FFA FISHERIES TRADE NEWS Volume 5: Issue 4 July-August 2012

FFA FISHERIES TRADE NEWS

Volume 5: Issue 4 July-August 2012

By Elizabeth Havice and Liam Campling[1]

CONTENTS

Preferential Trade Agreements

PACP gear up for the next round of EPA negotiations with the EU

World Trade Organisation

WTO appellate body rules on tuna-dolphin debate

Fisheries Regulation

EU to impose trade measures on countries engaged in unsustainable fishing

Fisheries Management

United States and FFA countries nearing agreement on US Treaty renewal

Fiji’s tuna fisheries management and development policies under review 

Fisheries Development

Recent developments in the Pacific Islands’ tuna fishery

Vietnam shipyard will build more new vessels for Sapmer

Cannery wages frozen in American Samoa

Tuna Price Trends

Preferential Trade Agreements

PACP gear up for the next round of EPA negotiations with the EU

Negotiations with the European Union on the Pacific ACP-EU Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) continue to drag out.  The next round of negotiations is scheduled for October 2012 and Pacific ACP states (PACP) remain hopeful that a conclusion can now be reached by the end of 2012, eight years on from when negotiations first commenced.[2]  

The Fisheries Chapter is a key component of the EPA negotiations and has proven to be one of the most contentious.  One of the primary concerns for PACPs is the EU’s hard-line position that extension of preferential ‘global sourcing’ rules of origin to fresh and frozen value-added fisheries products (HS 0304/0305) will be contingent on PACPs granting the EU fishing access to PACP waters. The EU has also reportedly proposed to limit global sourcing to tuna species, rather than all fish species. PACPs maintain that they have already demonstrated flexibility on the negotiation of contentious issues with the EU, and will stand firm on their position concerning the extension of global sourcing to HS 0304/0305 products.[3]  Hence, this issue could be a potential stalemate in negotiations if neither party is prepared to compromise.   

In preparation for the upcoming October negotiations, the PACP Fisheries Technical Working Group met in Fiji in mid-August to discuss outstanding issues concerning the Fisheries Chapter and work on negotiating positions.  Twelve out of 14 PACPs have now finalised their draft market access offers to the EU.[4] 

World Trade Organisation

WTO appellate body rules on tuna-dolphin debate

As reported in a recent issue of FFA Fisheries Trade News, the US and Mexico both appealed elements of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body panel ruling on the tuna-dolphin issue, which ruled largely in favour of Mexico.[5] The previous ruling had deemed the US tuna labelling requirements more trade restrictive than necessary to protect dolphins and inform consumers. In May 2012, the WTO’s highest court released its decision.[6] Several key findings emerged from the ruling. 

First, the Appellate Body addressed the question of if the dolphin-safe label qualifies as a mandatory regulation, even though its use is voluntary. The body determined the US ‘dolphin safe’ label to be a regulation because the US measure establishes a single and legally mandated definition of the term ‘dolphin-safe’ and prescribes the conditions that apply for making any assertion on a tuna product’s impact on the safety of dolphins. In line with the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, regulations must be implemented in a non-discriminatory manner, treating foreign products no less favourably than domestic products.

Second, the Body found that US measures granted Mexican products less favourable treatment than like products originating in the US and other countries. This ruling was based on the fact that though the US Dolphin Protection Consumer Information Act (DPCIA) applies to all domestic and imported products, it prevents the use of the label for tuna caught in the Eastern Tropical Pacific by purse seine nets that encircle dolphins, effectively banning purse seine fishing for Mexican vessels, even if independent parties certify that no dolphins were killed or injured during the catch. This was deemed less favourable treatment since purse seine fishing in ocean regions where tuna and dolphin do not school together can follow simple procedures to comply with the DPCIA. 

Third, the ruling reversed the previous panel decision that the US dolphin-safe labelling provisions were more trade restrictive than necessary to fulfil US legitimate objectives. Instead, it recognized that purse seine nets can harm dolphins beyond observed mortalities and injury and that this outcome justifies strict regulation. It also ruled that the US was permitting less strict treatment for other regions and fishing methods also known to negatively affect dolphins. In short, the Appellate Body found that other tuna fishing techniques used in other oceans could be just as risky for dolphins, that the US label rules failed to address this issue and required that the US amend this inconsistency in the next 18 months. The Body did not specify the conditions for doing so. The reformed ‘dolphin-safe’ measure will have to apply requirements evenly to all fishing techniques and regions.

Fourth, the judges ruled that using the Agreement on International Dolphin Conservation Programme (AIDCP) as an international standard for dolphin-safe tuna – a request made by Mexico – was not possible. Though the TBT Agreement mandates that where relevant international standards exist technical regulations must adopt their design, the Appellate Body determined that the AIDCP is not an international standard because membership to is only open to non-member countries upon invitation. 

This ruling has several general ground-breaking implications.[7] First, the decision demonstrates that the WTO accept the US objective of ensuring that its domestic market does not encourage fishing methods that harm dolphins, a significant departure from the conventional wisdom at the WTO that trade regulation may not have an effect outside of a country’s own territory, and that countries may not impose specific regulatory approaches on their trading partners through importing or marketing requirements. Second, the Appellate Body’s finding that the US legislation is mandatory government regulation, even though it is not required for importation, firmly brings other labels (such as organic food labels or other sustainability labels that are increasingly common in fisheries sectors) into the realm of WTO regulations. Finally, the careful examination of the quality and nature of the AIDCP as an international standard suggests that the WTO will carefully investigate the standards that are being assessed as potential trade barriers in future WTO cases.

