Natalia Dronova, Vassily Spiridonov · Natalia Dronova, Vassily Spiridonov Illegal, Unreported, and...
28
Transcript of Natalia Dronova, Vassily Spiridonov · Natalia Dronova, Vassily Spiridonov Illegal, Unreported, and...
Natalia Dronova, Vassily Spiridonov
Illegal, Unreported, andUnregulated Pacific Salmon
Fishing in Kamchatka
Moscow 2008
The research and preparation ofthis report was made possible thanksto the financial support of the Gordonand Betty Moore Foundation.
We are grateful to the followingpeople:– V.V. Tsygir for assistance in gather�ing and preparing materials for theproject, and preparing the section onforeign imports of Russian salmon; – A.B. Dekshtein (WWF�Russia) foradditional data and editing of the text;– PhD I.A. Khaliy, PhD O.V. Aksenova,and E.B.Bychkova (Institute ofSociology, Russian Academy ofSciences) for assistance in draftingthe questionnaire and conducting thesociological survey;– A.B. Abykh for assistance in arrang�ing interviews; and– I.A Burdelnaya and M. Varikova(RBTL) for their research on theRussian salmon market.
We also acknowledge the effortsof A. L. Vaisman (Russian delegationto TRAFFIC Europe�Russia) and O.M.Zaporozhets (Kamchatka ResearchInstitute of Fisheries andOceanography), for taking it uponthemselves to review this report.
We are particularly thankful to K.A.Zgurovsky and L.Williams (WWF�Russia) for their constant help at allstages of work, and for their participa�tion in preparing the final version ofthe report.
We would like to thank A.Popovkina for her work on the Englishtranslation.
The preparation of an English lan�guage version of the text was madepossible thanks to the hard work ofStephanie von Meibom (TRAFFICEurope) and Joseph Kellner, who edit�ed the English version. Colleagues atTRAFFIC International are thanked fortheir contribution to final review andpublication of this report.
Special thanks go to WWF�Germany, the main long�term donorto TRAFFIC Europe�Russia.
Acknowledgements Abbreviations
RAIPON – The Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of theNorth ABR – aquatic biological resourcesGoskomrybolovstvo – The State Fisheries Committee of theRussian FederationEEZ of the Russian Federation – exclusive economic zone ofthe Russian FederationKamchatNIRO – The Kamchatka Research Institute of Fisheriesand OceanographyIUU fishing – Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated fishing TAC – Total Allowable CatchCSIPN – The Center for Support of Indigenous Peoples of theNorthROSSTAT – The Federal State Statistics Service TINRO�Centre – The Pacific Research Fisheries Centre M_INFO – a private agency, which collects original informationdirectly from every customs declaration.NPAFC – The North�Pacific Anadromous Fisheries Commission
3
Contents
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
The state of salmon resources in Kamchatka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4Fisheries management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4The main importers of Pacific salmon and the volume of exports from Russia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4The domestic market for pacific salmon products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5Salmon poaching on Kamchatka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5Evaluation of the IUU catch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5Methods of resolving the IUU fishing problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5The socio�economic importance of fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
Definition of the problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8Material and methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
1. The Main Target Species and Characteristics of the Salmon Yield in Kamchatka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10Pink salmon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10Chum Salmon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10Sockeye salmon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11Сoho salmon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11Chinook salmon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12Cherry salmon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12Rainbow trout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
2. Fisheries Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .133. The Recorded Catch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .194. The Volume of Salmon Export from Russia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
4.1. Export of Salmon Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .204.2. Foreign Imports of Salmon from Russia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .224.2.1. List of Russian salmon products exported to Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .224.2.2.The volume and cost of Japanese salmon imports from Russia. Dynamics of import volumes and prices .234.2.3. The supply of Russian salmon to Japan: Shipments direct from Russia and via the Republic of Korea . . .244.2.4. Imports of Russian Pacific salmon by the Republic of Korea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .264.2.5. Imports of Russian Pacific salmon by the People's Republic of China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .264.2.6. Exports of Russian sockeye salmon, compared to the total yield of the species in Russia . . . . . . . . . . . . .26
5. Evaluation of the Domestic Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .296. Violations of Fishing Legislation and Poaching in the Far East . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33
Illegal commercial fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34Poaching on the rivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36
7. Assessment of the Scope of IUU Fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .378. Methods of Resolving the IUU Fishing Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .389. Socio�Economic Importance of Salmon Fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41
Recommendations for governmental agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41Recommendations for fish processing and trade companies in the Russian Federation, as well as in the major importing ountries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42Recommendations for environmental NGOs and other concerned organizations in the Russian Federation, as well as in the major importing countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .451. Methodology of Assessment of Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Salmon Fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .452. Russian Codes of the Foreign Economic Activity Commodity Classification Referring to the Pacific Salmon . . .
Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .493. Structure of the federal institutions involved in marine fishery management and enforcement in Russia . . . . . . .51
2
54
ExecutiveSummary
FISHERIES MANAGEMENT
SALMON POACHING ON KAMCHATKA
ble, as it does not exceed a few tons. Japan is the leading importer ofRussian salmon products. Although thelist of salmon products bought fromRussia is extensive, frozen products, inparticular frozen sockeye, make up thebulk of all imports. In the 2000s, importvolumes of frozen sockeye rangedbetween 16.3 and 24.8 thousand tonsper year. The long�term trends forimports of frozen sockeye from Russiasuggest an increasing volume, adecrease in average prices, and anincreasing total import value.
In recent years, the average annualprice for sockeye imported fromRussia has ranged between JPY 585(USD 4.9) per kg (2001) and JPY461(USD3.9) per kg (2006). With regard toother species of Pacific salmon(excluding sockeye and coho), importdynamics suggest a decrease in importvolume, increasing average prices, andstable total import value.
Imports of other frozen Pacificsalmon ranged between 5 277 and 8394 tons; prices averaged JPY142(USD1.2) to JPY 355 (USD2.98) per kg.
The Republic of Korea imports smallamounts of frozen Pacific salmon fromRussia. The greatest volumes of Pacificsalmon were imported in 2000 and2001 (1.8 to 3.2 thousands tons);prices averaged USD 0.96�1.38 per kg.In subsequent years, sockeye andother Pacific salmon were imported in
Kamchatka is a large peninsula in the North�east of Asia; it isconnected to the mainland by an isthmus. As this territory is sur�rounded by the cold and productive waters of the North Pacific,Kamchatka's economy historically depended on fishing andseafood processing. The fishing and processing of salmonplayed, and continue to play, a major role in the economy.
At least ten species of salmon inhabit the waters of the penin�sula, five of which (pink salmon, Oncorhynchus gorbucha; chumsalmon, Oncorhynchus keta; sockeye salmon, Oncorhynchusnerka; coho salmon, Oncorhynchus kisutsch and chinooksalmon, Oncorhynchus tschawytscha) are fished commercially.
Salmon fishing has a long history in Kamchatka, and remainsan important source of economic stability and external income. Inaddition, the industry supplies a significant portion of the entirecountry's seafood. Between 2000 and 2004, Pacific salmoncomprised 6.17 % of the overall Russian catch, and 16.51% oftotal catch in Kamchatka's waters.
Poaching has a significant negative impact on the Pacificsalmon stock in Russian waters. Well�organized illegal fishingundermines the management of the salmon stock, and in many
cases leads to stock depletion. In addition, organized illegal fish�ing contributes to corruption and criminalization of society, drawsfishing income out of the region, and weakens incentives for eco�nomic development of the region and sustainable fishing.
In this report, the term "salmon poaching" implies thefollowing:� illegal and unrecorded commercial fishing (in excess of allocat�ed quotas) in the seas and large rivers; � illegal fishing for the purpose of roe extraction at the approach�es to spawning grounds; and� fishing by the local people, without permission, for personalconsumption.
The goal of this study was to analyze available information onvarious types of poaching, assess the scale of illegal, unreported,and unregulated (IUU) fishing, and develop recommendationstowards reducing the illegal catch.
The report was prepared under the auspices of the Project forconservation of the Kamchatka salmon and its habitat. The proj�ect was financed by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.
The goal of this study was to analyze available information on various types ofpoaching, assess the scale of illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing,and develop recommendations towards reducing the illegal catch.
In recent years, stocks of commer�cial species of Pacific salmon inKamchatka have been adequate,though most of the valuable species(chinook, coho, and certain stocks ofsockeye) are decreasing in numbers.This is a result of concealed overfish�ing and poaching, which lead to per�manent shortages in reproductivestock at the spawning grounds.
The catch of Pacific salmon hasbeen relatively stable or growing inrecent years: 2004 – 161.6 thousandtons, 2005 – 260.2 thousand tons,2006 – 273.4 thousand tons).Kamchatka provides Russia with 41.4% of its pink salmon, 40.1 % of itschum salmon, up to 100 % of its sock�eye and chinook, and 82.2 % of itscoho salmon.
THE STATE OF SALMON RESOURCES IN KAMCHATKA
At present, determining the total allow�able catch (TAC) is an essential steptowards distributing quotas between fish�ing companies. The procedures for deter�mining and approving TAC's for marinebiological resources, as well as anychanges to them, are specified by thegovernment of the Russian Federation.
THE MAIN IMPORTERS OF PACIFIC SALMON AND THE VOLUME OFEXPORTS FROM RUSSIA
small amounts, for prices averagingUSD 3.16�3.69 per kg.
The volume of Russian Pacificsalmon imported by the People'sRepublic of China has increased con�siderably in recent years. Most of theimported products are inexpensive,such as frozen pink and chum salmon(proportions by species are unknown,as they are recorded together); 40.4thousand tons of frozen salmon wereimported in 2005, and around 49 thou�sand tons were imported in 2006.Average prices increased to USD1.92per kg in 2006 (from USD1.66 per kg in2005). Sockeye imports are recordedseparately; China imported 600 tons offrozen sockeye products in 2005, and860 tons in 2006.
On the whole, trade statistics sug�gest volumes of sockeye significantlylarger than the recorded Russian sock�eye catch. The amount by whichJapanese sockeye imports exceededthe official catch was greatest in 2005,totaling 9.7 thousand excess tons (thetotal recorded catch was 23 985 tons).
Overall sockeye imports by Japan,China, and South Korea in 2000�2006(according to data provided by thesecountries) significantly exceeded boththe total Russian export of frozen sock�eye (by 27% on average) and therecorded sockeye catch (by 20 % onaverage). This indicates both illegalfishing and poor control by the execu�tive authorities.
forms the economic foundation for theinhabitants of many of the peninsula'ssettlements. Poachers on Kamchatkaharvest at least 54 thousand tons ofthe salmon annually, primarily for thepurpose of roe extraction (fish car�casses are often discarded). Up to95% of the reproductive stock may bedestroyed in those basins ofKamchatka's rivers and lakes, locatednear roads and highways.
EVALUATION OF THE IUU CATCH
Overall imports from Russia of allspecies of Pacific salmon by Japan,PRC, and the Republic of Koreaamounted to 107 thousand tons in2006 (raw weight). Our rough esti�mate of the volume of the domesticmarket is 219 to 319 thousand tons.Accordingly, the actual catch couldrange between 326 and 426 thousandtons. These are our most conserva�tive estimates, not taking into accountfish discarded on site after roe extrac�tion (about 55 thousand additionaltons), fish caught for personal con�sumption, etc.
The recorded catch in the Far Eastamounted to 273 thousand tons in2006, which suggests excess fishingof at least 53 to 153 thousand tons, or1.2�1.6 times official numbers.However, survey participants, offi�cials, and salmon experts on more
METHODS OF RESOLVINGTHE IUU FISHING PROBLEM
Authorities have proposed a systemof rights�based use for fishing areas,with the aim of mitigating the effects ofpoaching. When we began the prepa�ration of this report, such a system wasbeing was discussed, and at presentthe administrative reform of fishingrights is already underway. Fishingareas could be allocated for long�termuse in accordance with the "one bodyof water � one user" principle. Criminalcodes should also be updated toenhance the efficiency of poachingcontrol. Not only the captains of thefishing vessels, but also the chief man�agers (owners) of the fishing compa�nies need to be held responsible forillegal salmon fishing. Poachers'means of transport and fishing equip�ment need to be confiscated.
Obligatory customs certification ofproducts exported abroad would deterillegal fishing in the Russian economiczone, as well as the uncontrolledexport of raw products. This is the onlylegal means for Russia to contend withcountries importing illegal products.Positive changes in this direction arealready notable. According to theamendments to the Law "On Fishing,"beginning on the 1st of January 2009,all fish harvested in the exclusive eco�nomic zone of the Russian Federationmust be delivered to Russian customs,i.e. transferred through Russian ports.Beginning that same year, all fish prod�ucts delivered to the ports can be soldonly via the Russian Fish Exchange.
Participants in our sociologicalresearch proposed several means ofsettling the poaching problem, includ�ing control over air transportation ofroe, the use of aircraft to protectspawning areas, and regular verifica�tion by Kamchatka inspectors of ves�sels accepting salmon. Most of the
Up to 95% of the reproductive stock may be destroyed in those basinsof Kamchatka's rivers and lakes, located near roads and highways.
The volume of the entire Moscowsalmon market was estimated at 103.5thousand tons (USD 1.412 million) in2007. Pacific salmon constitute 28% ofall salmon sold, so we estimate thatannual sales of Pacific salmon on theMoscow market amount to 29 thou�sand tons. A precise assessment of thecapacity of the entire Russian marketwould require similar studies in differentregions and cities, which is not feasiblein a study such as this one. In theabsence of other published data onsalmon products, ratios were usedderived from market investigations of
THE DOMESTIC MARKETFOR PACIFIC SALMONPRODUCTS
The TAC is adopted for each salmon fish�ing season.
Salmon are fished in the exclusive eco�nomic zone in accordance with allocatedquotas. The quotas are distributed amongRussian fishermen for data control pur�poses (catch data are used to adjust theforecast of the salmon's approach to thecoast), and among Japanese fishingcompanies, as per the IntergovernmentalAgreement signed by Russia and Japanon 12 May 1985.
As it stands today research fishing is"research" in name only. Insofar as itonly targets valuable commercialsalmon species, and the sockeyesalmon in particular, it does not princi�pally differ from commercial fishing. Thefish are caught for control purposes, butthe catch amounts to several thousandtons annually.
On average, the officially recordedcatch in the Russian Pacific exceeded theTAC by approximately 10 % in the years1995�2005, though this figure variesdepending on the particular region.
Japan, China, and the Republic ofKorea import most of Russia's salmonproducts. The amount of salmonimported by other countries is negligi�
other types of fish products, in order toextrapolate the size of the entiredomestic market from that ofMoscow's. According to these roughestimates, the capacity of the RussianPacific salmon market may total 219�319 thousand tons.
Annual volumes of roe production,including illegal production, in the terri�tory of the Russian Federation average18 thousand tons (11 to 26 thousandtons, according to data obtained fromvarious sources). Of this total, 8�12thousand tons are produced legally,while 3 to 6 thousand tons are procuredby poachers and processed illegally.
than one occasion suggested a totalyield 3 times the recorded one.
Thus, various estimates indicatethe actual catch as being between 1.5and 3 times larger than officiallyrecorded.
About two thirds of Russia's totalaquatic biological resources come fromthe Far East. Hence, the fishing industryis one of the Far East's largest employ�ers.
Fishing in Kamchatka Kray is of greatsocial importance, as it ensures employ�ment for the local population, particular�ly in the coastal areas (Ust�Kamchatskiy,Ust�Bolsheretskiy, Sobolevskiy,Aleutskiy, Milkovskiy, and Elizovskiy dis�tricts). In these districts listed above,fishing is the major source of income forthe locals and, in part, funds local budg�ets for the development of social infra�structure. In 2006, the fishing industry inKamchatka Kray employed around 16thousand workers, or more than a half ofall employees of industrial enterprises.
The needs of the indigenous peoplesof Kamchatka, as well as those of otherresidents of the coastal areas, need tobe considered when quotas are allotted.
It is important to remember, thatRussian salmon are ecologically pure, asthey are caught in the wild instead ofbred in captivity. The global demand forwild salmon is very large, and it is pricedwell above farmed varieties. In Russia,wild salmon are not a limited resource,so they can and must be priced morecompetitively. The promotion of Russianwild salmon harvested in accordancewith legal regulations, in both domesticand international markets, is a guaran�tee of stability and wellbeing for the resi�dents of Kamchatka.
The following is a summary of our rec�ommendations for governmental organ�izations, the business sector and NGOs:
Governmental bodies must improvethe system of monitoring, surveillanceand control through changes to legisla�tion, development of technologies(VMS, the use of helicopters to protect
spawning grounds), institutional devel�opment (an effective monitoring sys�tem), the tracking of vessels engaged inIUU fishing, improved training for lowerand mid�level employees of the surveil�lance bodies (as well as increasedsalaries and responsibilities), develop�ment of deputisation of surveillancerights to, representatives of the localpeople.
Governmental bodies must also eval�uate the efficiency of the new salmonfisheries management system, and holdpublic forums on the topic every fouryears (two cycles for pink salmon andapproximately one cycle for othersalmon species) following implementa�tion of the standards set forth in Article29.1 of Federal Law No. 333, "OnFishing and Conservation of AquaticBiological Resources" (in the versionpassed December 6th, 2007).
Authorities should critically evaluatelocal budget revenues from taxation offishing conducted by long�term usersand other services and development
opportunities provided by them to localcommunities, and take necessarymeasures if the new practice of long�term fishing area leases does not con�tribute to sustainable management ofresources and development of localcommunities.
Governmental bodies and the privatesector should develop market mecha�nisms aimed at achieving sustainablefisheries, and in particular promotebranding and labeling of salmon prod�ucts. Russian brands should be built ona reputation for high quality productsand legal fishing methods.
NGOs should work with relevant stateagencies to enhance incentives andmotivation to carry out the measuresproposed in this document. They mustalso continue monitoring the domesticmarket and IUU fishing of Pacificsalmon, and distribute collected infor�mation among relevant state bodies andother interested parties for the purposeof stock protection and economicallyefficient exploitation of Pacific salmon.
76
respondents, as well as a number ofinterviewed experts, emphasized thenecessity of strategic regulation offishing by interdepartmental agenciesduring the salmon fishing seasons. Intheir opinion, the state should estab�lish a monopoly over salmon roe trade.
Introduction
BACKGROUND
Salmon fishing has a long history inKamchatka, and remains an impor�tant source of economic stability andexternal income. In addition, theindustry supplies a significant portionof the entire country's seafood.Russians are proud to call Pacificsalmon one of the major symbols ofKamchatka, Kamchatka's "brand," asthe region's financial stability, andimage on the world market, dependon successful salmon yields.
Up to one fifth of the world stock ofwild Pacific salmon reproduces inKamchatka (Sinyakov, 2004). At leastten salmon species inhabit the watersof the peninsula, five of which (pinksalmon, Oncorhynchus gorbucha;chum, Oncorhynchus keta; sockeye,Oncorhynchus nerka; coho,Oncorhynchus kisutsch and chinook,Oncorhynchus tschawytscha) arefished commercially. Aquiculture andfish farming are rapidly expandingworldwide � more than half of allsalmon traded on the world marketare bred in captivity. However,Kamchatka is a large region of thewestern Pacific with favorable condi�tions for natural salmon reproductionstill preserved, as well as a region witha significant "genetic reserve" of thespecies.
In the first third of the last century,the registered Pacific salmon catchaveraged 800 thousand tons. Aroundhalf of all Pacific salmon bred alongthe American coast, while the restreproduced in Asia. From the 1950sto the 1970s, there was a sharpdecline in salmon stock and annualcatches halved, dropping to only 400thousand tons (Sinyakov, 2004).Salmon population numbers fluctuateconsiderably from year to year, andthe reasons for such fluctuations arenot always evident. Nevertheless,most experts agree that the notice�able decline resulted from large�scalesalmon fishing by the Japanese com�mercial fleet, using drift nets on theopen sea. After exclusive economiczones were established in 1982, andthe Convention on the Conservationof Anadromous Fish in the Northern
Pacific Ocean (which prohibited driftnet fishing outside these zones) wassigned (Moscow, 1992), Pacificsalmon populations increased. Theirnumbers are fairly high now in thenorthwestern Pacific, as well as inAlaska (Sinyakov, 2004).
