and basic health. Wahlstr�m highlighted issues ahead, including 
rehabilitation costs and coordination challenges. She called for a 
dialogue between UN technical experts and government agencies, and 
stated that they are important in setting priorities and handling 
expectations.

AUSTRALIA welcomed the development of an Indian Ocean tsunami 
early warning system, and the IMO briefed on the first steps taken 
in its establishment. The EU highlighted aspects of the EU Tsunami 
Action Plan. THAILAND stressed the continuing need for technical 
assistance. INDONESIA said the recovery process should focus on: 
poverty eradication; local communities' involvement; and 
employment creation. TUVALU underscored the vulnerability of SIDS 
to tsunamis. UNEP described a task force addressing the follow-up 
on the tsunami's impacts. MEXICO advocated establishing regional 
scientific institutions to help raise awareness on tsunamis. 

PLENARY

AREAS OF CONCERN AND ACTIONS NEEDED: Marine debris: MEXICO 
advocated adopting a multi-sectoral approach to marine debris, and 
outlined training programmes for fishermen focusing on recovering 
and regulating gear. Emphasizing that marine debris is a cultural 
problem, FIJI called for changing attitudes, behavior and business 
practices. HONDURAS outlined an initiative to regionalize 
contingency planning of waste in Central America. FINLAND reported 
on the work of the Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission 
to reduce ship-generated waste and the environmental impacts of 
fisheries. ARGENTINA supported the adoption of mandatory 
notification of fishing gear loss.

IUU fishing: HONDURAS outlined actions taken to comply with its 
flag State obligations under international law, including: the use 
of satellite monitoring systems; fishing licenses; and inspection 
of fishing gear. AUSTRALIA underscored the need to eliminate flags 
of convenience and to define the genuine link between flag States 
and vessels in order to combat IUU fishing. ARGENTINA supported 
prompt negotiations on a binding instrument on port State measures 
against IUU fishing.

Fisheries and sustainable development: NAMIBIA underscored 
fisheries' contribution to sustainable development, especially 
that of African countries and SIDS. CANADA underlined that only 
sustainable fisheries can contribute to sustainable development. 
TUVALU, on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States, 
encouraged the Consultative Process to take note of the Mauritius 
Strategy. AUSTRALIA said the greater challenge to the sustainable 
management of oceans is the implementation of existing instruments, 
and urged States that have not yet done so to ratify all relevant 
agreements. 

Legal framework for the management of the high seas: AUSTRALIA and 
the EU recommended that the Ad Hoc Open-ended Informal Working 
Group to study issues relating to the conservation and sustainable 
use of marine biodiversity beyond areas of national jurisdiction 
examine options for the management of the high seas. ITALY 
reiterated its call for a new international instrument on 
integrated MPAs on the high seas. PALAU, supported by FIJI and 
COSTA RICA, recommended a temporary moratorium on high seas bottom 
trawling until appropriate regulations have been adopted and 
implemented. CANADA underlined the problems posed by the 
enforcement of moratoria and called for practical solutions. 
ARGENTINA proposed that the International Seabed Authority report 
on the impact of bottom trawling and, supported by URUGUAY, 
suggest specific measures for UNICPOLOS consideration. The US said 
additional management measures need to be applied to protect 
seamounts. NORWAY noted that the international debate on oceans 
and the law of the sea has focused on high seas, and said States 
should concentrate on national implementation. CUBA said that 
UNCLOS creates a universally recognized framework according to 
which activities on the high seas should be carried out. 

RFMOs: AUSTRALIA welcomed the agreement at the recent conference 
on the governance of high seas fisheries to review the performance 
of RFMOs, and mentioned the current negotiation to establish an 
RFMO for the South Pacific Ocean. NAMIBIA called on States, 
international organizations and NGOs to participate in RFMOs, 
especially in developing countries, for the sustainable and 
equitable management of natural resources. NAMIBIA and CANADA 
called for strengthening RFMOs. The EU said RFMOs should play an 
important role in addressing destructive fishing practices and, 
with CANADA, recommended expanding their coverage. MEXICO 
suggested promoting the recovery of lost gear in the context of 
RFMOs.

