The tuna proposal becomes sushi

Yesterday, the proposal to list Atlantic bluefin tuna under Appendix I of CITES suffered a resounding rejection - not once, but twice. That Gordion knot of the so-called 'EU compromise' quickly unravelled and was rejected by 72 votes to 43, while Monaco's original proposal was even more soundly sliced to sushi by 68 to 20 - no doubt because many of the EU countries were still irretrievably caught in the Robinson Heath-like machinery of their proposal.

This was a sad result - and not just because it dooms Atlantic bluefin tuna stocks to impending collapse and commercial extinction. For one thing, it certainly quickly dispels any naive notion that CITES debate and decisions are based on the best available scientific advice and information. Everyone and his dogfish knows that it clearly meets the biological and trade criteria for listing under Appendix I of CITES - and then some. The IUCN-TRAFFIC Analyses said so. The CITES Secretariat said so. For chrissake, even the FAO Panel of Experts says so. Does all that science make even an iota of a difference? Evidently not.

But let's not even talk of scientific debate, if you were looking for any remotely intelligent debate in yesterday's tuna proceedings, you'd probably have a significantly better chance of finding an Inuit igloo in the Qatari desert. In this respect, the rather loud and lengthy intervention from the delegate of Libya probably deserves special mention. The delegate's scientific determination that the tuna was 'a smart fish' and did not want to swim to the Swedish waters of the EU proposal proponent was certainly breath-taking in its insight. He then went into this eulogy on what a great organization ICCAT is, how well-run it is, how effective it is, it is the best-of-the-best. Forget the fact that any sane person knows that among the various regional fisheries management organisations, it is probably the basket case - and when you're talking about RFMOs, that's saying a lot.

The fact that the even the usually severe interpreters could not help bursting into sniggers during his intervention probably demonstrates the hadalpelagic depths to which intelligent debate has descended to in CITES.

Of course, this all assumes that debate is even allowed to take place. Thanks to CITES' medieval procedural rules, any further debate on the tuna issue was unceremoniously cut off when the wannabe Nobel Science Prize winner from Libya called for an immediate vote on the proposal. This request was accompanied by much wailing, arm waving and beating of chests from the Arab delegations in the room, with the Committee Chairman looking on like the proverbial deer in headlights. To add insult to injury, the Friends of Over-Fishing demanded that countries resort to the cowardice of a secret ballot. CITES is based on the best available scientific advice and information? Sorry, but it's based on Who speaks the loudest. Foaming at the mouth helps too.

However, the biggest disappointment was not the stifling of debate, the paucity of rational scientific discussion, the ignorant interventions from the Friends of Over-fishing or the dull apathy and couldn't-care-less attitude of the other countries. The biggest disappointment came from the countries that the embattled Atlantic bluefin tuna depended upon the most - the countries of the European Union. I told colleagues months ago that if the EU compromise - then called the French compromise - was not killed off quickly, it would sink the proposal. It wasn't and it did.

I have to say that there were a few glimmers of hope in yesterday's proceedings. Just two years ago, I would have never imagined in my wildest dreams that Spain, Norway and the FAO would stand up in a CITES CoP and support a ban on ANY fishery, let alone a commercially significant one such as Atlantic Bluefin tuna.

And the next time a Japanese or Libyan delegate or any of the Friends of Over-Fishing takes the floor at the CoP and says that their decisions are based upon FAO advice, the world will know that it is - what's the technical fisheries term for it? - seahorseshit.