1995 saw the largest catches everrecorded in the northern Pacific, at1027 thousand tons. However, adecline of Alaskan salmon populationwas followed by their recovery to thelevel of the 1920�1930s, whileRussian stocks remain half the size ofthe stocks from those years(Sinyakov, 2004). In addition, recentyears have seen a different specificstructure of the catch, and variation inpopulation size in particular breedingregions from the norms of the 1930'sand 1940s. Thus, the yields of themost valuable species, such as chi�nook, coho, and sockeye, are declin�ing in some regions, even though theofficial data indicate stable migrationof breeders to spawning grounds.The share of chinook and cohosalmon in the total Russian catch hasdeclined 4�5 times over (Sinyakov,2004). This was caused by concealedoverfishing and poaching, which ledto a permanent shortage in reproduc�
tive stock at the spawning grounds.The scale of poaching at spawning
grounds has increased considerably(compared to the 1950's�1970s) dueto enhanced economic incentives,accessibility of the spawning areas,greater free trade of salmon prod�ucts, and frequent restructuring ofthe fish protection agencies, whichnaturally impairs their ability to workefficiently. This explains why the truenumber of spawning fish is lower,even while official statistics report thenumber of breeders to be equal tothat recorded in the 1950's�1970s(Sinyakov, 2004). The end result isthat, in spite of a peak in foodresources for the salmon, the situa�tion may turn critical. The stock isalready low due to natural cyclic fluc�tuations caused by large�scalechanges in the northern Pacificecosystem, and current fishing prac�tices, along with poaching, may bringthe stock levels lower than the mini�mum of the 1970s. Additionally, theeconomic situation in Kamchatka ischanging. More and more peoplebelieve that the social and economicproblems of Kamchatka Kray cannotbe solved without prioritizing devel�opment of hydrocarbon and mineral
THE SOCIO�ECONOMICIMPORTANCE OF FISHING
© WWF�Russia / Dmitry Shpilenok
Kamchatka and Russian Far East
98
– illegal and unrecorded commercialfishing (in excess of allocated quotas) inthe seas and large rivers;
– illegal fishing for roe at theapproaches to the spawning grounds;and
– fishing by the local people, withoutpermission, for personal consumption.
Well�organized illegal fishing under�mines the management of the salmonstock, and in many cases leads to stockdepletion. In addition, organized illegalfishing contributes to corruption andcriminalization of society, draws fishingincome out of the region, and weakensincentives for economic developmentof the region and sustainable fishing.
The fight against poaching is com�plicated not only by the remoteness ofthe spawning rivers, technical compli�cations, and corruption. Another majorcomplicating factor is that illegal salmonfishing, with the aim of roe extraction, iseffectively the main source of incomefor residents of villages in Kamchatka.
The scale of illegal fishing must beknown, in order to combat it. However,assessing the volume of illegal fishing,both recent and potential, as well as thedamage it inflicts on the salmon popula�tion, is a problem unto itself.
The goal of this study is to analyzeavailable information on various typesof poaching, assess the scale of illegal,unreported, and unregulated (IUU)fishing, and develop recommendationstowards reducing the illegal catch.
The report was prepared under theauspices of the Project on conservationof the Kamchatka salmon and its habi�tats. Financial support for the projectcomes from the Gordon and BettyMoore Foundation.
The goal of this study is to analyze available information on various types ofpoaching, assess the scale of illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing,and develop recommendations towards reducing the illegal catch.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
divisions of the Pacific ResearchFisheries Centre (TINRO�Centre) ofthe Ministry of Agriculture of theRussian Federation. The TINRO�Centre provides data for the NorthPacific Anadromous Fish Commission(NPAFC) (www.npafc.org/new/publi�cations/Statistical).
Export data Materials from the M_INFO data�
base (the counterpart of NorthAmerican PIERS) were used for theanalysis of exports from 1996 through2006. M_INFO is a private companythat collects original informationdirectly from every customs declara�tion. The study period extends from2001 to 2005 and also encompasses11 months of 2006.
Import data Data on Japanese customs statis�
tics were obtained from the website ofthe Ministry of Finance of Japanhttp://www.customs.go.jp .Information collected from theM_INFO database (1996�2006) werealso used. Statistical data on theimport of salmon products fromRussia by the Republic of Korea wereobtained fromhttps://trade.suhyup.co.kr/index.asp. (1995�2006). To calculate actualweight of catch based on gutted andheadless frozen salmon the conver�sion ratio of 1.33 (adopted by TINRO�Centre, see Tsygir, 2007) was used.
Data on the domestic market The project used a review compiled
by the Norge�Fish Ltd. Company,"Analysis of the current state and ten�dencies of fisheries and fish marketdevelopment in Russia (catch, export,import, production, and consumption(including Moscow supermarketchains and НоReCa) of fresh, refrig�erated, frozen, processed, and fin�ished fish and seafood from 2000�2005" (available athttp://mi.aup.ru/res/03/1208703.html). In addition, the results of a studyby RBTL communication group, car�ried out under the auspices of thisproject, are used.
Investigators conducted an audit ofsales outlets (866 stores of 24 leadinggrocery chains) in August andSeptember 2007, using standardmethodology adopted from marketinvestigations.
We estimated the total weight offemale fish caught from the knownweight of traded roe based on a coef�ficient of 4% roe to fish weight thatGreenpeace Russia derived in theirsurvey of available records.(Greenpeace Russia communication,http://www.greenpeace.org/russia/ru/campaigns/660660/660736).
This coefficient is within the rangeof species�specific coefficientsadopted by TINRO Centre (InternalStandard of State Agency of Fishery,2004).
Assessment of IUU fishingIllegal, unreported, and unregulat�
ed fishing was evaluated on the basisof the general methodical approachdescribed by V.A. Spiridonov (seeappendix 1).
Data on roe exports via the Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskiy airport
The project used published materi�als on intercepted shipments ofsalmon roe in Kamchatka and inMoscow, as well as relevant Internetresources. The monitoring of roetransportation in hand luggage via thepassenger and, partly, cargo termi�nals of the Elizovo Airport(Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskiy) wasconducted in July 2006 throughDecember 2007. The amount ofexported roe and destination of flights(Moscow, Saint�Petersburg,Novosibirsk, Khabarovsk,Krasnoyarsk, Samara, andKemerovo) were recorded.
As part of this project, a sociologi�cal survey was conducted fromNovember 2006 through March 2007.The survey was meant to ascertainthe positions of representatives frommajor professional groups involved insalmon fishing, on the key problemsof salmon conservation and sustain�able development of fisheries
(poaching, certification, quotas, etc.).Over the course of the survey, repre�sentatives from fishing companies,fishermen, and fish inspection offi�cials of the Kamchatka region werequestioned. A total of 150 individualswere interviewed, 58 managerial andexecutive staff of fishing companies,43 fishermen (including the leaders ofteams involved in coastal fishing), and49 fish inspectors. The sample is rep�resentative, because the target sub�jects are already a small group, in anarrowly specialized field. The ques�tionnaire contained interconnectedsets of questions, aimed at ascertain�ing the respondents' attitudes towardthe following issues:
– catch and trade volumes;– quotas and limits;– efficiency of salmon fishery man�
agement in the region;– poaching; and– measures aimed at protection of
the salmon.Results of the questionnaire were
analyzed by professional sociologistsfrom the Institute of Sociology of theRussian Academy of Sciences.
© WWF�Russia / Aleksandra Filatkina
resources. There are large�scaleplans for oil and gas development onthe Kamchatka shelf, and numerousprojects aimed at developing variousmineral deposits on the peninsula.The residents of Kamchatka expect tobenefit greatly from the implementa�tion of these plans (Orlov, 2007).Experience in implementation of sim�ilar projects in the other regions, how�ever, and on Sakhalin in particular,doesn't inspire such optimism(Spiridonov, 2008). Negative factorsassociated with industrial develop�ment, such as pollution, constructionin the coastal areas, and increasedaccessibility to spawning areas mayconsiderably aggravate the effects ofillegal fishing and improper resourcemanagement, particularly given thelack of tools available to truly protectthe salmon stock.
Anadromous salmon are one of thevital elements of the Kamchatkaecosystem, as they deliver greatamounts of organic material, pro�duced by the ocean ecosystem, tothe peninsula's rivers. In this way, theocean ensures constant annualeutrophication of the terrestrialecosystems of Kamchatka. Thesalmon also provide food for otheranimals. For example, Pacific salmon(pink, chum, sockeye, and cohosalmon) are an important componentof the diet of Kamchatka brownbears, and are crucial during their fat�tening period (Seredkin, Pachkovskiy,2006). Many other inhabitants of thepeninsula (Steller's sea eagles, redfoxes, etc.) greatly depend upon thestate of the salmon stock.
DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM
Poaching can be considered thescourge of commercial salmon fishing,and the main threat to the Pacificsalmon stock in Russian waters. In thisreport, the term "salmon poaching"implies the following:
The present report is based on pub�lished data, information from a num�ber of agencies, and the results ofstudies carried out in Kamchatka overa two�year period, as well as a study ofthe Moscow salmon product market.
The following information on fish�eries issues in the Kamchatka regionwas collected and analyzed:
– reports by the government of theKamchatka Oblast;
– information posted on the web�sites of fishermen's co�ops, fishingcompanies, and online versions ofperiodicals (e.g., www.dalryba.ru,www.fishery.ru, www.rybak.com.ru,w w w . f i s h � s e a f o o d . r u ,www.npacific.ru, www.kam�chatkasalmon.ru, among other onlineresources);
– materials from the RussianAssociation of Indigenous Peoples ofthe North (RAIPON) and the Centerfor Support of Indigenous Peoples ofthe North (CSIPN), which are devotedto the social and economic conditionsof the indigenous peoples ofKamchatka.
Catch dataData on the Russian recorded1
catch and total allowable catches(TAC) were obtained from theForecasts for the fishing seasons(TINRO�Centre, 2000 � TINRO�Centre, 2007). The Forecasts werecompiled on the basis of reports andforecasts from basin institutes and
1 In the cited publications of TINRO�Centre the "recorded" catch is called "actual". In our opinion, this may cause confusion. That is why weuse the term "recorded" for the catch reflected in the official documents and "actual" for the overall (recorded as well as unrecorded, includ�ing poaching) catch.
11
chum salmon coincides with the har�vest of other salmon species. Chumare usually harvested as a by�productof sockeye, pink, and coho salmonharvest.
According to available data, theconcealed catch of Pacific salmon,chum included (as a by�product ofpink salmon fishing), has grown since2002, when regulation of fishing waseffectively halted. Regional authoritiesare no longer entitled to strategic reg�ulation of fishing during the fishingseason, and recent experience hasshown chum limits are usually exceed�ed in the first two weeks of the pinksalmon harvest. After that, the chumsalmon yield goes unrecorded in thestatistics. It is either omitted from thecalculations altogether, or is tradedillicitly (TINRO�Centre, 2007).
According to unofficial data (infor�mation collected from fishing vessels,questionnaire data, data on confiscat�ed and exported fish products provid�ed by enforcement agencies, etc.),the catch of chum in the Karaginskayasubzone (the eastern coast ofKamchatka) between 2003 and 2006considerably exceeded the recom�
10
The Main Target Species andCharacteristics of the SalmonYield in Kamchatka
1PINK SALMON CHUM SALMON
Figure 1. The recorded and actualcatch of chum salmon in theKaraginskaya subzone (TINRO�Centre, 2007).
mended values. These data indicatethat 11 020 tons of chum salmon wereharvested in 2003, 11 250 tons in2004, 12 650 tons in 2005, and 10 125tons in 2006 (Zaporozhets et al.,2007). Thus, the actual catch exceed�ed the recorded one by 427% in 2003,by 283% in 2004, by 182% in 2005,and by 148% in 2006 (see fig. 1).
In recent years, the sizes of differentchum salmon generations in theBolshaya River (the western coast ofKamchatka) have ranged between 3.3and 195.2 thousand individuals(TINRO�Centre, 2007).
Chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta)are the second most abundant of Far�Eastern salmon species. The chumsalmon was the second most numer�ous of Far�Eastern salmon species,after the pink salmon. In recent years,however, the chum yield has becomethe third largest, behind pink andsockeye salmon (TINRO�Centre,2007).
Chum salmon spawn between theages of 3 and 10, most of thembetween 4 and 6. Throughout theentire range of the species, the salmonare divided into two forms � summerand autumn. The two forms differ inboth qualitative traits and ecologicalpeculiarities. The autumn chumsalmon, growing up to 1 m in length,are larger and more valuable than thesummer variant. They are prevalent inthe southern parts of the range. Uponentering the rivers of westernKamchatka, chum are 52 to 78 cmlong, and weigh between 1.7 and 5.4kg. The fish spawn in quiet areas ofsmall rivers with fine pebble and gravelbeds. In Kamchatka, chum enter therivers in July through October. Insevere winters, the spawning areasoften freeze through, destroying alarge portion of the offspring. Theautumn form of chum salmon is lesssusceptible to the cold, as they preferto spawn in areas where ground watercomes to the surface. Their eggs arerelatively large, measuring 6.5�9.1 mmin diameter.
The chum stock in Kamchatka hasbeen stable in recent years.Nevertheless, the species' populationnumbers in some parts of the peninsu�la leave much to be desired. The situ�ation is aggravated by drift�net fishingin Russia's exclusive economic zone,and by the fact that coastal fishing of
Pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gor�bucha) is the most abundant ofPacific salmon species. Along withchum salmon, pink salmon are amajor target of fishing. InKamchatka, they constitute up to 80% of the overall salmon catch. Thespecies can grow up to 76 cm inlength and weigh up to 5.5 kg. Whenheading upstream to the spawninggrounds, the fish are usually 32�64cm long (the majority being between38 and 59 cm), and weigh between1.4 and 2.3 kg. In years of higherpopulation numbers, pink salmon areusually 2.5 to 5.7 cm smaller than inyears of population decline. Usually,spawning fish enter rivers in the sum�mer and autumn; in Kamchatka, thisoccurs in July and August. The malesoutnumber females in the beginningof the spawning period, but theopposite is true by the end.
The pink salmon stock of easternKamchatka has been increasing innumbers since the mid�1970s. Atpresent, more than 13 million individ�uals approach the coast in evenyears (TINRO�Centre, 2004). Thepopulation on Kamchatka's easterncoast is characterized by alternatinggenerations of high and low num�bers. At present (1990�2005), anaverage of 61.5 thousand tons ofpink salmon are harvested in thecoastal areas in odd years, com�pared to 8.2 thousand tons in evenyears (TINRO�Centre, 2006).
In 2005, 24 million pink salmonapproached the western coast ofKamchatka; the total catch amount�ed to 8.5 thousand tons (TINRO�Centre, 2007).
SOCKEYE SALMON
Sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchusnerka) are the most economicallyimportant species. The fish are 52 to65 cm in length, weigh up to 3 kg, andreach maturity at 5�6 years of age. Thefish spawn early, in late May and Junein Kamchatka. The run ends by the endof July. Most sockeye spawn in lakesand springs, where ground waterreaches the surface. When spawning,the salmon take on a scarlet color. Asingle salmon produces an average of3.8 thousand eggs, which are relative�ly small in size. Unlike chum and pinksalmon, the young fish spend a longtime in fresh water, only swimmingdownstream after a year, and in somecases, two or three.
According to multi�year data, around85 % of sockeye salmon harvestedalong the entire eastern coast ofKamchatka are caught in theKamchatka River. In 2004, the numberof sockeye breeding in that riverdeclined considerably, and their num�bers continued to decrease into 2005.In 2006, the population rebounded.
Estimates by KamchatNIRO expertsindicate that the concealed commer�cial catch of sockeye salmon in the
Kamchatka River amounted to 2.2thousand tons (880 thousand individu�als) in 2006. Additionally, at least 100thousand breeding sockeye werepoached at spawning grounds on theKamchatka River. These are conserva�tive estimates, compared to thosefrom other sources investigating theissue (Zaporozhets et al., 2007). In2005, at least 700 thousand individualsthat approached the river mouth wereomitted from the sockeye catch statis�tics for this river (TINRO�Centre,2006).
Between 2000 and 2006, 93.4 % ofsockeye harvested along the westerncoast of Kamchatka were of theOzernaya River stock (90.8 % in 1989�2006). At present, it is the largest pop�ulation in the northwestern Pacific. In
2006, 9.088 million sockeye of theOzernaya River stock approached thecoast, 7.838 million (or 17995 tons) ofwhich were caught (TINRO�Centre,2007).
Сoho salmon (Oncorhynchuskisutsch) can be easily distinguishedfrom other salmon species by theirbright silver scales; the species'Japanese and American names ('sil�ver salmon'), as well as the oldRussian name ('white fish') can beattributed to their color. The fish cangrow up to 84 cm in length; the aver�age length is around 60 cm. Cohoenter the rivers later than the othersalmon species and spawn from earlySeptember through March, oftenunder ice cover. During the spawningperiod, both males and females turn adark crimson. As with sockeye andchinook, juvenile coho run down�stream to the sea after they havespent a year or two in the rivers. Cohospend little time in the sea, though, as
they reach maturity at the age of three.Of all Pacific salmon species, coho arethe most thermophilic, and winter fur�ther to the south than pink salmon, inwaters between 5.5 to 9°С.
Over the last three years, the numberof breeding coho approaching theeastern coast of Kamchatka hasincreased. In 2006, 6.387 millionbreeders entered spawning areasalong the eastern coast; 81.1 % of theTAC was fulfilled (TINRO�Centre,2007).
The number of breeders spawningalong the entire western coast ofKamchatka has been increasing since2003. In 2004, 227.5 thousand individ�uals were recorded at spawninggrounds; three times as many wererecorded in 2006 (TINRO�Centre,2007).
In 2006, the recorded coho catch inthe rivers of the western coast ofKamchatka reached only 60% of theTAC (the TAC was 545 tons). This wasdue, in part, to the number of spawningfish, but mostly resulted from the con�cealment of some catches. Most cohostocks on Kamchatka's western coastare extensively exploited. Although the
officially recorded catch has notexceeded 600 tons annuallyover the last five years, it'ssafe to assume that the actu�
al yield has been significantlyabove that, due to illegal andunrecorded fishing (TINRO�Centre,2007).
СOHO SALMON
1
2
3
5
67
8
9
10
4
1312
CHINOOK SALMON
CHERRY SALMON
RAINBOW TROUT
The chinook salmon(Oncorhynchus tschawytscha) is thelargest Pacific salmon, as well as thelargest anadromous fish in north�eastern Asia. Chinook can grow to alength of 147 cm and weights of 57�61 kg. Most chinook caught in theKamchatka River are between 78and 103 cm long, and weigh 5.5�17.0 kg. Individuals weighing up toand above 45 kg have been record�ed. Chinook enter the rivers fromMay through July and spawnbetween June and late August. Theirspawning grounds are located alongthe entire length of the rivers, fromthe tidal zone to the headwaters.The salmon breed between the agesof 4 and 7, and a single female pro�duces over 14 thousand large eggs.Juvenile Asian chinook live in fresh�water between one and three years,while young American chinookspend anywhere from a few months(ocean type) to two years there (rivertype). In Kamchatka, most juvenilefish run downstream to the sea aftera year, but some leave the freshwa�ter only after two.
Most of the chinook harvested onthe eastern coast of Kamchatkabreed in the Kamchatka River. Overthe last 30 years, the size of the chi�nook stock in the Kamchatka Riverbasin has ranged from 59 to 303thousand individuals, with 158 thou�sand fish on average per year(TINRO�Centre, 2007).
The Bol'shaya River is the mainbreeding and fishing area of thepeninsula's western coast. Over thelast 30 years, the chinook stock inthe Bol'shaya River has fluctuatedbetween 15 and 56 thousand individ�uals, averaging 33 thousand fish peryear (TINRO�Centre, 2006).
Between 2000 and 2006, commer�cial fishing of chinook salmon in theBol'shaya River experienced a three�fold decline in comparison to the1990s, and the number of breedersat spawning grounds is continuallydecreasing (TINRO�Centre, 2007).