Other issues: ITALY, supported by SPAIN, recommended that 
underwater noise pollution and its consequences on marine life be 
considered by the General Assembly. Highlighting the conflict 
between small-scale and industrial fishing activities, FIJI said 
his government has drafted a Customary Fishing Bill that accounts 
for the rights of both owners and users. 

IN THE CORRIDORS

The corridors were abuzz with comments on the entrenched positions 
evidenced as Plenary resumed on Thursday afternoon. Some 
attributed them to the important economic interests at stake in 
the discussions on high seas management and the little leeway 
certain delegations had been given by their capitals. Other 
participants observed that regional coordination behind the scenes 
turned out to be particularly difficult due to the stark contrast 
between fisheries- and biodiversity-centered perspectives on the 
Consultative Process' agenda. While one delegate feared that 
positions may polarize even further as some major players have not 
yet laid their cards on the table, NGOs still nurtured hope for 
some "baby steps" to be taken. All in all, many participants have 
resigned themselves to a bleary-eyed session on Friday.

THINGS TO LOOK FOR

ENB REPORT: The Earth Negotiations Bulletin summary and analysis 
of UNICPOLOS-6 will be available on Monday, 13 June at: 
http://www.iisd.ca/oceans/icp6/




This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin � <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is 
written and edited by Alice Bisiaux, Robynne Boyd, Elisa Morgera, 
and Cecilia Vaverka. The Digital Editor is Dan Birchall. The 
Editor is Pamela S. Chasek, Ph.D. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and the Director 
of IISD Reporting Services is Langston James "Kimo" Goree VI 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. The Sustaining Donors of the Bulletin are the 
Government of the United States of America (through the Department 
of State Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and 
Scientific Affairs), the Government of Canada (through CIDA), the 
Swiss Agency for Environment, Forests and Landscape (SAEFL), the 
United Kingdom (through the Department for International 
Development - DFID), the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the 
Government of Germany (through the German Federal Ministry of 
Environment - BMU, and the German Federal Ministry of Development 
Cooperation - BMZ), the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 
the European Commission (DG-ENV), and the Italian Ministry of 
Environment. General Support for the Bulletin during 2005 is 
provided by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the 
Government of Australia, the Austrian Federal Ministry of 
Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management, the 
Ministry of Sustainable Development and the Ministry of Foreign 
Affairs of Sweden, the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of 
Foreign Affairs of Norway, the Ministry of Environment and the 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland, SWAN International, the 
Japanese Ministry of Environment (through the Institute for Global 
Environmental Strategies - IGES), and the Japanese Ministry of 
Economy, Trade and Industry (through the Global Industrial and 
Social Progress Research Institute - GISPRI). Specific funding for 
coverage of this meeting has been provided by the New Zealand 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Funding for translation of 
the Earth Negotiations Bulletin into French has been provided by 
the International Organization of the Francophonie (IOF) and the 
French Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Funding for the translation of 
the Earth Negotiations Bulletin into Spanish has been provided by 
the Ministry of Environment of Spain. The opinions expressed in 
the Earth Negotiations Bulletin are those of the authors and do 
not necessarily reflect the views of IISD or other donors. 
Excerpts from the Earth Negotiations Bulletin may be used in 
non-commercial publications with appropriate academic citation. 
For information on the Bulletin, including requests to provide 
reporting services, contact the Director of IISD Reporting 
Services at <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, +1-646-536-7556 or 212 East 47th St. 
#21F, New York, NY 10017, USA. The ENB Team at ICP-6 can be 
contacted by e-mail at <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.

---
You are currently subscribed to enb as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Subscribe to Linkages Update to receive our fortnightly, html-newsletter on 
what's new in the international environment and sustainable development arena: 
http://www.iisd.ca/email/subscribe.htm
- Archives of Climate-L and Climate-L News are available online at: 
http://www.iisd.ca/email/climate-L.htm
- Archives of Water-L and Water-L News are available online at: 
http://www.iisd.ca/email/water-L.htm

Reply via email to