Cherry Salmon and Rainbow Troutshould be also noted among thePacific salmon of Kamchatka.Although these two species have nocommercial value due to their lownumbers, they are sometimesrecorded as part of the catches.
Cherry salmon (Oncorhynchusmasou) is the least abundant of thePacific salmon in Kamchatka, and isusually omitted from fisheries statis�tics. Temperature appears to be thelimiting factor for the cherry salmonpopulation in Kamchatka, as the cli�matic conditions of the rivers andsurrounding seas are much moresevere than in the species' optimalrange. Breeding cherry salmon usu�ally enter the rivers in the last ten�dayperiod of May. The spawning periodin Kamchatka lasts until late July andcoincides with the spawning period ofthe chinook and the spring sockeye.The spawning grounds are locatedfar from the sea in the upper reachesof the rivers, or in small rockystreams. The young cherry salmonspend one to three years in the rivers(Kamchatka Red Data Book).
On the whole, the cherry salmonstock in all rivers of westernKamchatka, from the Bolshaya to theVoyampolka River, are low. Accordingto estimates from experts atKamchatNIRO, the number of cherrysalmon entering the Utka River in thespawning period ranges from 15 to50 thousand individuals, dependingon the year. The overall annual catchof the cherry salmon, as a by�prod�uct of other fish�
Rainbow Trout (Parasalmo mykiss,or Oncorhynchus mykis according toclassification adopted by NPAFC) islisted in the Red Data Book of theRussian Federation as a rare anadro�mous form (category 3). Rainbowtrout are more numerous in the north�ern rivers of western Kamchatka; inthe southern rivers, despite a fishingban, the stock has declined in recentyears. No fishing is officially record�ed; however, the valuable trout areextensively poached. Their numbersare also limited by a lack of suitablespawning areas and food resourcesfor juveniles in the rivers (Red DataBook of the Russian Federation,2001).
The species is listed in theKamchatka Red Data Book (category2) and the Red Data Book of theNorthern Russian Far East as anendemic species of Kamchatka dra�matically declining in numbers.
ing, does not exceed a few dozentons (Tokranov, 2002).
The cherry salmon is listed in theKamchatka Red Data Book (they aredesignated as category 3, or aspecies occurring at the edge of itsnatural range and requiring study andpopulation control, as an endemicwide�boreal species rare in the riversof Kamchatka) and the Red DataBook of the Northern Russian FarEast.
Fisheries Management2
2 It is worth noting, that dead salmon consumed by predators in the post�breeding period are an important source of organic substance inthe river basins' ecosystems. The importance of this input to the maintenance of a healthy ecosystem has never been considered in the the�ory of salmon fisheries management or practical fishing. As such, current salmon fisheries management is still far from the principles of"ecosystem�based management."
The Main Target Species and Characteristics of the Salmon Yield in Kamchatka
Pacific salmon are monocyclic fish(spawning only once in their lifetime),which distinguishes them from mostother fish species with an assignedTAC. Mistakes made in managingpolycyclic stocks can be corrected,either by increasing or decreasingfishing pressure in subsequent years.Effective Pacific salmon fishingdemands a different approach � it isnecessary to remove all fish, notessential for successful breeding2.The total allowable catch (TAC) isadopted by federal authorities in theyear of the salmon fishing season (thelate May through September), follow�ing an assessment of the population(see fig. 3 for details).
The government of the RussianFederation specifies the proceduresfor determining and approving TAC'sof aquatic biological resources, aswell as making changes to them.
Many different factors influence thespawning run into the rivers. The mostimportant of these are illustrated infigure 2. A network of regional fishingresearch institutes develops forecastsof the salmon's approach to thecoast. This assessment of the state ofsalmon populations and the forecastof their movements are based on thenumber of breeders running to thespawning grounds, the numbers ofjuvenile fish running downstream,commercial catches, and the trawlcensus at sea (fig. 3). The forecastsare adjusted, based on data fromcontrolled drift net fishing in thesalmon' migration routes.
Unfortunately, it is fairly complicat�ed to assess the many factors affect�ing salmon population numbers. Thetotal number of young fish runningdownstream cannot be estimated, asit is impossible to survey all the riversof the peninsula. The sea surveys areirregular and do not always cover allthe necessary regions, due to a lackof financial resources. One of themost serious obstacles to forecasting
is extensive poaching, and the lack ofreliable data on the unrecorded catchof breeders in the rivers.
Forecasts of the salmon stock relyon homing, or the returning of salmonto their native rivers. As a rule, thesalmon return to these rivers after aperiod of fattening in the sea (TINRO�Centre, 2004). At the same time, dataindicate that pink salmon, the mostabundant Pacific salmon species,have a more flexible homing behaviorin some years.
In order to adjust forecasts, fishinginstitutes annually conduct sea moni�toring (trawl surveys and drift netresearch). This provides practicalinformation on the timeframes ofPacific salmon's approach to thecoasts, and the numbers ofapproaching fish in major fishingregions (namely western and easternKamchatka, eastern Sakhalin, theKuril Islands, and the mainland coastin the southern Sea of Okhotsk).
According to the Law of the RussianFederation "On Fisheries andConservation of Aquatic BiologicalResources" (No.166�FЗ, 20.12.2004,version from 06.12.2007), the TAC isdivided into the following quotas:
catch (harvest) quotas of aquaticbiological resources for commercialfishing (not including coastal fishing)on the continental shelf of the RussianFederation and in the Russian exclu�sive economic zone (commercialquotas);
catch quotas of aquatic biologicalresources for coastal fishing in theinner seas of the Russian Federation,the marine territory of the RussianFederation, the continental shelf ofthe Russian Federation, and theRussian exclusive economic zone(coastal quotas);
catch quotas of aquatic biologicalresources for fishing for scientific andcontrol purposes (scientific quotas);
catch quotas of aquatic biologicalresources for fishing for educationaland cultural purposes;
catch quotas of aquatic biologicalresources for fishing, carried out forthe purposes of breeding, restoration,and acclimatization;
catch quotas of aquatic biologicalresources for sport fishing;
catch quotas of aquatic biologicalresources for support of the tradition�al economic activities of the indige�nous minorities of the North, Siberiaand the Far East of the RussianFederation;
catch quotas of aquatic biologicalresources for the Russian Federationin regions under the jurisdiction ofinternational fisheries and conserva�tion agreements, signed by theRussian Federation;
catch quotas of aquatic biologicalresources for foreign states in theexclusive economic zone of theRussian Federation, established inaccordance with international fish�eries and conservation agreementssigned by Russian Federation;
catch quotas of aquatic biologicalresources for commercial fishing inthe inner waters of the RussianFederation, excluding Russia's innerseas (commercial freshwater quotas).
Salmon are fished in the exclusiveeconomic zone in accordance withallocated quotas. The quotas are dis�tributed among Russian fishermen fordata control purposes (catch data areused to adjust the forecast of thesalmon's approach to the coast), andamong Japanese fishing companies,as per the IntergovernmentalAgreement signed by Russia andJapan on 12 May 1985. The fisher�man use drift and floating nets, a fewkilometers in length, set acrosssalmon migration routes.
Quota types (1) and (9) are themain commercial quotas. The coastalquota is filled largely by means of fish�ing with fixed nets on the open seaand in waters close to the rivermouths. When fixed gear is used, aguiding wing of the net is placed in theway of fish migrating along the coast.
14
Fig
ure
2.
Life
cyc
le o
f th
e P
acifi
c sa
lmo
ns
(with
th
e p
ink
salm
on
as
an e
xam
ple
) an
d t
he
fac
tors
aff
ect
ing
th
e s
urv
ival
an
d r
etu
rn o
f th
e in
div
idu
als
of
the
var
iou
s ag
e g
rou
ps
(aft
er
TIN
RO
�Ce
ntr
e,
20
04
).
Fig
ure
3.
Flo
w c
har
t o
f th
e b
asis
sta
ge
s o
f th
e d
eve
lop
me
nt
of
the
fo
reca
st o
f th
e s
alm
on
re
sou
rce
s an
d T
AC
su
bst
antia
ting
(af
ter
TIN
RO
�Ce
ntr
e,
20
04
).
15
17
A new article was added to theFederal Law "on Fisheries andPreservation of Aquatic BiologicalResources" (FL No.333) on 6December 2007. This article, Article29.1, is entitled "The harvest (catch) ofanadromous fish species," and reads:
1. Anadromous fish species are to beharvested by legal entities and inde�pendent businesses, as stipulated byArticle 16, Part 3 of the current FederalLaw, on the basis of the agreementdefined by Article 33.3 of the currentFederal Law.
2. Bodies of water designated forharvesting anadromous fish speciesmay only be used for other purposeswith the consent of the persons listedin Part 1 of the this article (includinguses not connected with fishing).
3. For harvesting of anadromous fishspecies, the fish and their habitats areto be assigned to the persons stipulat�ed in Part 1 of this article, on the basisof the resolution of the commissionregulating the anadromous fish har�vest. This resolution is adopted by localauthorities, authorized by the federalexecutive branch.
4. Commissions regulating theanadromous fish harvest are to beestablished in the subjects (republics,okrugs, oblasts, etc.) of the RussianFederation. The commission is to beheaded by top official of the subject ofthe Russian Federation (the head ofthe top executive authority of the sub�ject of the Russian Federation). Thecommission must be comprised ofrepresentatives from the federal exec�utive authorities, including defense,security, and environment protectionauthorities, as well as public authoritiesof the subjects of the RussianFederation, community organizations,legal associations, and scientific insti�tutions.
5. The commission regulating theanadromous fish harvest determinesthe volume, timeframe, and locationsfor the catch, and other conditions forthe harvesting of anadromous species.This resolution is adopted by localauthorities, authorized by the federalexecutive branch.
6. The list of members of the com�mission regulating the harvest of
anadromous fish species and theoperating procedures is to beapproved by the authorized federalexecutive authority.
7. In order to establish favorableconditions for fishing and preserveaquatic biological resources in watersallocated for the harvest of anadro�mous fish species, a special agree�ment may be negotiated between twoparties, one of which heads the regu�lating commission, and is obligated toissue fishing permits for anadromousfish in a given body of water for a peri�od of 10�20 years. The second party,in turn, is responsible for the imple�mentation of measures aimed at sus�tainable use and conservation of theaquatic biological resources, includingwater body amelioration and theresponsible management of aquaticbiological resources.
8. The agreement denoted in Part 7of this article must be officially regis�tered with local authorities, authorizedby the federal executive branch. Theagreement is considered effectiveimmediately following registration.
9. The procedures for preparation,completion, and official registration ofthe agreement mentioned in Part 7 ofthis article, as well as the sampleagreement form, are specified by thegovernment of the Russian Federation.
In effect, this document establishesthe legal grounds for the allocation offishing areas in accordance with the"one body of water � one user" princi�ple. The practicability of assigninglocal salmon stocks for the long�termuse has been discussed for a longtime. Such an approach could estab�lish conditions that would compel theusers (actual stock "owners") to beengaged in salmon conservationissues. It would also lay the ground�work for a smooth transition from theexisting system of assigned TAC's. Atpresent, TAC's are a necessary mech�anism for distributing quotas amongfishing enterprises, i.e. among fixednets. Salmon fishing would effectivelybecome a process of removing excessfish heading towards their spawningrivers. The user would have no reasonto persuade (or deceive) himself everyyear that the original fishing forecast
must be repeatedly increased over thecourse of the fishing season, becausethe spawning grounds of the fishedsalmon will be located within his ownfishing area, rather than in far�off andunknown rivers (Makoedov et al.,2006). To this end, the State FisheriesCommittee is currently developing thenecessary bylaws. This measure hasits opponents as well as its supportersand thus, requires thorough and care�ful consideration for each region andbody of water.
It is safe to say, that the long�termassignment of fishing areas will haveboth positive and negative conse�quences. Competition for fishing areassometimes escalates into veritablewars, best summarized in the words ofBritish philosopher Bertrand Russell:"War does not determine who is right �only who is left". Regional topical pub�lications, particularly those distributedvia the Internet, illustrate fairly uglyaspects of these wars, in which admin�istrative resources are widely used inconstant attempts to change the termsof access to aquatic biologicalresources. It is worth noting, that norelevant documents detailing the newprocedures for allocation of fishingareas were available by the beginningof the 2008 fishing season. Someexperts expressed fears that thosedocuments would be drafted in haste,and that the distribution of fishingareas would serve the interests of thelarger fishing enterprises, who havegreater administrative resources andare well equipped to capitalize on theredistribution, at the expense of small�scale users. In addition, conflictsbetween the new long�term users andthe local population are unavoidable,as locals will inevitably consider somenew users illegitimate. Conflict resolu�tion will depend upon the ability of theusers to win the favor of residents insettlements situated along the riversand seacoast, ensure their employ�ment, and help them find their place inthe new economy. If the fishing indus�try fails to strike this balance, conflictswith the local population will provokeincreased poaching.
16
The salmon are guided along the winginto the trap and gather there, and aresubsequently removed and delivered tothe coast. About 70 % of all harvestedsalmon are trapped in this way. In larg�er rivers where fishing is permitted,fisherman use fixed, floating, andsweep nets. It is worth noting, that as itstands today research fishing is"research" in name only. Insofar as itonly targets valuable commercialsalmon species and the sockeyesalmon in particular, it does not princi�pally differ from commercial fishing.The fish are caught for control purpos�es, but the catch amounts to severalthousand tons annually (Anon., 2007).
According to Accounting Bureauestimates, the results of the Pacificsalmon fishing season in 2004�2006suggest that the salmon TAC (fromtheir own scientific studies) did not cor�respond to the actual catch. The poorquality of the forecasts and, hence,underestimated TAC resulted in materi�al and financial losses for fisheriesorganizations preparing for the fishing
season. Attempts at strategic regula�tion of fishing and adjustment of theTAC during the short fishing seasonproved to be inefficient, as TAC adjust�ment require an environmental impactassessment and thorough analysis ofrelevant regulatory documents fromRosrybolovstvo and the Ministry ofAgriculture of the Russian Federation(Anon., 2007).
On average, the officially recordedcatch in the Russian Pacific exceededthe TAC by approximately 10 % in theyears 1995�2005, though this figurevaried depending on the particularregion (fig. 4).
Many fishermen distrust scientists,as the salmon approach cannot beaccurately forecasted in advance andthus, TAC's cannot always be effective�ly regulated in a timely fashion. Theyare often convinced that the catchcould exceed allocated quotas. In theSoviet period, as well as in the 1990s,so�called Fishing Season Centers wereestablished to regulate salmon fishing.They were authorized to ban fishing if
the salmon approached the coast inlow numbers, or expand the TAC ifnumbers appeared to be high. On July18th, 2002, the State FisheriesCommittee of the Russian Federation(the agency responsible for state fish�eries management prior to the 2004administrative reform) issued Order N241. According to this document,Fishing Season Centers were onlyauthorized to regulate fishing within thelimits of adopted TAC's. By 2003, theFishing Season Centers were no longeroperational, and virtually no means fortimely and efficient regulation of fishingremained.
As fishing cannot reasonably be reg�ulated on a day�to�day basis and thepresent system encourages unrecord�ed fishing, some experts advise forego�ing management of Pacific salmonfishing by means of a TAC, and insteadregulating the amount of fishing equip�ment (Kotenev et al., 2006). This pro�posal is being actively discussed byexperts and fishing industry represen�tatives.
Figure 4. TAC and the recorded catch of Pacific salmon (all species and regions) in 1995� 2005 (from TINRO�Centre,2004, 2005, 2006).
Fisheries Management
19
In the period between 2000 and2004, Pacific salmon constituted 6.17% of the overall Russian catch, 8.65 %of the Russian EEZ catch, and 10.18% of the Far East catch (Sinyakov,2006). In that period, pink salmon
accounted for the greatest portion ofthe Far East catch (144.3 thousandtons, or 73.3 % of the total catch, onaverage). They were followed bychum (30.8 thousand tons, 15.6 %),sockeye (18.4 thousand tons, 9.4 %),
coho (1.64 thousand tons, 0.8 %),chinook (0.4 thousand tons, 0.2 %),and cherry salmon (6 tons, 0.003 %)(Sinyakov, 2006). The catch data for1999 through 2006 are presented inTable 1.
Kamchatka is the main salmon fish�ing region of the Far East, with an aver�age annual yield of 93.12 thousandtons between 2000 and 2004 (47.3 %of the overall catch in the Far East).Kamchatka produces 41.4 % of thepink salmon catch, 40.1 % of the chumcatch, almost 100 % of the sockeyeand chinook catch, and 82.2 % of thecoho catch (Sinyakov, 2006).
Salmon yields are fairly stable, par�ticularly in Kamchatka (Fig. 5), andshow a steady increase. The relativelylarge catches of recent years resultfrom particularly favorable conditionsfor salmon in their saltwater period(Sinyakov, 2006).
The Recorded Catch 3
Table 1. Salmon yield in the Russian Far East, 1999�2006, in tons (TINRO�Centre 2000�2007).
1999
188207
25127
12276
1348
765
227723 198541 222447 166443,5 228751 161607,5 260191,40 273395,9
25,428,110,98103,057
457 433 555,3 225 320,67 572 752,1
1796 1776 1728,64 1364 1515,67 872,4 1453,9
15127 18102 24796,8 17692 16342,16 19817,60 24925
32619 31230 31086,2 28877 30157,54 33110 46931,3
148542 170906 108273,5 180583 113260,5 205791,30 199308,2Pinksalmon
Chumsalmon
Sockeyesalmon
Сohosalmon
Сhinooksalmon
Cherrysalmon
TOTAL
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Figure 5. Salmon yields in the Russian Far East and in Kamchatka, 1999�2006 (TINRO�Centre 2000�2007).
© WWF�Canon / Kevin SCHAFER
21
The opposite trend can beobserved for imports of other, lessexpensive salmon products (fig. 8).China tops that list; Chinese importsof Russian salmon increase nearlyevery year.
Figure 9 clearly demonstrates thedominance of sockeye salmonamong exported salmon products(by cost). The only exception is2006, when the export of otherfrozen salmon to China noticeablyincreased. It is worth noting, thatgiven an essentially equal monetaryvalue of exports in 2006, the volumeof other salmon species exported toChina was 2.3 times greater (see fig�ures 7 and 8).
Salted salmon, and both frozen andsalted salmon fillets, comprise a neg�ligible share of total exports, whichhas not exceeded a thousand ton inthe past few years (see fig. 10).
According to data provided by theAccounting Bureau of the RussianFederation, salmon exports fromRussia are stable and amount to 22�30thousand tons annually. Salmon repre�sent 14�16% of overall seafoodexports by volume, and 9�11 % byvalue. Frozen sockeye is the singlelargest Russian salmon export; in2005, 24 759 tons were exported, andthe overall sockeye harvest totaled 26634.8 tons (Anon., 2007).
However, data from our own analysisof the export statistics indicate muchlarger volumes of exported salmon(see fig. 11), in some years more thandouble the official statistics.
In the period from 2001 to 2006,the overall export amounted to 287394 tons. Figures 6, 7, 8, 10, and 11show that, in 2004, overall exportvolumes, as well as exports to indi�vidual countries, hit a minimum. Thisyear saw the smallest number ofsalmon harvested in the Far East(Fig. 5, Table 1).
In 2004, the recorded catch inwestern Kamchatka was consider�ably smaller than the TAC. Expertsattributed this phenomenon toweather conditions. A cyclone hit thisarea on August 4�6, and 90 % of thenets (out of a total 106) were dam�aged and removed. Only 30 to 40 %
20
The Volume of SalmonExport from Russia
4.1. Export of Salmon Products
4
Figure 6. Russian export of salmon products to the major importingcountries, by year (M_INFO database).
Figure 7 illustrates that frozen sockeye are exported mainly to Japan;and export volumes are increasing. On the contrary, the amounts ofsockeye exported to the Republic of Korea are small, and decreasingover time. Sockeye exports to China are negligible (see fig 7).
In 2002, frozen sockeye salmonwas given its own code(0303110000), whereas previously itwas included under the 033100000code, designating frozen salmon.Now, sockeye can be used to traceexport dynamics by year and country,and to compare these data with theofficial catch (see sections 4.2).
In Japan, the market value of sockeye salmon is higher than that ofthe chinook salmon; the situation is reversed in Russia and America.The economic value of sockeye to Russian fishing companies hasincreased considerably over the last 10 years, due to growing exportvolumes (Bugaev, 2004).
Figure 7 illustrates that frozen sockeye are exported mainly to Japan;and export volumes are increasing. On the contrary, the amounts ofsockeye exported to the Republic of Korea are small, and decreasingover time. Sockeye exports to China are negligible (see fig 7).
Figure 8. Russian exports of frozen salmon (excluding sockeye) in 2002�2006, in tons (M_INFO database).
Figure 9. Russian exports of frozen salmon to Japan, China, and the Republic of Korea (USD) (M_INFO database).
Figure 10. The overall volume of Russian salmon product exports (M_INFO database).
The following Pacific salmon prod�ucts are recorded in Russian cus�toms statistics: (see Appendix 2):– live salmon,– fresh or refrigerated salmon,– frozen sockeye salmon,– other frozen salmon,– fresh or refrigerated salmon fillets,– frozen salmon fillets,– salted salmon fillets,– smoked salmon,– salted salmon,– processed and canned salmon, – salmon roe.
Russian export statistics indicatethat the bulk of all salmon products isexported to Japan, China, and theRepublic of Korea. In addition, smallamounts are exported to Ukraine,Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan (Figs. 6,7, and 8).
© WWF�Russia / Vladimir Prizemlin
23
Although the list of salmon productsbought from Russia is extensive,frozen products, in particular frozensockeye, make up the bulk of allimports. Most of the sockeye breed inthe waters of Kamchatka. Importdynamics of frozen sockeye aredepicted in figure 12. The long�termtrends suggest an increase in volume,a decrease in average prices, an andincreasing total import value.
In the 2000s, import volumes offrozen sockeye ranged between 16.3and 24.8 thousand tons per year. Theimport dates shows certain "lagging"behind the fishing seasons; in otherwords, the import dates do not entirelycorrespond to the years/months offishing. For example, fish harvested in2005 were imported through May2006. The first catches from Russiandrift�net fishing vessels are delivered inMay and June. Overlap between previ�ous�year products and the current�year harvests may occur during thesemonths. Additionally, customs statis�tics draw no distinction between theproducts of coastal fishing and thoseof drift�net fishing. Most productsimported from Russia belong to theformer.
In recent years, the average annualprice for sockeye imported fromRussia has ranged between JPY 585per kg (USD 4.9) per kg (2001) andJPY461 (USD3.9) per kg (2006). Thelowest prices were recorded in 2005and 2006, when import volumes werelargest. In March 2006, the prices forRussian sockeye caught with drift netsin 2005 ranged between JPY680(USD5.7) and JPY700 (USD5.9) per kgon the Tokyo wholesale market (datafrom Japanese customs statistics,Clarke, 2007). Sockeye salmon fishedboth in the eastern and westerncoastal areas of Kamchatka costJPY510 (USD4.3) to JPY530 (USD4.5)per kg (Tsygir, 2007).
Imports of other frozen Pacificsalmon ranged between 5 277 and 8394 tons; prices averaged JPY142(USD1.2) to JPY 355 (USD2.98) per kg.
It is impossible to deduce the volumesand prices of imported chum, pink,and chinook salmon from these fig�ures. Import dynamics of other Pacificsalmon species (besides sockeye andcoho salmon) are shown in figure 13.The long�term trend suggests adecrease in import volume, increasingaverage prices, and stable total importvalue.
Fresh/refrigerated Pacific salmonexported from Russia to Japan are
products of drift�net fishing. Accordingto import statistics, they were importedonly four months a year (June throughSeptember) between 1992 and 2006.The amount of imported fresh/refriger�ated salmon is fairly small; such prod�ucts are not delivered every year (e.g.,no import was recorded in 2005, 2004,or 2002). All told, only 2 120 tons ofRussian fresh/refrigerated Pacificsalmon have been imported by Japansince 1992.
22
of the nets were restored by August10�15. This indicates that underfish�ing was caused primarily by thestorms. They also prevented theremoval of fishing equipment,including traps with already caughtfish, and more that 15 thousand tonsof pink salmon drowned. On top ofthat, nets were destroyed and, thus,could be no longer used for fishing.One more reason for underfishingwas the late issuing of permits to setfishing nets, though this would nothave improved the situation regard�less (V. Tsygir, TINRO�Centre, pers.comm., 2007).
Объем поставок в другие страны (продолжение)
Figure 11. Overall volume of Russian salmon product exports(M_INFO database).
4.2. Foreign Imports of Salmon from Russia According to import statistics, Japan, China, and the Republic of Korea import most of Russia's salmon products.
The amount of salmon imported by other countries is negligible, as it does not exceed a few tons.
Japan is the lead importer ofRussian salmon products. In Japaneseimport statistics, Pacific salmon prod�ucts are recorded by species, 1)fresh/frozen sockeye salmon, 2)fresh/frozen coho salmon, and 3)fresh/frozen "other species of Pacificsalmon" (excluding sockeye andcoho); They also record frozen importsalone, including frozen: 4) sockeye, 5)coho, and 6) "other species of Pacificsalmon". The following import statis�
tics are also available: 7) salted refrig�erated salmon (all species), 8) hardsalted salmon roe (fully ripe egg mass�es), and 9) salted granular salmon roe.In addition, Japan imports frozen hardsalmon roe (10). Frozen salmon roe isnot recorded in customs statistics as aseparate product. However, mediapublications say that customs recordsfrozen salmon roe as "frozen roe ofother fish", equating it to imports of"frozen salmon roe.3
In addition to Pacific salmon prod�ucts, records show that the followingspecies were imported from Russia incertain years: 11) frozen trout, 12)Atlantic salmon, 13) trout (fresh andrefrigerated), 14) other frozen salmon,15) Pacific salmon / Atlantic salmon /taimen (fresh/refrigerated), 16)smoked Pacific salmon / Atlanticsalmon, including fillets, and 17)salmon: whole/chunks (not canned).
4.2.1. List of Russian salmon products exported to Japan
4.2.2.The volume and cost of Japanese salmon imports from Russia.Dynamics of import volumes and prices
3 Special import statistics exist for pollock and herring roe. Aside from the roe of these species, only salmon roe is imported fromRussia as a frozen product. As no special records of imported frozen salmon roe are kept, the category "frozen roe of other fish"includes salmon roe, and especially pink salmon roe, with regard to imports from Russia.
Figure 12. Dynamics of Japanese frozen sockeye imports from Russia (accord�ing to Japanese customs statistics).
Figure 13. Dynamics of Japanese frozen salmon imports from Russia, exclud�ing sockeye and coho salmon (According to Japanese customs statistics).
25
Protracted Russian�Japanese con�sultations have been held on variouslevels, on the importance of the jointstruggle against poaching andseafood smuggling. As a result ofthese consultations, along with cer�tain political events that occurred inJapan in 2001�2002, Japaneseauthorities began rejecting so�called"port clearances" from fishing ves�sels flying the Russian flag, begin�ning on 1 April 2002. Russian ownersof these fishing vessels wereunaware of the forthcoming changesin early 2002. The problem wassolved promptly: false port clear�ances were replaced with false cargodeclarations. Moreover, in theJapanese interpretation, the agree�ment does not affect transport ves�sels that have no fishing equipmenton board. Such vessels have beenused in recent years to ship seafood,including salmon products fromRussian drift�net fishing, fromRussian to Japanese ports.
The term "smuggling" was used inthe Russian�Japanese consultationsmentioned above, because illegalshipment of seafood to foreign portsis often referred to as such. However,the term "smuggling"6 implies thecrossing of state or customs bor�ders. With regard to marine areas,this corresponds to the 12�mile zoneof Russian territorial waters. That is
why any fish harvested (even illegal�ly) outside the Russian territorialwaters cannot be formally consid�ered "smuggled" goods, just as theshipment of seafood to foreign portswithout crossing the Russian borderis not smuggling.
Japanese authorities do not verifythe authenticity of documents pro�duced by vessels delivering seafood,so the forgeries are very commonlyused. Until 2002, Japanese portsharbored many vessels conductingillegal fishing in Russian waters. Theoverwhelming majority of Russiancrab�fishing vessels were supplied,repaired, and refitted in Japaneseports, and avoid calling at Russianports for years on end. Many vesselswere even unable to call at Russianports, because they no longer metthe standards for registration. Theship owners were reluctant to incuradditional expenses by calling atRussian ports.
In the late 1990s and in 2000,Hokkaido also harbored several drift�net vessels, which harvested salmonin the Russian EEZ, as well as in theopen waters of the Pacific Ocean(the NPAFC Convention area).Harvested salmon were delivered toJapan. Those vessels carried docu�ments that allowed them to fly theflags of third�party countries. Toconceal their illegal activities, such
vessels also carried false documentsidentifying them as other, Russian�flagged drift�net vessels. Russiandocuments were used in Russianwaters; while calling at the Japaneseports, the ships produced eitherRussian documents, or documentsthat permitted them to fly othercountries' flags. In some cases, suchvessels were detained, both in openwaters by the US coastguard and inthe Russian EEZ by the RussianFederal Frontier Guards (e.g., theAlbatros 101 case7).
The 1982 UN Convention onMaritime Law (Article 92, p. 2) reads:"A ship which sails under the flags oftwo or more States, using themaccording to convenience, may notclaim any of the nationalities in ques�tion with respect to any State, andmay be equated to a ship withoutnationality".
This provision is no longer prac�ticed. This is in part, becauseJapanese authorities no longer sup�port such vessels, since Japanesesupport for those conducting illegaldrift�net fishing was made public.Additionally, these waters arepatrolled by NPAFC parties (on theopen seas) and the Russian FederalFrontier Guards (in Russian territorialwaters).
24
Russian fishermen harvest salmonin the coastal areas, at the rivermouths and in the rivers, using bothfixed gear and floating nets. Sockeyeis virtually the only product ofRussian coastal fishing in demand onthe Japanese market. Since 1993,drift�net fishing of Pacific salmon hasbeen conducted in Russia with thetwin aims of monitoring and strategicforecasting of the salmon's approachto the coasts. Teams of Russian drift�net vessels are implementing the sci�entific programs of fisheriesresearch institutions. Salmon caughtduring these marine investigationsare of very high quality; most of themare subsequently exported to Japan.Products of Russian coastal fishingsupplied to Japan, as well as theseyields of Russian drift�net studies,are recorded in Japanese customsstatistics as imports from Russia.
In addition to salmon harvested byRussians, salmon of Russian origincaught by Japanese fishermen arealso delivered to Japan. The latterare harvested either in the 200�milezone of Japanese territorial waters,or in Russia's EEZ. In Japanesewaters, Japanese fishermen catchsalmon of Russian origin with driftnets, in compliance with theIntergovernmental Agreement onCooperation in Fisheries signed in19854. Japan pays compensation toRussia for such activities. A certainamount of Russian salmon is alsofished in Japanese coastal areas.After the Convention for theConservation of Anadromous Stocksin the North Pacific Ocean wassigned in 1992, Japanese fishermenceased to fish for salmon on theopen sea. They do, however, catchsalmon in the Russian EEZ on a com�mercial scale, in accordance with the1985 agreement mentioned above.
According to the Customs Law ofJapan (Custom Law, 1954), "import"
denotes transfer of the goods toJapan from abroad (includingseafood harvested by any foreignvessel on the open sea) and goodsapproved for export from Japan,having undergone the relevant cus�toms procedures. The fundamentalcriterion for "imports," with regard toseafood, is that they be harvested bya foreign vessel. If seafood is har�vested by a Japanese vessel, even inthe open sea, it is considered "localgoods" and its transfer to Japan isnot considered an "import". Thus,salmon harvested by Japanese ves�sels outside of Japanese waters andsubsequently shipped to Japan arenot considered imported products.In NPAFC and FAO statistics, salmonharvested by Japanese drift�net ves�sels in the Russian EEZ are recordedas part of the Japanese catch.
At present, Russian fishermen har�vest Russia's salmon both in the ter�ritorial and inner waters of theRussian Federation (within the cus�toms territory), and in the EEZ, whichis outside the customs territory. Incompliance with Russian legislation,salmon may be harvested in Russianwaters only with permits, and withinallocated quotas. Fishing productsare shipped outside the customs ter�ritory by means of customs declara�tions, drawn up at customs offices.Products may be shipped fromRussian ports to Japanese ones byvessels flying the Russian flag or theflag of any other country. As it isimpossible to verify the legality of allsalmon products at customs offices,a certain amount of illegally harvest�ed salmon is inevitably certified. Thismay be either salmon harvested overthe permitted limits, or poachedsalmon (harvested without any per�mit).
With regard to coastal salmon fish�ing, there should be no problemscertifying products and receiving
shipping documents in Russianports. However, drift�net studies ofPacific salmon for the purposes ofmonitoring and strategic forecastingof the salmon approach nonethelesshave been conducted in the RussianEEZ since 1993.
Salmon harvested during Russiandrift�net monitoring studies are soldin Japan. According to Russian legis�lation, these vessels are not requiredto call at any Russian port prior todelivery of their products to Japan orany other foreign country. It isenough to simply fill in the ShipCargo Declaration. However, thisdocument is not recognized byJapanese authorities. According toJapanese legislation (the Law onRegulation of Fishing by the ForeignPersons, No.60, 14 July 1967), theimport of seafood from foreign fish�ing vessels directly from the fishingareas is prohibited. A document con�firming shipping from a foreign portis required for customs registrationof imported seafood in Japan.Hence, Russian vessels deliveringseafood to Japan need to attain sucha document, either in a Russian port,or in the port of another country (e.g.The Republic of Korea). Call at a portrequires additional money for fuel,paperwork (filling out immigration,customs, and other relevant docu�ments), and time. Because of this,salmon fished by Russian drift netshave been delivered and are stilldelivered to Japan directly from fish�ing areas, either by the drift�net fish�ing vessels, or by cargo ships.
Up until 1 April 2002, Russian fish�ing vessels produced false portclearances (PC) confirming ship�ment through a foreign5 port, asrequired by Japanese customs.False documents were manufacturedeither on board the vessels them�selves, or in Japanese ports.
4.2.3. The supply of Russian salmon to Japan: Shipments direct from Russia and via the Republic of Korea
4 Before, fisherman engaged in long�line fishing as well.5 With regard to Japan.
6 Smuggling � 1) concealed transportation of prohibited or declarable goods across state borders; 2) smuggled goods � commodities andgoods transported in this way (Efremova, 2001). According to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Article 188, Part 1), smuggling isthe transportation of commodities and other articles across the Russian Federation's state border, avoiding customs control or concealinggoods from it.
7 Sem' Dney [Seven Days] , 24 February 2001 (http://www.segodnya.ru/w3s.nsf/Archive/2001_43_news_text_lenc1.html); newsru.com, 22 Febryary 2001 (http://www.newsru.com/arch/russia/22feb2001/albatros2.html).
Foreign Imports of Salmon from Russia
2726
The Republic of Korea importssmall amounts of frozen Pacificsalmon from Russia. Statistics haveused the categories "frozen Pacificsalmon" (through 2001, with nospecies indicated), "frozen sockeyesalmon" (recorded separately since2002), and "other frozen Pacificsalmon" (since 2002). The greatestvolumes of Pacific salmon wereimported in 2000 and 2001 (1.8 to 3.2thousands tons); prices averagedUSD 0.96�1.38 per kg. In subsequentyears, sockeye and other Pacificsalmon were imported in smallamounts, for prices averaging USD3.16�3.69 per kg. No Pacific salmonwere imported from Russia in 2005.
The absence of a given seafooditem in South Korean import statistics
does not mean that the item has notpassed through South Korean ports.For example, if seafood is shipped incontainers from Russian ports toJapan, it is transferred through Korea.If seafood from the Russian EEZ isdelivered to Korea by cargo ships orfishing vessels en route to Japan, theyare transferred in South Korean ports(usually in Pusan) without any cus�toms certification. In such cases,transit freight is omitted from Koreancustoms statistics (Tsygir, 2007).Russian products shipped to Japanvia the Republic of Korea, and notcertified by Korean customs, arerecorded in Japan as imports fromRussia. If Russian products were to becertified by Korean customs, andsubsequently exported to Japan, they
are recorded in Japanese customsstatistics as imports from theRepublic of Korea.
According to Japanese import sta�tistics, negligible volumes of salmonproducts are imported from Korea.There is no need to ship productsfrom the Russian EEZ, and destinedfor the Japanese market, throughSouth Korea. As mentioned above,these products are delivered from theEEZ of Russia directly to Japaneseports by "transport" ships.
All salmon products of coastal fish�ing, as well as those harvested in theEEZ and shipped to Japan, arerecorded there as "imports fromRussia".
4.2.4. Imports of Russian Pacific salmon by the Republic of Korea
4.2.5. Imports of Russian Pacific salmon by the People's Republic of ChinaThe volume of Russian Pacific
salmon imported by the People'sRepublic of China has increased con�siderably in recent years. Most of theimported products are inexpensive,such as frozen pink and chum salmon(proportions by species are unknown,as they are recorded together); 40.4thousand tons of frozen salmon wereimported in 2005, and around 49thousand tons were imported in 2006.Average prices increased to USD1.92
per kg in 2006 (compared to USD1.66per kg in 2005), which can be attrib�uted to a greater proportion of chumand coho salmon. Sockeye importsare recorded separately; Chinaimported 600 tons of frozen sockeyeproducts in 2005, and 860 tons in2006. China imports lower�qualitysockeye products than Japan. Pricesfor sockeye averaged USD1.87 per kgin 2006, and USD1.49 per kg in 2005.It should be noted, that sockeye
prices are lower than those of otherPacific salmon species. This may indi�cate that salmon of other species(e.g. coho salmon) were importedunder the name "sockeye," or that theproducts were of low quality. In termsof raw weight (with a coefficient of1.33, see Methods), China importedaround 54.5 thousand tons of Pacificsalmon from Russia in 2005, and 66.0thousand tons in 2006 (Tsygir, 2007).
4.2.6. Exports of Russian sockeye salmon, compared to the total yield ofthe species in Russia
The raw weight of Pacific salmon ofall species, processed into frozenproducts for Japan, China, andSouth Korea, totaled around 107thousand tons in 2006, and 97 thou�
sand tons in 2005.Foreign import statistics suggest
volumes of sockeye significantlylarger that the recorded Russiansockeye catch. Foreign imports of
sockeye and coho salmon are com�pared with the recorded coastal anddrift�net catch in Table 2.
Foreign Imports of Salmon from Russia
Table 2. Comparison of sockeye and coho salmon imports from Russia in 1998 through
2006 with catch data, in tons
Year
1998
1998
1998
1998
1999
1999
2000
2000
2001
2001
2001
2001
2002
2002
2003
2003
2004
2004
2005
2006
2006
25
11 412
11 437
1 261
12 186
1 460
16 354
1 195
17 489
17 492
1 137
24 562
614
20 892
1 074
18 827
871
24 759
1 080
24 649
632
3
10 135
1 697
12 276
1 348
15 127
1 796
18 102
1 776
24 797
1 729
17 692
1 364
16 342
1 516
19 818
872
24 925
1 454
62
13
52
601
860
2 480
492
2 787
223
3 227
303
4 062
249
3 335
221
3 676
385
2 877
717
4 167
381
4 293
251
12 615
2 189
15 063
1 571
18 354
2 099
22 164
2 025
28 132
1 950
21 368
1 749
19 219
2 233
23 985
1 253
29 218
1 705
15 211
1 677
16 207
1 942
21 751
1 589
4
23 260
23 264
1 512
32 750
817
27 804
1 428
25 109
1 158
33 729
1 436
33 927
841
1 100
�513
4 618
�1133
6 436
�321
5 890
�1075
9 744
183
4 709
�864
2 596
�512
1 144
371
3 397
�510
33
15 177
Product
Sockeye salmon(fresh/refrigerated)
Sockeye salmon(fresh/refrigeratd)
Sockeye salmon(frozen)
Sockeye salmon(TOTAL)
Sockeye salmon(TOTAL)
Сoho salmon(frozen)
Сoho salmon(frozen)
Сoho salmon(frozen)
Сoho salmon(frozen)
Сoho salmon(frozen)
Сoho salmon(frozen)
Coho salmon(frozen)
Coho salmon(frozen)
Coho salmon(frozen)
Sockeye salmon(frozen)
Sockeye salmon(frozen)
Sockeye salmon(frozen)
Sockeye salmon(frozen)
Sockeye salmon(frozen)
Sockeye salmon(frozen)
Sockeye salmon(frozen)
Sockeye salmon(frozen)
Import from
RussiaCatch in Russia
Ja
pa
n
Co
as
tal
(aft
er
TIN
RO
�C
en
tre
)
Ru
ss
ian
ma
rin
ed
rift
stu
die
s
Ov
era
ll i
mp
ort
of
raw
fis
h
Imp
ort
, ra
w f
ish
min
us
the
re
co
rde
d c
atc
h
To
tal
rec
ord
ed
PR
C
Re
pu
bli
c o
f K
ore
a
2005
29
The fish market is likely the least"transparent" of all Russian markets.Although a great variety of fish prod�ucts are available for purchase, nocomprehensive investigations intotrade volumes, stakeholders, supplyand demand, or proportions ofimported vs. domestic products haveever been conducted.
Russian fish companies are reluc�tant to disclose both production andtrade volumes. No reliable data on thenumber of fish companies operatingon the Russian fish market are avail�able. The number of such companiesmay reach hundreds or even thou�sands. Since companies do not dis�
close actual production and trade vol�umes, it is equally difficult to identifyindustry leaders.
Considering all of the above,assessment of the domestic market isan extremely difficult task. While col�lected data are often contradictory,they still characterize the general situ�ation and reflect the state and ten�dencies of the salmon market.
During our sociological survey, fish�ing industry representatives and fish�ermen of Kamchatka (150 respon�dents in all) were asked about thecountries that import salmon, and thepercentage of salmon products thatremain in Russia. Answers from both
respondent groups appear to be con�sistent. Most sockeye salmon areexported to Japan (70% and 75%,estimated by industry representativesand fishermen, respectively). SouthKorea accounts for 20% of sockeyeimports and negligible amounts ofpink, coho, and chum salmon. Thesame volumes of those species aresupplied to China. Fishing industryrepresentatives state that 10% of pinksalmon and 35% of chinook salmonare exported to Japan. The fisher�men, on the other hand, are con�vinced that all chinook salmon and99% of pink salmon enter the domes�tic market (see table 3).
28
In terms of total raw fish (assumingthat 75% of this total are frozen � seemethods), the sockeye catch suppliedto Japan totaled 22�33 thousand tonsper calendar year in the 2000s8 (table2). The volume of Japanese raw fishimports alone (not including fish sup�plied to the Russian market) exceedthe total recorded coastal and drift�netcatch of Russia. In 2005, a record vol�ume of Russian sockeye (24.8 thou�sand tons) was imported by Japan.This amounts to at least 33 thousandtons of raw fish. This exceeded the2002 total only slightly; nearly thesame amount of fish was delivered toJapan in that year. However, therecorded sockeye catch in 2002 was28.1 thousand tons, whereas only 24thousand tons (4.1 thousand tonsless) were harvested in 2005. Thus, theamount by which Japanese sockeyeimports exceeded the official catchwas greatest in 2005, totaling 9.7 thou�sand excess tons. The actual sockeyecatch was even larger, as some sock�eye products entered the Russiandomestic market (see part 5).
Figure 14 clearly illustrates thatsockeye imports by Japan, China, andSouth Korea (according to data provid�ed by these countries) significantlyexceed both the total Russian export offrozen sockeye (by 27 % on average)
and the recorded sockeye catch (by 20% on average).
From 1995 to 20069, overallJapanese and Korean imports of sock�eye salmon from Russia, calculated interms of raw fish weight, exceed therecorded catch of the species by morethan 40 thousand tons (Table 2).
The volume of Japanese frozen cohoimports from Russia ranged between600 and 1200 tons in the 2000s, andprices averaged JPY207�276(USD1.7�2.3) per kg. In terms of rawfish, the amount of coho imported byJapan exceeded the recorded catch in2005 and 1999.
Figure 14. Comparison of the volumes of Russian raw fish exports, raw fishimports by East Asian countries, and the recorded catch of sockeye salmonin the years for which the full data set is available.
8 In recent years, there has been an increase in the output of gutted and headless frozen sockeye salmon, which constituted less than 75%of the total. However, the relative share of these products is unknown, so we made no changes to the conversion factor. Therefore, the actu�al weight of raw fish used for processing exceeds data presented in Table 2.
9 Including 11 months of 2006.
Foreign Imports of Salmon from Russia
Evaluation of the Domestic Market 5
Table 3. Results of the survey on the domestic and international distribution of Russian salmon products
To which countries do your companies
distribute their products (by percent)?
Industry representatives
(58 respondents)
Fishermen
(43 respondents)
Sockeye salmon
Sockeye salmon 10 % 70 %
10 %
2 %
1 %
20 %
3 %
1 %
10 %
20 %
0,5 %
0,5 %
0,5 %
1,5 %
2 %
35 %
75 %
85 %
97 %
99 %
55 %
5 %
99 %
98 %
100 %
100 %
Pink salmon
Pink salmon
Chum salmon
Chum salmon
Сoho salmon
Сoho salmon
Сhinook salmon
Сhinook salmon
Russian
domestic
market
Japan China South Korea
Analyzing the answers of ourrespondents (see table 3) and officialcatch statistics (see table 1), we candeduce the following figures:According to results of the question�naire and recorded catch figures, 219to 246 thousand tons of Pacific salmonmust have entered the Russiandomestic market in 2006. At this point,it is worth mentioning that in 2006, therecorded catch was 273 thousand tons
(table 1, part 3) and the overall exportof raw fish totaled around 90 thousandtons (part 4). In other words, no morethan 183 thousand tons of the Pacificsalmon entered the domestic market.
In order to assess the salmon androe trade in the Moscow market, theRBTL Communication Group con�ducted an audit of sales outlets (seemethods), under the auspices of thisproject.
The results of the audit showed thatthe monthly trade of salmon productsin Moscow grocery chains amountedto 1 647 tons (USD 22.3 million) (seetable 4), 52% of which were frozen fish(854 tons). Pacific salmon (pink,chum, sockeye, and coho) comprised28% (470 tons) of this total.
3130
10 SmartMoney ; 09.07.2007 ; 25 ( 66 ), Small and big fish, grow [rasti rybka, bol'shaya i malenkaya] 11 A processed fish market (http://www.agricons.spb.ru/services/33�agroinform/fish�market.htm)
Table 4. Retail sales of salmon in Moscow grocery chain in September 2007, based on market surveys.
In tons (net weight)
Species
Pink salmon 158 72 –
–
–
169
8
6
7
11 247
185
37
4
12
5
27
Chum salmon
Sockeye salmon
�
0 %
209
180
389
249
29 %
349
256
854
470
28 %
633
543
1 647
15
32 %
16
16
46
16
11%
61
62
139
191
87 %
–
29
220
Subtotal: Pacific salmon
Pacific salmon, as a per�cent of the whole
Farmed Atlantic salmon
Trout
Total
Canned
fishFrozen fish
Refrigerated
fishSalted fish Smoked fish TOTAL
–– 2–11Сoho salmon
Evaluation of the Domestic Market
Table 5. Retail sales of salted and smoked salmon
products in Moscow grocery chains in September
2007, and average prices per kg.
Species
Pink salmon 17,0 226
341
356
10,6
2,5
Chum salmon
Sockeye salmon
673
697
616
76,9
77,5
185,9
Farmed Atlantic salmon
Trout
Total
Amount,
tons
Price,
RUR/kg
2770,8Сoho salmon
5550,1Сhinook salmon
2050,4Unidentified species of Far�Eastern salmon
Based on the estimate of RBTL (seeassumptions and limitations of this esti�mate below), the volume of the entireMoscow salmon market was 103.5thousand tons (USD 1412 million) in2007.
This estimate is based on the fol�
lowing assumptions:
Monthly trade volumes remainalmost consistent throughout the year,except for the peak season inDecember and January, when the tradevolume is twice as large.
30% of salmon on the Moscow mar�ket was sold in chain groceries (this fig�ure comes from computer simulations,based on the data of the EIU, RSM, and"Norge�Fish" consulting companies,as well as expert evaluation of thesalmon roe market based on data pro�vided by "Russkoe More".
Around 25% of all salmon sold is soldat stands in the marketplace and insmall stores, not affiliated with anychain (this figure comes from mathe�matical modeling, based on expertevaluation by the "Russkoe More"Company10).
If Pacific salmon constitute 28% of allsalmon sold (see above), approximateannual sales of Pacific salmon on theMoscow market amount to 29 thou�sand tons.
This is likely an underestimate, asdata provided by the statistics depart�ment indicate that 12 thousand tons ofsockeye salmon products enteredMoscow's city and regional markets in2005 (Anon., 2007), and sockeyesalmon account for a much smallershare of the domestic market than pinkor chum salmon (see Table 4).
Using this figure of 29 thousand tonsas the annual input to the Moscow mar�ket, let us evaluate the Russian Pacificsalmon market. We failed to find anycoefficient that could be used for suchan extrapolation from publishedsources, so these figures are based ona survey of the Russian processed fishmarket, conducted by AgriconsultJoint�Stock Company, in cooperationwith the Regional EconomicDevelopment Agency11. Dividing thevolume of the Russian market (1509thousand tons) by the volume of the
Moscow market (135 thousand tons)yields a coefficient of 11. Making nopretence for accurate calculations, wemultiplied 29 by 11 and estimated theapproximate annual volume of theRussian Pacific salmon market at 319thousand tons.
The volume of the Moscow salmonroe market sold in chain storesamounted to 32 tons (USD 2.5 million),with an average price of RUR 1923(USD 76.9) per kg.
The monthly volume of salted andsmoked salmon products sold in gro�cery chains in the Moscow markettotals 186 tons; prices average RUR616 (USD 24.6) per kg (see table 5).Trout and farmed Atlantic salmonaccount for 84% (154.4 tons) of thistotal, or 43 % and 41 %, respectively.Weighted mean prices were RUR 697(USD 27.9) per kg of trout and RUR 673(USD 26.9) per kg of farmed Atlanticsalmon. Other salmon species (pinksalmon, chum, sockeye, coho, and chi�nook salmon) comprise no more than16% of the market (31.4 tons).
The monthly volume of frozen salmon products soldin Moscow's grocery chains totaled 853 tons; pricesaveraged RUR 294 (USD 11.8) per kg (see table 6).Trout and farmed Atlantic salmon comprised 70%(604.7 tons) of this total, or 41 % and 30 %, respec�tively. Weighted mean prices were RUR 335 (USD 13.4)per kg for trout and 330 RUR (USD 13.2) per kg forfarmed Atlantic salmon. Other salmon species (pinksalmon, chum, sockeye, coho, and chinook salmon)comprise no more than 29% of the market (249 tons).
Table 6. Retail sales of frozen salmon products in
Moscow grocery chains in September 2007,
and average prices per kg.
71,7 182
206
226
169,4
7,8
330
335
348,5
256,2
Farmed Atlantic salmon
616185,9
Amount,
tons
Price,
RUR/kg
The monthly volume of canned salmon sold inMoscow's grocery chains totaled 220 tons; prices aver�aged RUR 175 (USD 7) per kg (see table 7). Pinksalmon accounted for 73% of the total (158 tons), andthe weighted mean price was RUR 129 (USD 5.2) perkg. The most valuable salmon species, such as sock�eye and coho salmon, only constituted around 13% ofthe canned fish market.
Table 7. Retail sales of canned fish in Moscow
grocery chains in September 2007, and average
prices per kg.
Species
Pink salmon 158 129
250
258
5
27
Chum salmon
Sockeye salmon
165
337
1
29
Сoho salmon
Trout
175220Total
Amount,
tons
Price,
RUR/kg
Shipping to Japan and the SouthKorea by sea is almost three timescheaper than shipping by train to cen�tral Russia. According to aRosrybolovstvo representative12,transportation of fish products fromthe Far East to European Russia is"too expensive for fishing companies;
transportation costs exceed 50% ofthe final values of the products". Inaddition, Japanese and Korean com�panies pay Russian fishermen inadvance for fish that have yet to beharvested.
As a result, Russia's central andeven far eastern regions importNorwegian salmon, bred in captivity.
According to RBTL data, Norwegiansalmon comprise more than 70% ofthe Moscow fish market (see evi�dence in tables 5 and 6).
The Russian Federation imported atotal of 74 527 tons of frozen and refrig�erated farmed Atlantic salmon andtrout in 2006 (M_INFO data). This was4% less than in 2005 (77 818 tons).
12 Gudok; 21.09.2006, No more legal sturgeon caviar (http://www.gudok.ru/index.php/print/40073)
Species
Pink salmon
Chum salmon
Sockeye salmon
Trout
Total
© WWF�Russia / Aleksandra Filatkina
A kilogram of salmon roe, boughtwholesale from the Far East, coststrading companies RUR 600�700.Illegally produced roe costs RUR 500per kg on the market. That said,demand for roe in Russia is not onlystable, but constantly increasing(Zaporozhets, Zaporozhets, 2007).For the most part, trading companiesand processing firms in Siberia andcentral Russia purchase the roe. It isusually sold in shipments of 1�20
tons. During the fishing season, buy�ers prefer to purchase salted roe,because if the roe is frozen in theovaries, a large part of the product iswasted in processing.
Those who partake in the roe mar�ket regard it as anarchic and unregu�lated. It is characterized by a greatnumber of middlemen. Resale of so�called "red gold" (salmon roe) is avery profitable business. Unlike fish,relatively small shipments of roe do
not require large refrigerating units,and are transported from Sakhalinand Kamchatka by air in thermosbags. Such cargo can be "madelegal" much easier. The main task is totransport the roe from the Far East.The price for a kilogram of roeshipped to Moscow is not RUR 700(USD 28), but RUR 1 200 to 1 500(USD 48�60). Moscow businessmenuse the difficulty of shipment to justifythe twofold price increase.
33
The Far East region is characterizedby large�scale illegal fishing. Poachinghas become commercial there, a kindof "economy inside the economy",governed by its own rules. Tens ofthousands of people are involved inthis business; enforcement agenciesrecord thousands of violations, butonly hundreds are taken to trial, and ofthose only dozens receive actual sen�tences. Even if the violators are caughtin the act, and investigations are con�ducted successfully, the poachers areusually fined negligible sums, and thesentence suspended (see text box 1and 2).
Official sources name two main rea�sons for the inefficiency of effortsagainst poaching. The first is poorlogistics and insufficient funding ofbodies engaged in fish protection; thesecond is overly permissive legislation.
The annual illegal catch of salmon inKamchatka averaged 55 thousandtons from 2002�2006 (Zaporozhets etal., 2007, 2008). According to alterna�tive data, up to 100 thousand tons15 ofsalmon are poached annually onKamchatka, mostly with the aim of roeextraction (the rest of the fish is oftendiscarded) (Zaporozhets et al., 2007).Environmentalists estimate illegal roeproduction in Kamchatka in 2005 at2.5 thousand tons16.
According to Sergey Osipov, Vice�Governor of Sakhalin Oblast, the situa�tion on Sakhalin is the same: an esti�mated 80 thousand tons17 of salmonare illegally fished there each year.
32
According to calculations byACNielsen Company and RBTL data,the volume of the Russian market forsalted and mildly�cured salmon spe�cialties was approximately 20 thou�sand tons (USD 409 million) in 2006.Russkoe More, АSТО, RОК�1, andSevernaya Kompaniya are the leadingcompanies in the Russian specialtysalmon market.
Based on various data, annual vol�umes of roe production, including ille�gal production, in the territory of theRussian Federation reach 11�26 thou�sand tons. According to NPConsulting13, the volume of roe pro�duction is 11 to 18 thousand tons; 8 to12 thousand tons of which are pro�duced legally (6�8 tons are prepack�aged and 2�3 tons are sold by weight)
and about 3�6 thousand tons are pro�duced illegally, and processed withnon�industrial methods.
Rosrybolovstvo data indicate thatfish processing plants in Sakhalin,Kamchatka, Primorskiy andKhabarovskiy krays, and Magadanoblast processed more than 26 thou�sand tons of salmon roe in 200614.These data also suggest that morethan 50% of this roe was exported,mainly to Japan and South Korea.However, import statistics of thesecountries, as well as Russian exportstatistics (M_INFO data), provide noevidence for this. Only one import toJapan (1.3 thousand tons) wasrecorded in 2006.
According to Rosstat (FederalStatistics Service), the volume of
legally produced salmon roe wasapproximately 5.5 thousand tons in2005. However, as shown below,these figures are likely underesti�mates.
Based on calculations fromACNielsen Company, the volume ofRussian salmon roe retail rangedbetween 3.9 and 7.2 thousand tons(USD 187 and 345 million, respective�ly) in 2006.
Roe production, if calculated fromthe estimated volume of the Russianmarket and available export data,should not exceed 10.3 thousandtons (see table 8), which contradictsRosrybolovstvo data. However, thisfigure matches other evaluations ofthe roe market.
Evaluation of the Domestic Market
13 Trade News and Technology (TorgRus.com); 05.03.2007, Prices for salmon caviar increased by 40%14 Gudok; 21.09.2006, No more legal sturgeon caviar (http://www.gudok.ru/index.php/print/40073)
Table 8. Calculated production volumes of salmon
roe in the Russian Federation (data from ROSSTAT,
Rosrybolovstvo and RBTL)
Volume of the Russiansalmon roe market in2006Roe exports from theRussian Federation toJapan in 2005 Roe production in theRussian Federation (calculated)
3 100
3 900 7 200
min max
Net weight, tons
10 3007 000
Violations of Fishing Legislation and Poaching in the Far East 6
Between January 1st and November 1st, 2006, the Department of Protection,Use, and Restoration of Aquatic Biological Resources and their Habitatsrevealed 4 711 violations and arrested 4 633 violators.
Fines totaling 3 185.2 thousand rubles were imposed and 2 102.2 thousandrubles were collected, (66 % of all imposed fines).
Damages were assessed at 64 535.5 thousand rubles, and 487.9 thousandrubles were collected (0.7 % of the assessed damages).
The Department, in response to administrative malfeasance, confiscated690.2 tons of aquatic biological resources in 2006, including 668.4 tons of fishproducts and 21.8 tons of salmon roe. (Anon., 2007).
The press service of the Far Eastern Division of the Russian Ministry ofInternal Affairs reported, that 58.4 tons of salmon roe, valued at 24 millionrubles, and 445.3 tons of salmon, valued at 15.1 million rubles, were confiscat�ed from illegal dealers on the territory of the Federal Okrug between May andOctober18 2005. This was a result of the "Putina�2005" campaign.
Since the beginning of "Putina�2006" campaign19, enforcement agency offi�cers have confiscated more than 1092 tons of salmon and 105 tons of salmonroe. In addition to this sum, agents confiscated a large shipment (18 tons20) ofsalmon roe on November 2nd, 2006.
15 Reuters , Category: Criminal. 28 June 2007
16 Chestnyi Detectiv. "Golden" Fish Eggs. 1 December 2005
17 ITAR�TASS, 20.09.2005
18 Source: Russian Hunters' Newspaper; 26.10.2005 ; 44 (588)
19 Source: Regions.Ru / Russia. Regions; 11.10.2006
20 Source: WebDigest.RU ; 02.11.2006
© WWF�Russia / Vladimir Prizemlin © WWF�Russia
35
(5%). In the opinion of fishermen,fishing in excess of the quotas is themost serious threat to the salmonpopulation (73%). It is followed byfishing in prohibited areas (59%) andfishing without permits (39%).Inspectors shared these opinions.
It is worth noting, that 66% of fisher�men consider poaching a threat to thesalmon population, 34% had difficultanswering, and nobody answered "no".
In the opinion of inspectors, thepercentages by which species wereoverfished were large in 2005 and2006. This figure was largest for chum(183% and 193% in 2005 and 2006,respectively), coho (170% and185%), pink salmon (153% and133%), and chinook salmon (126%and 133%). In 2006, the percentageof cherry salmon in excess of thequota noticeably increased from 2%to 10% (see table 9).
The recent practice of keeping sev�eral sets of documents aboardRussian fishing vessels (differentnames, ports of registration, shipowners, etc.) has become wide�spread. Such vessels are fishing in theRussian EEZ under various namesand in various fishing areas.
Registration of ships with forgeddocuments in Russian ports is anoth�er widespread violation. Such vesselsacquire all the same rights and quotasfor fishing of aquatic biologicalresources as Russian vessels andtheir owners. The ships, however, aremanaged by Japanese companiesand retain their legal obligation to bereturned to their actual owners.
The use of twin ships by one and thesame company is also practiced.
Fishing is carried out by two vesselswith the same names, board num�bers, etc.
The introduced system of ABRmonitoring, and observation and con�trol over the activities of fishing ves�sels with GPS, could be consideredeffective with regard to most foreignfishing vessels. However, this systemfailed to produce positive results withregard to actual Russian andJapanese poachers.
Despite widely held opinion, poach�ing inflicts the greatest damage on
the interests of fisheries industry (i.e.fishermen), rather than on the state.Fisherman can be divided into honestand dishonest camps. The former,usually larger fishing companies,operate in compliance with the law.They purchase the limits and paytaxes. The latter do nothing of thesort. Poachers not only underminethe resource base, but also suppressthe market by low�balling prices, suchthat honest companies are forced topatrol fishing areas, in addition to theenforcement agencies.
34
Violations of Fishing Legislation and Poaching in the Far East
ILLEGAL COMMERCIAL FISHING
At present, Russia is the only coun�try where drift�net fishing is conduct�ed by vessels of a foreign state(Japan). The reasons for this are asfollows: On December 20th, 1991,the UN General Assembly adoptedresolution No.46/225, which banneddrift�net fishing in open waters. OnFebruary 11th, 1992, Russia, theUSA, Canada, and Japan signed theConvention for the Conservation ofAnadromous Stocks in the NorthPacific Ocean. After that, Japanesefishermen ceased to fish on the opensea, and began commercially har�vesting salmon of Russian origin onlyin the Russian EEZ, and in the 200�mile zone of Japanese territorialwaters on a compensatory basis,within quotas and other restrictions(the number of the vessels, areas,and fishing seasons). Such restric�tions were established by a Russiandelegation, during the annual ses�sions of the Russian�Japanese JointFishery Commission. Japan signedthe Convention, which granted thema guarantee from Russia that com�mercial fishing in the Russian EEZcould continue. Japan took responsi�bility for cooperation in restoring thesalmon stock in the territory of theRussian Federation.
It is noteworthy, that only the rightto fish in the Russian EEZ is sold, notthe fish itself. This is much more prof�itable than harvesting and producinga final product, as fishing, process�ing, and transportation costs areavoided. Japanese vessels primarilyselect the most valuable species offish, such as sockeye, chinook, andcoho.
It should be mentioned, that theJapanese quota for fishing in Russianwaters has been considerablyreduced since 1999. However, theproblem was not solved, due to asimultaneous increase in activity by
the Russian drift fleet, using drift netsfor scientific purposes. At first, lessthan one thousand tons of salmonwere caught for these purposes perseason21. In 2000, the scientificquota had increased to 6.4 thousandtons. Russian drift�net fishing for"monitoring" purposes has recentlybecome a large�scale business; itsyields considerably exceed thoserequired for scientific purposes(Spiridonov, Nikolaeva, 2004).
As mentioned above, sockeye, chi�nook, and coho salmon are the mostvaluable targets of drift�net fishing.This is why both foreign and Russianfishing vessels often exceed quotasfor those particular species andrecord them as less expensive pinkand chum salmon. Although inspec�tors are always present on drift ves�sels, companies clearly have themeans to involve them in these activi�ties, or divert their attention else�where.
It is no wonder, that the amount offrozen sockeye imported by Japanclearly exceeds the recorded catch ofthe species.
Naturally, not only sockeye salmon,but also other salmon species areharvested in excess of allocated quo�tas. According to questionnaire data(with 43 fishermen participating),fishermen caught 1.5�2.5 times theirquotas in 2005. A certain amount ofillegally harvested fish is salted,smoked, and used for production ofcanned fish, and in turn shipped byair, ground and sea. Extraction of roefrom illegally harvested fish is themost profitable business, as roe is tentimes more valuable than fish.
In our sociological survey, 68% offishermen and 76% of inspectorsnoted that the fish is harvested inexcess of quotas. Inspectors identi�fied "corruption in controlling bod�ies", "increased demand from fishprocessing companies", and "inade�quate punishment" as the main rea�sons. The fishermen also considercorruption the major cause.According to representatives from the
21 The impact of fishing on the Pacific salmon population (http://www.greenpeace.org/russia/ru/campaigns/660660/660700)
During control operations under�taken by the Kamchatka State SeaInspection in the Petropavlovsk�Komandorskaya subzone on 9 July2006, the cargo ship "Zolotistyi,"belonging to the "UnichekI" compa�ny, was intercepted. It had around79.3 tons of salmon products onboard. According to daily ship logsand data from control devices, theproducts were transferred in thePetropavlovsk�Komandorskaya andKaraginskaya subzones from theship "Algazeya," leased by the"National Fish Resources" FederalUnitary Enterprise, and owned bythe "Tunaicha" Company Ltd.Ministerial inquiries into the casewere carried out in accordance withthe Code of AdministrativeInfringements of the RussianFederation, Article 8.17, Part 2. Thedamage inflicted on the aquaticbiological system was estimated at32 million rubles. However,Rosrybolovstvo took no measuresto exclude "National FishResources" Federal UnitaryEnterprise from planned researchprograms.
fish industry, one of the main reasonsis the "low legal incomes".
In the current circumstances inKamchatka, the different respon�dents understood the concept ofpoaching in different ways. Accordingto the fish industry representativesand fishermen, poaching is, first andforemost, fishing in excess of quotasand in prohibited areas. More so thanthe fisherman, industry representa�tives consider substitution of fish,concealment of the catch, and mis�representation of yields in documentsserious issues.
70% of fish industry representa�tives disapprove of fishing in excessof quotas and in prohibited areas,compared with 51% of fishermen.Fishermen demonstrated betterunderstanding of these problems(24%), than industry representatives
Table 9. Fishing of Pacific salmon in excess of the limits (% over the
quota) (Expert estimates from 49 officers of the Fish Protection
Inspection of Kamchatka)
Species
Сoho salmon
Chum salmon
Сhinook salmon
Pink salmon
Sockeye salmon 101 % 99 %
153 % 133 %
10 %
193 %
185 %
133 %
2 %
183 %
170 %
126 %
Cherry salmon
2005 г. 2006 г.
According to information provided by the Kamchatka State Fish Inspectionof the North�East division of the coast guard, the following violations of fishingregulations by fishery companies were discovered in the fishing periods of2005 and 2006. In 2005, the catch of the "Okean Produkt" Co., Ltd exceededthe fishing quota for Pacific salmon by 10 tons; "Rybolovetskaya Artel" Co.,Ltd procured raw fish without weighing; and "Vostochnyi Bereg" Co., Ltd vio�lated the conditions of their allocated permit for fishing sockeye, exceedingthe limits by 4.9 tons. In 2006, the catch of the "Alukinskoe" Co., Ltd exceed�ed the commercial quota for fishing of chum and chinook salmon with fixednets by 1.3 tons. Fines totaling 397 thousand rubles were imposed, and 233thousand rubles were collected. Thus, in 2005 and 2006, the Department didnot fully exercise its ability to rescind permits for Pacific salmon fishing incases of overfishing.
37
Knowing export and import vol�umes of Russian salmon products,and having assessed the domesticmarket as best as possible, as wellas the character and scope of illegalsalmon fishing, let us attempt toevaluate the actual catch.
As mentioned above, overallimports from Russia of all species ofPacific salmon by Japan, PRC, andthe Republic of Korea amounted to107 thousand tons in 2006 (see part4.2.6). Our rough estimate of the vol�ume of the domestic market is 219 to319 thousand tons (part 5).
Accordingly, the actual catch couldrange between 326 and 426 thou�sand tons. These are our most con�servative estimates, not taking intoaccount fish discarded on site afterroe extraction (about 55 thousandadditional tons, see part 6(Zaporozhets et al., 2007, 2008)).
The recorded catch amounted to273 thousand tons in 2006 (part 3),which suggests excess fishing of atleast 53 to 153 thousand tons, or1.2�1.6 times official numbers.
According to other expert esti�mates by the autonomous non�profit
organization of the scientific andtechnical center "Dalrybtechnika"("Dalrybtechnika", 2007), the vol�ume of the illegal catch is at leastcomparable to the recorded catch.However, survey participants, offi�cials, and salmon experts on morethan one occasion estimated thetotal yield at 3 times the recordedone.
Thus, various estimates indicatethe actual catch as being between1.5 and 3 times larger than officiallyrecorded.
36
Violations of Fishing Legislation and Poaching in the Far East
POACHING ON THE RIVERS
Poachers inflict the greatest dam�age to salmon stocks during theapproach to the spawning grounds.Salmon roe is virtually the only prod�uct of this type of illegal fishing. Thefundamental reasons behind thistype of poaching is deep economicdepression in most of the regionswhere it is practiced, a lack of jobs,and the marginalization of local pop�ulations.
The degree of poaching in spawn�ing areas has considerablyincreased compared to the 1950�1970s, due to enhanced economicincentives, greater access to thespawning grounds, fewer restric�tions on the trade of salmon prod�ucts, and frequent restructuring offish protection agencies, whichdecreases their effectiveness. Evenif the officially recorded number ofbreeders is equal to that recorded inthe 1950�1970s, the actual numberof spawning fish is lower (Sinyakov,2004). The scope of the illegal har�vest of Kamchatka salmon (exclud�ing pink salmon) has increased par�ticularly sharply over the last fiveyears, after strategic regulation offishing was abandoned. Thisincrease in poaching is mainly due tofishing over the limits by authorizedusers (Zaporozhets et al., 2007,2008).
The scale of poaching increasedafter Rosselkhoznadzor (TheFederal Veterinary andPhytosanitary Surveillance Service)became responsible for the protec�tion of rivers in 2005 (see the chart inAppendix 3). Effectively, nobody ispresently dealing with the issue ofriver protection. As it turns out, 270thousand tons of fish were harvestedlegally, while no less than 150 thou�sand tons were poached (as noted ina Federal Fisheries Agency intercomconference devoted to Pacific
salmon fisheries, August 27th,2006).
No precise evaluation of poachingon the rivers is available. The lack ofsuch estimates, as well as a lack ofinformation on the socio�economicrole of poaching, are major reasonsthat the fight against poaching isineffective.
During the fishing season, virtuallyevery Kamchatka settlement turnsinto a poachers' camp. Both special�ly organized groups and locals areinvolved. The roe is procured on siteby visiting dealers. For example, aGreenpeace helicopter survey in2005 counted 21 teams of poachersalong the Vorovskaya River (data ofGreenpeace). Such illegal fishing isoriented first and foremost towardsthe extraction of roe, as it is the mostexpensive product. The fish carcass�es are usually discarded. Poachinginflicts the greatest damage on thesalmon populations of theKamchatka, Bolshaya, and Avachariver basins. These areas are theclosest to human settlements, andeasily accessible to roe poachers.
According to some experts, up to95% of breeders may be poached inthose basins of Kamchatka's riversand lakes, located near the roads.Survey data indicate that the catchof salmon by legal users in the lowerreaches of the rivers, and in coastalareas, may exceed allocated quotasby a factor of 10 (Zaporozhets,Zaporozhets, 2007).
The actual scale of poaching canbe assessed using volumes ofshipped roe. According to officialdata, 2980 tons of salmon roe wereshipped by plane from Kamchatkaalone in 2001. Since the mass of theroe constitutes about 4% of thefish's total weight, it can be assumedthat at least 74.5 thousand tons offish were harvested to extract thisroe22.
Monitoring at the Elizovo Airport,conducted under the auspices ofthis project, showed that at leasteight thousand tons of roe were
shipped in hand luggage and, inpart, via the cargo terminal, betweenJune 2006 and July 2007. Thismeans that about 200 thousand tonsof fish were harvested. Taking intoconsideration the volume of exportsand of the recorded catch, these fig�ures considerably exceed the TAC.
Unfortunately, confronting poach�ing on the rivers is a difficult task. Onone hand, effective control over thespawning grounds requires a well�equipped and corruption�resistantinspection apparatus; on the otherhand, illegal salmon roe is effective�ly the main source of income for thelocal population. As such, the prob�lem of poaching should be solvednot only through prohibitive meas�ures, but also by changing socialand economic policy in the villages.
22 Poaching is the main threat to the Pacific salmon population (http://www.greenpeace.org/russia/ru/campaigns/660660/660736)
Assessment of the Scope of IUU Fishing7
© WWF�Russia
© WWF�Russia / Sergey Zolotukhin
39
promote the development of Russianports and the construction of fish pro�cessing enterprises.
It is important to realize that withoutproper declaration procedures,Russia will neither have the legalgrounds to confront countries thataccept illegal products, nor be able toreduce illegal fishing in the exclusiveeconomic zone or control the ship�ment of raw fish from it.
According to amendments to theLaw "On Fishing", beginning on the1st of January 2009, all fish harvestedin the exclusive economic zone of theRussian Federation must be deliveredto Russian customs, i.e. transferredthrough Russian ports. Beginning thatsame year, all fish products deliveredto the ports can be sold only via theRussian Fish Exchange. Divisions ofthe Fish Exchange will open inMoscow, Saint�Petersburg,Kaliningrad, Murmansk, Vladivostok,and Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskiy. Trialauctions were held in December2007, and the exchange is due tobegin trading at full capacity in thesecond half of 200823.
In our sociological survey, we askedrespondents of three groups (inspec�tors, fishermen, and fishing industryrepresentatives) to identify methodsfor settling the poaching problem.Generally speaking, respondentsfrom all groups were unanimous intheir choice. Most checked the fol�lowing measures: "control over airtransportation of roe"; "the use of air�craft to protect spawning areas"; and"regular verification of vesselsaccepting salmon by Kamchatka
inspectors". The smallest number ofrespondents chose the followinganswers: "allocation of fishing areasaccording to the 'one body of water �one user' principle" and "manage�ment by means of regulating the fish�ing haul". No fundamental differencesbetween the groups of respondentswere revealed, though certain ten�dencies were noted. For instance,fishermen chose the answer "regularverification of vessels acceptingsalmon by the Kamchatka inspectors"more often than industry representa�tives. Inspectors mentioned "the useof aircraft to protect spawning areas","management by means of regulatingthe fishing haul", and "allocation offishing areas" more often than theother respondents.
It should be noted, that attitudestowards the major issues of salmonprotection appeared to be similaramong all three groups. The differ�ences are connected with the socialand professional status of the respon�dents, which in turn make for differ�ences in interests, the degree open�ness, and, sometimes, generalawareness. Thus, inspectors are moredogmatic in their evaluation of poach�ing and more technocratic in theirchoice of poaching control methods.They mentioned administrative meas�ures less frequently than fishingindustry representatives, and oftenchose methods connected with theirown activities, for example, "the useof aircraft to protect spawning areas".As administrative problems are con�cerned, inspectors first and foremostblamed problems of regulation strate�
gy, whereas the other respondentsput corruption on top of the list.However, respondents from the othertwo groups preferred to combatpoaching through state inspections,rather than by regulating the fishinghaul or allocating fishing areas.
At the same time, many industryrepresentatives assume that fisheriesmanagement is inefficient and mustbe improved. In their opinion, themajor problems are corruption amongdecision�makers, inaccurate fore�casts of the salmon's approach to thecoast, and complications in assigningfishing areas. An overwhelmingmajority of respondents from thisgroup consider that administrativeproblems could be solved if a fishingcouncil were to be established. Thecouncil's main tasks would be thestrategic regulation of fishing, the cre�ation of regional fisheries policy, andthe distribution of fishing areas.
It should be mentioned, that virtual�ly all of the fishing industry represen�tatives are aware of the fishermen'sunions (and may even be involved intheir activities), and consider them aninfluential force in regional fisheriespolitics.
According to survey data, voluntaryecological certification of fishing(e.g., in compliance with the systemused by the Marine StewardshipCouncil � see Spiridonov, Zgurovskiy,2007) remains the business of man�agers, who consider it a means ofaccess to the international market.The fishermen employed by the com�panies know little or nothing about thecertification process.
38
Authorities have proposed a systemof rights�based use for fishing areas,with the aim of mitigating the effectsof poaching. When we began thepreparation of this report, such a sys�tem was being was discussed, and atpresent the administrative reform offishing rights is already underway.Fishing areas could be allocated forlong�term use in accordance with the"one body of water � one user" princi�ple. In this approach, the users them�selves are supposed use their ownmeans to protect the spawning areasfrom poaching. This concept has bothits advocates and opponents. On onehand, such reform may incite con�flicts, both among potential users andbetween the users and the local pop�ulations, which may in turn provokeadditional poaching pressure at thespawning grounds as a form of socialprotest. On the other hand, regionalauthorities could solve this problemby selecting only those users who canprove their ability to cooperate withlocal people, and ensure theiremployment and financial security.
Criminal codes should also beupdated to enhance the efficiency ofpoaching control. Not only the cap�tains of the fishing vessels, but alsothe chief managers (owners) of thefishing companies need to be heldresponsible for illegal salmon fishing.
Poachers' means of transport andfishing equipment need to be confis�cated. However, the true owners offishing vessels are often difficult toidentify. Vessels are rented by outsidecompanies and carry out fishingunder those companies' names, whiletheir true owners remain on the side�lines, not technically involved in crim�inal activities.
Unfortunately, amending andstrengthening existing legislation alonewould be insufficient. For many rea�sons, the entire system of control isinefficient in confronting poaching.Reasons for this include poor logistics,corruption, and other factors. Even atwo or three�fold increase in funding forfisheries enforcement would hardlyyield positive results, at least in the FarEast. Interception of poachers at searequires both great effort and greatexpenses. The only effective strategywould be to ship all harvested aquaticresources to Russian ports, and intro�duce obligatory declaration.
This convention is widely practicedthrough the world: everything harvest�ed at sea is unloaded in ports, counted,checked, declared, and only thenloaded onto cargo ships and transport�ed elsewhere. In Russia, most biologi�cal resources harvested in the exclu�sive economic zone are immediatelyshipped abroad.
Not all fishermen are pleased withthe introduction of mandatory decla�ration, and for good reason: Russianports, at present, are not equipped forthis. The filing and checking proce�dures are cumbersome, and manyports have their own administrativeapparatuses that levy taxes (in addi�tion to state taxes), so the entireprocess requires both time andmoney. Given these circumstances,foreign ports that can service ship in afew hours are very attractive toRussian fishermen. It is much easierfor them to ship raw fish directly to aforeign port or transfer it on the opensea, receive payment in cash, andavoid taxes.
It is undeniable, that declaringproducts in Russian ports willinevitably increases expenses for thefishing companies. However, the statecould minimize those expenses bymeans of simplifying administrativeprocedures. For example, specialcustoms zones could immediately beestablished in Russian port, in whichships would technically remain out�side of the country.
The paradox is, that when the sup�ply of illegally harvested raw fish toforeign ports decreases, marketprices will rise, and fishermen will notonly compensate for their expenses,but also turn profits. This, in turn, will
Methods of Resolving the IUU Fishing Problem8
23 Koltunova O., 2008. Under the Sign of the Fish ( http://www.ko.ru/document.php?id=18198)© WWF�Russia / Nikolay Pavlov
41
improve the system of state moni�toring, using satellites to track vesselsinvolved in open�sea salmon fishing(http://www.fishcom.ru/page.php?r=40). Satellite tracking data should beused to compile a "black list" of thosevessels harvesting and transferringillegal products, and to inform theauthorities of Japan, Korea, andChina about the assumed illegal ori�gin of delivered products;
establish an efficient system ofcontrol, based on the permanentpresence of qualified and financiallyindependent inspectors on open seasalmon fishing vessels;
make changes to legislation thatallow for more severe punishment forillegal salmon fishing, includingimprisonment for up to five years andconfiscation of vessels and fishinggear. Not only the captains of the fish�ing vessels, but also the chief man�agers (owners) of the fishing compa�nies need to be held responsible forillegal salmon fishing;
involve fishing industry associa�tions, regional fishing councils,municipalities, and environmentalagencies in the process of adjustingPacific salmon fishing regulations andimproving their efficiency;
make amendments to Article 56 ofthe Federal Law "On the AnimalWorld" No. 52�FЗ (April 24th, 1995)that correct overlap in the control andsurveillance functions of differentgovernmental institutions;
accelerate the introduction of thegovernmental resolution "On theexport of harvested and processedaquatic biological resources from theRussian exclusive economic zone andthe Russian continental shelf outsideof the exclusive economic zone andthe continental shelf" to the govern�ment of the Russian Federation;
40
About two thirds of Russia's totalaquatic biological resources comefrom the Far East. Hence, the fishingindustry is one of the Far East'slargest employers. Over the past 16years, the productivity of the averagefishing industry employee hasdeclined by 60 % in monetary terms,and by 25�30% in the terms theircatch ("Norge�Fish" Co., Ltd., 2006).On one hand, this stems from a phys�ical deterioration of production facili�ties; on the other, it shows a desirewithin individual enterprises to main�tain high levels of employment in thefishing industry. It is well known thatthe industry, in some regions thebackbone of the urban population, isof great social and geopolitical impor�tance to the country. This is particu�larly true for coastal regions, where upto 70% of the industry's production isconcentrated ("Norge�Fish" Co., Ltd.,2006).
Fishing in Kamchatka Kray is ofgreat social importance, as it ensuresemployment for the local population,particularly in the coastal areas (Ust�Kamchatskiy, Ust�Bolsheretskiy,Sobolevskiy, Aleutskiy, Milkovskiy,and Elizovskiy districts). In these dis�tricts listed above, fishing is the majorsource of income for the locals and, inpart, funds local budgets for thedevelopment of social infrastructure.It is also significant that many small
and mid�size companies, registeredin local municipalities and payingtaxes to local budgets, are engaged incoastal fishing. Incidentally, this isone of the latent shortcomings of thelong�term "one body of water � oneuser" principle of fishing area alloca�tion. As the administrative resourcesof large�scale businesses are immea�surably greater than those of smallbusiness, the new changes may resultin the expulsion of local enterprises,which currently pay taxes to municipalbudgets for fishing rights. In 2006,the fishing industry in KamchatkaKray employed around 16 thousandworkers, or more than a half of allemployees of industrial enterprises.("Dalrybtechnika", 2007).
Salmon fishing on Kamchatka is anextremely important source of eco�nomic stability and external income(4�5 billion rubles), exceedingincomes from the nonferrous metalsindustry by a factor of 1.7. Withregard to the overall Japanese catchin Russian waters (as per theIntergovernmental Agreement of May12th, 198524) , Kamchatka salmonmake up 60% of the total monetaryvalue.
While other provinces flourish off ofRussia's resources, the population ofKamchatka is declining; numbershave fallen by more than 100 000people over the past 15 years. 16 Far
Eastern fishing ports are currently invery poor condition("Dalrybtechnika", 2007).
Fish plays an important role in thediet of Kamchatka's indigenous peo�ples. On one hand, this stems fromthe unavailability other foods (often, itis impossible to cultivate anythingelse in the region, or people lackfarming experience). On the otherhand, they cannot afford to purchaseother food, because of unemploy�ment, chronic non�payment ofsalaries, and very low incomes.Additionally, the consumption of fishis a long�running tradition. As such,the needs of the indigenous peoplesof Kamchatka, as well as those ofother residents of the coastal areas,need to be considered when quotasare allocated.
It is important to remember thatRussian salmon are ecologically pure,as they are caught in the wild insteadof bred in captivity. The globaldemand for wild salmon is very large,and it is priced well above farmedvarieties In Russia, wild salmon arenot a limited resource, so they canand must be priced more competi�tively. The promotion of Russian wildsalmon harvested in accordance withlegal regulations, in both domesticand international markets, is a guar�antee of stability and wellbeing for theresidents of Kamchatka.
Socio�Economic Importanceof Salmon Fishing 9
24 RESOLUTION of the Conference of Kamchatka fishermen and their unions, "The Role of Fisheries in the Economy of the KamchatkaOblast", Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskiy, December 21st 2006 (http://www.fish�seafood.ru/news/detail.php?ID=1509)
Recommendations
RECOMMENDATIONS FORGOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
CONCERNING COMMER�CIAL FISHING IN EXCESSOF QUOTAS, WE RECOMMEND THATTHE GOVERNMENT
CONCERNING THE ELIMI�NATION OF INCENTIVESFOR POACHING ON THERIVERS, WE RECOMMEND THATTHE GOVERNMENT
evaluate the efficiency of the newsalmon fisheries management sys�tem, and hold public forums on thetopic every four years (two cycles forpink salmon and approximately onecycle for other salmon species) fol�lowing implementation of the stan�dards set forth in Article 29.1 ofFederal Law No. 333, "On fishing andconservation of aquatic biologicalresources" (in the version passedDecember 6th, 2007).
CONCERNING THESTRENGTHENING OFCONTROL OVER THESPAWNING GROUNDS,WE RECOMMEND THATENFORCEMENT BODIES
create, finance and supply mobile,interdepartmental anti�poachingteams, engaging both fishing industryrepresentatives and the public;
use aircraft (helicopters) to locate andapprehend large teams of poachers;
increase the efficiency of operatingsurveillance bodies, by conductingregular training courses and providingthem with necessary information andequipment;
amend legislation, in order to sim�plify the procedures for apprehendingpersons suspected of illegal fishingand stiffen punishments for poaching;
raise wages and improve socialsecurity for lower�and mid�levelemployees of the surveillance bodies,
while simultaneously increasingaccountability for activities inconsis�tent with the role of a state inspector.The state must provide a means forregional and municipal administra�tions, as well as concerned parties inthe fishing industry, to pay bonuses tothese inspectors for successful inter�ception of poachers;
establish an internal affairs depart�ment in every surveillance body thatwill conduct internal investigationsand fight corruption;
encourage the development ofteams of inspectors from local com�munities (including from the indige�nous population), and environmentalprotection teams (including stu�dents);
when reforming fishing area usealong the principles of "one body ofwater � one user," ensure that the fol�lowing conditions are met: New long�term users must pay a portion of theirrevenues in taxes towards the localbudget, guarantee employment of thelocal populations, and observe therights of the indigenous people;
in order to control the export ofpoached products by means of air�craft, mandate the printing of stateregistration numbers on the under�sides of helicopters. Control over air�craft and their routes is essential insalmon fishing regions.
expand development plans for theregions and municipalities (e.g.development of legal fish processingand tourism) that offer Kamchatka'sinhabitants alternatives to the illegalharvest of biological resources. Theplans should define the procedures oftheir implementation, and containprovisions for education and trainingof the public.
CONCERNING CONTROLOVER THE DEVELOP�MENT OF INFRASTRUC�TURE, WE RECOMMENDTHAT THE GOVERNMENT
develop efficient mechanisms tomonitor the impact of infrastructurecomponents (e.g., road construction)on poaching. The results of the moni�toring should be used in the environ�ment impact assessment and in publichearings on industrial projects;
develop a system to ensure thatcompensation from operators of com�mercial projects for damage inflictedon aquatic biological resources goestowards improvement of equipmentand informational support for stateenvironmental agencies.
43
Anon., (2007): BULLETIN of the Accounting Bureau ofthe Russian Federation No. 6(114), 2007http://www.ach.gov.ru/bulletins/2007/6�3.php
Bugaev V.F. (2004). Multispecies salmon fishing in theKamchatka River basin // Conservation of biodiversity ofKamchatka and the adjacent seas: Proc. of the 5thScientific Conference (Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskiy, 22�24November 2004). Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskiy,Kamchatpress. P. 168�172.
Chestnyi Detectiv. "Golden" Fish Eggs. 1 December2005
Convention on the Conservation of Anadromous Fish inthe Northern Pacific Ocean (1992). Moscow
Clarke S. (2007). Trading tails: Russian Salmon fish�eries and East Asian markets. TRAFFIC East Asia
Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, 13.06.1996No. 63�F3 (Federal Laws, 1998�2006): On�line.http://www.consultant.ru/popular/ukrf/ (accessedDecember 2006).
Customs Law. (1954) (Last amended by Law No. 26 ofMarch 1998). On�line. http://www.mof.go.jp/english/tar�iff/tar001n.pdf (accessed December 2006).
"Dalrybotechnika" (Autonomous Non�profitableOrganization Scientific and Technical Centre), 2007.Studies of the production and economic indices of thefisheries complex in the regions of the Far East for the12�month period of 2006. Vol. 1, Vladivostok, 112 p.
Efremova T.F. (2001). New Dictionary of the RussianLanguage. Explanatory and educational dictionary.Moscow, "Russkiy Yazyk".
Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On state regu�lation of foreign trade activities" (ammended on 8 July1997, No. 96�ФЗ) � Rossijskaya Gazeta, No.133,12.07.1997.
The impact of fishing on the Pacific salmon population(http://www.greenpeace.org/russia/ru/cam�paigns/660660/660700)
Glubokovskiy M.K. (1995). Evolutionary biology ofsalmons. Moscow, Nauka. 342 p.
Gudok; 21.09.2006, No more legal sturgeon caviar(http://www.gudok.ru/index.php/print/40073)
ITAR�TASS, 20.09.2005
Koltunova O., (2008). Under the Sign of Fish(http://www.ko.ru/document.php?id=18198)
Kotenev B.N., Gritsenko O.F., Klovach N.V. (2006). Onthe organization of Pacific salmon fishing // Aquatic bio�logical resources, their state and use. Review informa�tion, All�Russia Institute of Fisheries Economics. –Moscow, vol. 1, 28 p.
Kurmazov A.A., Tsygir V.V. (2006). Legal regulation ofdrift�net fishing of Pacific salmon. � Maritime Law andPractice, No. 3, p. 11�26.
Makoedov A.N., Antonov N.P., Kumantsov M.I.,Pogodaev E.G. (2006). Theory and practice of salmonfishing in the Far East // Voprosy Rybolovstva, vol. 7, N1(25)http://www.npacific.ru/fishkam/science/content.phtml?d=7&autor=7&content=0001
The processed fish product market ( http://www.agri�cons.spb.ru/services/33�agroinform/fish�market.htm)
Trade News and Technologies (TorgRus.com);05.03.2007, Prices for salmon roe increased by 40%.
newsru.com, 22 Febryary 2001(http://www.newsru.com/arch/russia/22feb2001/alba�tros2.html
Norge�Fish Ltd. Company, "Analysis of the currentstate and tendencies of fisheries and fish market devel�opment in Russia (catch, export, import, production, andconsumption (including Moscow supermarket chains andНоReCa) of fresh, refrigerated, frozen, processed, andfinished fish and seafood from 2000�2005". Moscow.
Orlov V.P. (2007). Mineral resources in the developmentof the North (with Kamchatka Kray as an example).Mineral Resources of Russia. Economics andManagement, vol. 5, p. 39�48.
Red Data Book of Kamchatka, vol. 1, Animals, Fish.http://www.kamchatsky�krai.ru/red_book_kamchatka/fish/14_sima_1.htm,
Red Data Book of the Russian Federation (Animals),(2001). Ministry of Natural Resources of the RussianFederation, Russian Academy of Sciences, AST, Astrel,273 p.
Regions.Ru / Russia. Regions; 11.10.2006
RESOLUTION of the Conference of Kamchatka fisher�men and their unions, "The Role of Fisheries in theEconomy of the Kamchatka Oblast", Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskiy, December 21st 2006 (http://www.fish�seafood.ru/news/detail.php?ID=1509)
Reuters , Category: Criminal. 28 June 2007
Russian Hunters' Newspaper; 26.10.2005 ; 44 (588)
Sem' Dney [Seven Days] , 24 February 2001(http://www.segodnya.ru/w3s.nsf/Archive/2001_43_news_text_lenc1.html);
Seredkin I.V., Pachkovskiy D.Zh. (2006). The feeding ofbrown bears on Pacific salmon at the Kronotskaya River,Kamchatka // The Brown Bear of Kamchatka: Ecology,conservation, and sustainable use. Vladivostok,"Dalnauka", p. 78�84.
42
CONCERNING MARKETMECHANISMS FORREDUCING THE ILLEGALTURNOVER OF SALMONPRODUCTS, WE RECOMMEND THAT THE GOVERNMENT
introduce mandatory labeling andbranding for salmon products. Publiceducation should form a lasting asso�ciation between legal fishing methodsand high quality roe or other salmonproducts. Consumers should alsoassociate Russian brands with highquality and legal fishing methods;
develop a public Russian FishExchange that will make available"guilt�free" salmon products to thepublic; additionally, it should help tocreate new economic incentives,attract investors, and introduceRussian fisheries to the market ofdomestic and foreign borrowings.
CONCERNING CONTROLOVER THE TRADE OFSALMON PRODUCTS, WE RECOMMEND THATTHE GOVERNMENT
Recommendations forfish processing andtrade companies in theRussian Federation, as well as in the majorimporting countries
Recommendations forenvironmental NGOsand other concernedorganizations in theRussian Federation, as well as in the majorimporting countries
that they work with relevant stateagencies to enhance incentives andmotivation to carry out the measuresproposed in this document;
that they continue monitoring thedomestic market and IUU fishing ofPacific salmon, and distribute collect�ed information among relevant statebodies and other interested parties
adopt appropriate legislation thatprovides for control over the trade ofsalmon products on both the regional(Kamchatka Oblast) and the federallevels;
develop regulatory and economicmechanisms that would grant prefer�ence to those who supply salmonproducts directly to the domesticmarket through Russian ports.
that they encourage legislative andadministrative measures aimed atimproving the salmon products market;
that they develop branding and label�ing for salmon products. Russianbrands should be built on a reputationfor high quality products and legal fish�ing methods;
that they include ecological certifica�tion of fishing products, in accordancewith the MSC system, in any plans toexpand their companies.
Recommendations References
for the purpose of stock protectionand economically efficient exploita�tion of Pacific salmon;
that they cooperate with the stateagencies in activities aimed at pro�tecting spawning areas;
that they monitor the salmon mar�ket and develop educational pro�grams, which inform consumers onsustainability issues and the environ�mental impact of certain kinds of fish�ing and aquiculture;
that they encourage dialogueamong representatives from stateagencies, municipalities, and the sci�entific and business communities,towards the development of econom�ic mechanisms for sustainable use ofPacific salmon.
45
Illegal, unreported, and unregulatedfishing is often considered synony�mous to poaching. However, these twoterms should be addressed separate�ly, in order to better understand theactual situation with regard to aquaticbiological resources.
Illegal fishing denotes the harvest ofaquatic biological resources in viola�tion of national or international (out�side the country's jurisdiction) legisla�tion. From a legal standpoint, there isno fundamental difference betweenfishing over quotas by authorizedcommercial fisheries and individuals,and fishing by those who have no rightto commercially fish in a particularplace, or at all. However, the rootcauses of these kinds of illegal fishingare different. Thus, we will first speakto commercial fishing over the limits,and then address poaching.
From a legal standpoint, fishing inexcess of quotas by local people(including indigenous people) for per�sonal consumption should also beconsidered illegal fishing. At the sametime, the illegal nature of such over�fishing is questionable, because in thiscase fishing limits are set voluntarily indocuments not registered with theMinistry of Justice and, unlike theTAC's, are not grounded in science.
However, given the current condi�tions in Russia, this kind of fishing (wewill call it subsistence fishing in excessof quotas) contributes to the unreport�ed catch, along with above�limit com�mercial fishing and poaching.
Even if a part of the above�limit andpoaching catch could be more or lessaccurately estimated, it would be diffi�cult to assess the share of that catchdue to above�limit (commercial andsubsistence) fishing and poaching,versus the share from unreportedfishing.
In general, above�limit fishing andpoaching can also be called unregu�
lated. However, one can imagine a sit�uation in which certain administrativemeasures could affect change in theillegal and above�limit subsistencecatches. In this case, though retainingits illegality, such kinds of fishingappear to be regulated to a certaindegree.
Let us mention once again, that inthe current state of the Russian fish�eries, both illegal (above�limit com�mercial and poaching) fishing andabove�limit subsistence fishing areunreported and unregulated. Differentmethods should be used for assess�ment of each of these in order torecord, correct, or at least learn to reg�ulate them.
44
Sinyakov S.A. (2004). The importance, problems, andprospects for preservation of the scale and biodiversity ofnatural salmon reproduction on Kamchatka and in the FarEast // (http://www.npacific.ru/fishkam/science/con�tent.phtml?d=2&autor=2&content=0002)
Sinyakov S.A. (2006). Fisheries and salmon fishing incomparison with other industries in Far Eastern regions.� Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskiy: Kamchatpress, 64 p.
SmartMoney ; 09.07.2007 ; 25 ( 66 ), Small and bigfish, grow [rasti rybka, bolshaya i malenkaya]
Spiridonov V.A. (2008). The launch of oil in the land ofvolcanoes. World Energetics, vol. 3, p. 39�40.
Spiridonov V.A., Zgurovsky K.A. (2007). Ecological cer�tification of sea fishing, or information for fishermen whowant fish to remain for their children and grandchildren,2nd edition, Vladivostok, 28 p.
Spiridonov V.A., Nikolaeva N.G. (eds.) (2004).Commercial drift�net fishing of Pacific salmon, and itseffect on the marine ecosystem. Moscow, 64 p.
The Law on Regulation of Fishing by the ForeignPersons (14.07.1967, Law No. 60, Article 4) (inJapanese).
TINRO�Centre (2000). Salmon � 2000 (Forecast for thefishing season), Vladivostok, 86 p.
TINRO�Centre (2001). Salmon � 2001 (Forecast for thefishing season), Vladivostok, 88 p.
TINRO�Centre (2002). Salmon � 2002 (Forecast for thefishing season), Vladivostok, 88 p.
TINRO�Centre (2003). Salmon � 2003 (Forecast for thefishing season), Vladivostok, 100 p.
TINRO�Centre (2004). Salmon � 2004 (Forecast for thefishing season), Vladivostok, 112 p.
TINRO�Centre (2005). Salmon � 2005 (Forecast for thefishing season), Vladivostok, 96 p.
TINRO�Centre (2006). Salmon � 2006 (Forecast for thefishing season), Vladivostok, 112 p.
TINRO�Centre (2007). Salmon � 2007 (Forecast for the
fishing season), Vladivostok, 131 p.
Tokranov A.M. (2002). The sixth salmon species // Onthe "scaleless beast" and other inhabitants ofKamchatka's waters. Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskiy,"Severnaya Pacifika"http://www.npacific.ru/np/library/publikacii/tokra�nov/04.htm
Tsygir V.V. (2007). Salmon�2007 (Forecast for the fish�ing season) // Review of fish markets // Foreign exportsof salmon from Russia. Vladivostok: TINRO�Centre, p.121�131.
UN Convention on Maritime Law. (1982). On�line.http://www.un.org/russian/documen/convents/lawsea.html (accessed December 2006)
WebDigest.RU ; 02.11.2006
Zaporozhets O.M., Zaporozhets G.V. (2005). Poachingas a threat to Pacific salmon on Kamchatka //Conservation of biological diversity of Kamchatka and theadjacent seas. Proc. of the 6th Scientific Conference(Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskiy, 29�30 November 2005).
Zaporozhets O.M., Zaporozhets G.V. (2007). Illegalsalmon fishing in the waters of Kamchatka: survey andecological consequences. � Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskiy:Kamchatpress, 60 p.
Zaporozhets O.M., Shevlyakov E.A., Zaporozhets G.V.,Antonov N.P. (2007). Possibilities for the use of data onillegal Pacific salmon fishing towards estimating the actu�al stock // Voprosy Rybolovstva, vol. 8, N 3(31), p. 471�483.
Zaporozhets O.M., Shevlyakov E.A., Zaporozhets G.V.(2007). Analysis of population dynamics of Kamchatkasalmon in the 20th and 21st centuries, taking intoaccount legal and illegal fishing, and an assessment ofeconomic losses // Bulletin of the implementation of the"Concept of the Far�Eastern Basin Program of PacificSalmon Research". No. 2, p. 160�168.
Zaporozhets O.M., Shevlyakov E.A., Zaporozhets G.V.2008. Population dynamics of Kamchatka salmon, takinginto account legal and illegal fishing // Izvestia TINRO.Vol. 153, p. 109�134.
Methodology of Assessment of Illegal,Unreported, and Unregulated SalmonFishing 1
Definitions and Terms
V.A. Spiridonov (WWF�Russia)
Evaluation of commercialfishing of sockeye, chi�nook, and coho salmon in excess of quotas
APPENDICES
Sockeye, chinook, and coho salmonare the most valuable target species ofdrift�net fishing in the EEZ. That is whyteams of both Japanese and Russianfishing vessels often exceed quotas forthese species, and record them in log�books as pink and chum salmon. Whencaught, pink salmon are often discard�ed. These illegal fish products (mostlysockeye) do not enter the Russianmarket; they are delivered to Japanand sold there at prices approachingtens of dollars per kilogram. Observersfrom the marine inspection agencies ofthe Russian Border Guard and/or fish�eries research institutions are usuallypresent on board drift�net fishing ves�sels. We do not claim that all of themare corrupt; at the same time, repre�sentatives from fish companies areobviously able to divert their attention,if not outright bribe them.
The most valuable salmon speciesare also overfished using fixed nets atsea. In this case, the fresh fish is deliv�ered to refrigerator trawlers andshipped to Japan and, to a lesserextent, the USA.
As a result, the amount of the frozensockeye imported by Japan in theperiod 2002�2005 considerablyexceeded the official catch of thespecies. At the same time, frozensockeye were supplied in great quan�tity to the Russian domestic market.Since 2002, Japanese authoritieshave required export declarations forimported fish products. This meansthat either some sockeye, fishedabove the quotas, is registered with�out arousing suspicious, or somefrozen sockeye and other valuablesalmon are exported to Japan usingfake documents.
Above�limit commercial fishing ofsockeye, chinook, and coho could beassessed by comparing the officialfishing data, export data, the amountof fish supplied to the domestic mar�ket, and import data from Japan andthe USA.
Catch data Data on fishing in Russia, by statis�
tical regions specified by the Foodand Agriculture Organization of theUnited Nations (FAO), are summa�rized by the Department ofInternational Commercial FisheriesStatistics of the All�Russian Instituteof Marine Fisheries andOceanography (VNIRO). The data arethen delivered to the FAO database offisheries statistics(http://www.fao.org/fi/statist/FISOFT/FISHPLUS.asp). Data on the Russiancatch of the sockeye, chinook, andcoho salmon in the northwest Pacific(FAO statistical region 61) encompassthe yields of drift�net fishing (so�called control fishing), fishing withfixed nets, and fishing on the rivers.
In addition, data on the commercialsalmon catch, organized by speciesand months, enumerated both in tonsand the number of fish, as well as dataon the average weight of the fish of aparticular species, can be found in theannual reports of the North Pacific
4746
Anadromous Fish Commission(NPAFC) (http://www.npafc.org/new/pub_statistics.html). A separatetable contains data on the salmoncatch by indigenous communities.Data on salmon fishing by foreign(Japanese) vessels in the RussianEEZ are also available. Unlike the FAOstatistics, NPAFC materials are regu�larly updated, but often released withgreat delay. In June 2006, the annualreport from 2001 was available on theNPAFC website.
The NPAFC is supplied with data bythe Pacific Research Centre ofFisheries and Oceanography (TINRO�Centre), which annually publishesforecasts for the fishing season.These forecasts also contain data onthe salmon catch in particular regionsand some river basins, as well as dataon the catches of the Russian andJapanese drift�net fleets.
Data on the yields of variousspecies of salmon, with more detailedindication of regions and fishing gear,are available at the regional depart�ments of the Federal FisheriesAgency. These data are not accessi�ble to the public, but can be obtainedby request to state organizations.
Materials from regional statisticsdepartments, based on the reports ofenteprises, can serve as be an addi�tional source of data.
All available sources of data on theofficial catch should be used toassess the above�limit catch. If suchdata are contradictory, priority shouldbe given to the NPAFC data for gener�al estimates, and the data of theTINRO�Centre and regional depart�ments of the Federal Fisheries to esti�mate the catch by regions. As such,the recorded annual catch of a partic�ular salmon species in a particularregion, including the yield of the drift�net fishing in the EEZ (Сreg i) and the
overall catch in Russia (С tot.) could be
estimated. Сtot= СregI (1)
such data to assess the domestic mar�ket should be investigated. However,even if production indices for differentspecies were available, they would nodoubt be underestimated.
Data collected by the Economic andFisheries Departments of regionaladministrations appear to be moreprecise.
Information from fishing industryassociations on the volume of pro�duction by their individual members isyet another source of data. However,the associations do not encompass allproduction enterprises, so it is neces�sary to compile a list of the fishing andfish processing enterprises of theregion (e.g., the Kamchatka Oblastand Koryakia), and collect productiondata by species from those enterpris�es not affiliated with any associations.Naturally, they will provide only theofficial data presented to state controlbodies.
Therefore, all evaluations based onfish production statistics are likely tobe underestimates. If any discrepan�cies are revealed between dataobtained from the regional statisticsdepartments, Economic and FisheriesDepartments of regional govern�ments, and the fishing and fish pro�cessing enterprises, one should ori�ent themselves towards the highestvalues.
One could assume that all fish prod�ucts, except for fast�frozen ones, aresupplied for the most part to thedomestic market or to the CIS andBaltic countries (though this is irrele�vant to this analysis, because suchproducts are exported from the regionvia intermediaries in Russia). Thisassumption should be verified usingcustoms export statistics. OnKamchatka, such data can beobtained on request from the regionalcustoms department and checkedagainst data obtained on request fromFar�Eastern Customs. It is safe toassume, that even if salted, smoked,and canned sockeye, chinook, andcoho are exported to the countries ofthe Asian Pacific Region and the USA,the volume of the export is not verylarge, and export data recorded bycustoms more or less reflect the actu�al volume.
With regard to the distribution ofproducts frozen on shore between thedomestic and international markets,the situation is more complicated.These products cannot be exportedwithout customs certification (or inany case, the amount of smuggled
goods can be approximated by cus�toms experts). However, customscertification can be complicated by"regrading," when a shipment ofsockeye salmon is declared as ashipment of pink salmon. Customsexperts are able to analyze suchcases, and propose a correction fac�tor in order to assess the trueamounts of frozen sockeye, chinook,and coho exported to the AsianPacific Region and the USA via theregional customs.
There is another, even more seriousproblem in estimating the share of thecatch that enters the domestic mar�ket. Products accounted for annuallyby certain statistical systems may beproducts of the previous�year catch,while the most reliable fisheries sta�tistics correspond to calendar years.To overcome this issue, one can referto monthly statistics and analyzelong�term production dynamics in theregion. It may help to define when theextraction of raw products of the pastyear ends, and when the start of pro�cessing begins during the new sea�son. Products that enter the marketin the "production" year should becompared with the catch of the calen�dar year.
When discussing the amounts ofthe sockeye, chinook, and cohosalmon supplied to the domesticmarket as a yield of both legal andabove�limit commercial fishing, weassumed that the fish carcasses,being more valuable than the car�casses of chum and pink salmon, arealways processed, rather than dis�carded after extraction of the roe.This may not always be the case, butit is very difficult to evaluate this par�ticular factor. Expert estimates of thefrequency of such cases could beobtained from interviews with thestaff of fish protection agencies,police, prosecution agencies, and themedia. If even a certain number oftheir estimates confirm such a prac�tice, an additional factor (W) thataccounts for such products should beconsidered.
Let us introduce the following notations: D reg i – amount of fish (in tons) sup�
plied to the domestic market duringthe 'production' year
Ks – the subset of salted fish prod�
ucts from the total yieldKsm – the subset of smoked fish
products from the total yieldKc – the subset of canned fish
Supply to the domestic market
Calculation of the above�limit catch
We propose the following method forcalculating the above�limit catch of sock�eye salmon. Assuming that most sockeyeare harvested by commercial fisheries ofthe Kamchatka Oblast, Koryakia, and theChukotka Autonomous Area, let us calcu�late the yearly catch of sockeye suppliedto the domestic market (Dkkch) accord�ing to formula (4).
The overall actual catch, as estimatedfrom the product yield amounts to
Calculation of the actualcatch of Chum and PinkSalmon, excluding poach�ing on the rivers
Products of the most valuablePacific salmon species enter thedomestic market as frozen, refrigerat�ed, salted, smoked, and canned fish.Data from regional statistics depart�ments may list production indices forvarious types of products; however,different salmon species are notalways itemized separately.Nonetheless, the possibility of using
Assessment of the volume of supplyto the international market is basedon the assumption that most Russianfish products are imported by Japan.Japanese statistics are well presentedin the reports of the Japanese MarineProducts Importers' Association;these reports are regularly studied bythe TINRO�Centre experts and fishmarket analysts. In addition, certainamounts of frozen sockeye, chinook,and coho are shipped to the UnitedStates. Information on these ship�ments can be found in official cus�toms statistics. A certain amounts offrozen salmon is also exported toSouth Korea, either for re�export toJapan or for local consumption.Although it is harder to obtain cus�toms statistics from Korea than from
Supply to the international market
products from the total yieldKf – the subset of frozen fish prod�
ucts from the total yield (fish trunksand fillets are considered separatelyas Kf 1 and Kf2)
Ds – total amount of salted fish
productsDsm – total amount of smoked fish
productsDc – total amount of canned fish
productsF – total amount of frozen fish prod�
ucts (can be split into F1 and F2, fish
trunks and fillets, respectively)Ef – total amount of frozen fish
products produced by the coastalenterprises and having undergonecustoms certification
Df – total amount of frozen fish
products supplied to the domesticmarket; and
L – correction factor for recordingfish under the wrong names in cus�toms documents.
Therefore, the minimum amount ofsalmon of a certain species suppliedto the domestic market by the enter�prises of a particular region would beequal to
D reg i = 1/K sDs + 1/Ksm Dsm +
+1/Kc Dc + 1/Kf Df (2)
where Df = L (F – Ef) (3)
The overall volume of a salmonproduct of a certain species suppliedto the domestic market would amountto
D = D reg i where i (1;n), n � the
number of the regions. (4)
Japan, information on the unloadingof particular kinds of fish productsfrom ships can be found on the web�sites of Korean ports. As with prod�ucts supplied to the domestic market,certain difficulties are caused by thedelay of the annual import cycle inrelation to the annual fishing cycle.That is why monthly analysis ofimports statistics, as well as appraisalof the 'production' years of the inter�national market (just as with thedomestic market), are required.
Another problem stems from theimpossibility of determining the par�ticular region of origin for products inimports statistics. This complicatesassessment of the above�limit catchof coho salmon, as it is harvestedalong virtually the entire eastern coastof Russia. Neverthless, import datacan yield fairly reliable results on thecatch of sockeye and chinook salmonharvested commercially onKamchatka and in Koryakia.
Let us introduce the following notations:Ij – imports of frozen salmon (in
tons) by Japan over the 'production'year
Ius – imports of frozen salmon of
certain species (in tons) by the USAover the 'production' year; and
Ik � imports of frozen salmon of cer�
tain species (in tons) by South Koreaover the 'production' year.
If fish trunks and fillets are import�ed, the estimate will be more accurateif imports of these products are con�sidered separately, e.g., Ij1, Ij2.
I � the overall catch imported overthe 'production' year
I = 1/Kf (Ij+Ius+Ik) (5)
If frozen products are divided intofish trunks and fillets, calculations areperformed separately with the use offactors Kf 1 (trunks) and Kf2 (fillets).
Y = I + Dkkch (6)
The above�limit catch is then IUU1 = Y – Ctot (7)
While the greatest part of theabove�limit catch of sockeye and,possibly, chinook can be deducedfrom Japanese imports statistics,chum and pink salmon fished inRussian waters are shipped to theJapanese market only in smallamounts. Most chum and pink salmonproducts are destined for the domes�tic market. Seeing as official data onthe processing of these species areunderestimated, the relative bias inthe calculations of domestic marketvolumes with formula (2) will be high�er than it is for more valuable salmonspecies. The calculation proceduremay be geared towards selectingcoefficients to account for conceal�ment of products by enterprises.
A different approach may beapplied to such regions asKamchatka, from which fish productsare shipped by processing trawlersand by air. The lowest estimate of theamount of fish caught with fixed netsand transferred to cargo ships is avail�able through the Rybolovstvo infor�mation system. The amount of frozenfish (first and foremost chum and pinksalmon) shipped by plane could beapproximated with records of cargoflights to the mainland, if such recordsare available.
The actual catch also includes thesubsistence catch by residents of theregion, or fish harvested:
� in accordance with quotas of alltypes;
� in excess of quotas by commercialfishing teams;
� in excess of quotas by the com�munities of indigenous minorities;
� in licensed sport fishing;� by local people for personal con�
sumption, without permits, at the rivermouths and at sea; and
� by teams of poachers at the rivermouths and at sea.
Consumption of salmon productscould be assessed by interviewing rep�resentative samples of various popula�tion groups. Such a survey should yieldan assessment of the annual con�sumption of various species of fish bythe entire population.
49
0301 Live fish:
0302 Fresh and chilled fish, except for the fish fillet and other 0304 fish products:
0303 Frozen fish, except for the fish fillet and other 0304 fish products:
0304 Fresh, chilled, and frozen filleted and other fish, including mince:
0304 20 Frozen fillet
0305 30 Dried and salted fish fillet and fish fillet in brine, but not smoked:
0305 Dried and salted fish; fish in brine; hot� and cold�smoked fish; fish meal,powder, and pellets for human consumption:
0301991100
0302120000
Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka, Oncorhynchus gorbuscha,Oncorhynchus keta, Oncorhynchus tschawytscha, Oncorhynchus kisutch,Oncorhynchus masou and Oncorhynchus rhodurus), Atlantic salmon(Salmo salar) and Danube trout (Hucho hucho)
Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka, Oncorhynchus gorbuscha,Oncorhynchus keta, Oncorhynchus tschawytscha, Oncorhynchus kisutch,Oncorhynchus masou and Oncorhynchus rhodurus), Atlantic salmon (Salmosalar) and Danube trout (Hucho hucho)
0303110000 Red, or Sockeye Salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka)
0304101300Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka, Oncorhynchus gorbuscha,Oncorhynchus keta, Oncorhynchus tschawytscha, Oncorhynchus kisutch,Oncorhynchus masou and Oncorhynchus rhodurus), Atlantic salmon(Salmo salar) and Danube trout (Hucho hucho)
0304201300Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka, Oncorhynchus gorbuscha,Oncorhynchus keta, Oncorhynchus tschawytscha, Oncorhynchus kisutch,Oncorhynchus masou and Oncorhynchus rhodurus), Atlantic salmon(Salmo salar) and Danube trout (Hucho hucho)
0305303000Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka, Oncorhynchus gorbuscha,Oncorhynchus keta, Oncorhynchus tschawytscha, Oncorhynchus kisutch,Oncorhynchus masou and Oncorhynchus rhodurus), Atlantic salmon(Salmo salar) and Danube trout (Hucho hucho)
0303190000 Other salmons
0302700000 Fresh and refrigerated fish liver, roe, and soft roe
48
Russian Codes of the Foreign Economic ActivityCommodity Classification Referring to the PacificSalmon Products2
Roq – the amount of roe procured
through commercial fishing in excessof the quotas (according to esti�mates);
Rlic – the amount of roe procured by
local people within the quotas allocat�ed for indigenous minorities andlicensed fishing (calculated based onthe officially recorded catch); and
Rp – the amount of roe procured by
poachers, mostly on the rivers.We rely on the assumption that the
overall amount of roe produced insuch a region as Kamchatka could beestimated from
� the amount of officially producedcanned roe (statistical data are avail�able);
� the amount of roe shipped by pas�senger and cargo flights;
� the amount of fresh (not canned)roe shipped by sea; and
� the amount of roe consumed byresidents of the region.
The amount of roe shipped by air iscomprised, in turn, from the amountof roe taken by visitors for their ownconsumption and shipments of vari�
The estimate of the actual chumand pink salmon catch on Kamchatka,excluding the poaching catch on therivers, will be the sum of the estimatesof the amount of frozen fish shippedby processing trawlers, fish productsshipped by air, and products con�sumed locally.
Assessment of poachingon the rivers
Assessing the scale of poaching onthe rivers is one of the most difficulttasks in evaluating illegal, unreported,and unregulated salmon fishing. Thiskind of poaching is aimed exclusivelytowards roe extraction. However, roeis a product of all legal and illegaltypes of fishing. Thus, the major taskis to assess the overall amount of roeproduced in the region, shipped fromit, and consumed on site. Let us callthis amount R and introduce somemore notation:
Rl – the amount of legally procured
roe, extracted from salmon harvestedin accordance with the quotas;
ous sizes exported from the region forsale.
One more assumption is that theresidents of Kamchatka and visitorspurchasing roe for their own con�sumption usually buy roe by weight,rather that canned products. We alsoassume that unreported shipments ofroe exported for sale are usuallytransported in large packages ratherthan in cans. The assumptions men�tioned above should be verifiedthrough anonymous questioning of airpassengers, as well as consultationswith experts from law enforcementagencies, journalists, and former air�line employees.
The same methods could be usedto assess roe consumption by localresidents and by visitors toKamchatka.
Consultations with experts are nec�essary to assess the sizes of large,packaged roe shipments exported byair and by sea for sale. In this case,former wholesale dealers should bealso consulted.
5150
Smoked fish including fillet:
Salted, but not dried and smoked, fish and fish in brine:
1604 Ready�to�eat and canned fish; sturgeon (black) caviar and roe substitutesproduced from the other fish eggs:
160420 Other ready�to�eat and canned fish:
0305410000 Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka, Oncorhynchus gorbuscha,Oncorhynchus keta, Oncorhynchus tschawytscha, Oncorhynchus kisutch,Oncorhynchus masou and Oncorhynchus rhodurus), Atlantic salmon(Salmo salar) and Danube trout (Hucho hucho)
0305695000Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka, Oncorhynchus gorbuscha,Oncorhynchus keta, Oncorhynchus tschawytscha, Oncorhynchus kisutch,Oncorhynchus masou and Oncorhynchus rhodurus), Atlantic salmon(Salmo salar) and Danube trout (Hucho hucho)
1604110000 Ready�to�eat salmon products and canned salmon (whole or chopped, butnot minced fish)
1604 201000 Ready�to�eat salmon products and canned salmon
1604203000 Ready�to�eat and canned products of Salmonids, except for salmons
Ready�to�eat and canned salmon (red) roe 1604309010
1604191000 Ready�to�eat and canned products of Salmonids, except for salmons(whole or chopped, but not minced fish)
Str
uct
ure
of
the
fe
de
ral i
nst
itutio
ns
invo
lve
d in
mar
ine
fis
he
ry m
anag
em
en
t an
d e
nfo
rce
me
nt
in R
uss
ia3
Natalia Dronova, Vassily Spiridonov. Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Pacific Salmon
Fishing in Kamchatka. – WWF�Russia / TRAFFIC Europe, 2008. – 52 pages.
ISBN 978 � 5 � 87317 � 522 � 2Design, layout: © WWF�Russia / Julia KalinichevaTranslated by: Anastasya PopovkinaEditor: Joseph KellnerPhoto on the 1st cover: © WWF�Russia / Dmitry ShpilenokMap of Kamchatka and Far East: © WWF�Russia / Anton MakarovPrinted by: KMKCirculation: 500 October 2008, WWF�Russia / TRAFFIC Europe, MoscowAny reproduction in full or in part of this publication must mention WWF�Russia and TRAFFICEurope.Use of photographs from this publication is prohibited without written permissionof WWF�Russia. © text 2008 WWF�Russia / TRAFFIC Europe. All rights reserved.
For free distribution
This brochure presents an analysis of different forms of poaching, figures on illegal, unreport�ed and unregulated (IUU) salmon catch and proposed measures to decrease IUU catch.Useful information on Kamchatka salmon catch, its main producers and buyers, and fishproducts chain of custody is provided.