The decision is also likely to have important implications for the tuna sector, potentially setting the stage for reorganising the definition and changing the implementation of dolphin-safe. This change comes at a time of debate over the relevance of the dolphin-safe label in the WCPO generally and the newly MSC-certified WCPO free school fishery in particular.[8] On the part of the US industry, the National Fisheries Institute, the industry association representing the big-three American canned tuna brands, expressed disappointment in the ruling, suggesting that it is likely to create confusion about whether or not tuna products are dolphin safe. The US brands reaffirmed their commitment to dolphin-safe products.[9]

Fisheries Regulation

EU to impose trade measures on countries engaged in unsustainable fishing

The European Council and the European Parliament’s Committee on Fisheries have reached agreement on a draft regulation allowing the EU to impose restrictive measures on countries deemed to be engaged in unsustainable fishing practices.[10]  

While the primary catalyst for the development of the regulation is a long standing dispute between Iceland and the EU concerning overfishing of mackerel by Iceland and the Faroe Islands, the regulation will extend beyond ‘stocks of common interest’ to any fish stock available to EU and non-EU fishing fleets.  This includes stocks managed by a regional fisheries management organisation (RFMO) to which the EU is a contracting party.[11]  As the EU is a member of WCPFC, the regulation will apply to tuna and other highly migratory fish stocks originating from the Western and Central Pacific region. 

Under the draft regulation, countries or territories deemed to be engaged in unsustainable fishing practices may be subject to the following restrictions: quantitative restrictions on the importation of fish into the EU; restrictions on the use of EU ports by fishing vessels and carriers; a ban on the sale of fishing vessels, fishing equipment and supplies to an offending country; and, a ban on re-flagging fishing vessels from an EU Member State to an offending country.  If these measures prove to be ineffective, the draft regulation provides scope for further measures to be applied.  The draft regulation also includes provisions for third countries to have their case heard and, should appropriate corrective actions be adopted, allow for rapid termination of the measures instated.[12] 

On 27 June 2012, the regulation was ratified by the European Council.  The European Parliament is expected to formally ratify the regulation in early September 2012. 

Fisheries Management

United States and FFA countries nearing agreement on US Treaty renewal

Following several years of intense negotiations, FFA members and the United States have reportedly agreed on basic terms and conditions that will extend the US Treaty. A key component of the renegotiation was bringing the US Treaty into compliance with the Vessel Day Scheme, as well as the new economic relations that it has yielded in the region. As reported in previous issues of FFA Fisheries Trade News, negotiations focused primarily on the price and number of fishing vessel days and Pacific island countries’ interests in the presence of the US fleet generating a broader range of economic benefits to the region.[13] In particular, Pacific Island countries remain interested in opening negotiations for market access in the US market for processed Pacific tuna products. 

The new agreement is yet to be finalised, but several key points of agreement have been made public. The Parties have provisionally agreed that the US Treaty will be valued at US$ 63 million for 8,000 fishing days. It has not been revealed how many of these days will be for fishing within PNA waters. Of this sum, industry is to pay US$ 42 million and the remaining US$ 21 million is to come from the US Department of State for broader cooperation (official development aid).[14] In past US Treaty agreements the US government contribution was dedicated to an economic development fund. Under the previous terms of the US Treaty, the US government paid a sum of US$ 18 million, but the change in the industry payment is far greater. Under the previous Treaty, industry paid US$ 3 million to license 40 vessels.[15] In 2011, US vessels used 7,696 fishing days under the terms of the previous Treaty.[16] 

Though a provisional agreement has been made, the US and the FFA Parties have publically debated the terms of the new Treaty. The US has claimed that the Treaty will yield the FFA members a 17 per cent rate of return on the value of fish caught,[17] while the PNA report that the agreement will yield a rate of return of 11.7 per cent if the aid package is included, and 7.7 per cent if only the licensing fees are taken into consideration – the latter of which is a rate of return lower than the ten per cent that the PNA countries desire. Further, the FFA countries have indicated that rather than locking the payment rates in for a ten year period as they have done in the past, that the payment will be reviewed every two years in order to be able to take into account market prices and other changes that might occur.[18] In general, in recent months, sky high skipjack prices have made increased licensing fees more palatable to boat owners in vessel day negotiations.

While all indications are that the Parties are nearing agreement on the new Treaty, the FFA countries continue to emphasise that they view US commitment to improving market access to the US for Pacific tuna products, investments and employment generation in the Pacific islands as key to the completion of the US Treaty. The Parties are scheduled to meet next in Port Vila, Vanuatu in early September. 

Fiji’s tuna fisheries management and development policies under review 

Fiji is currently working on developing a new Tuna Management and Development Plan, as well as a paper to present to Cabinet on recommendations for the sustainable harvest of tuna.[19] Both documents will shape the future of Fiji’s tuna fishery.    

One of the key issues being considered is Fiji’s annual longline licence cap.  Currently, around 70 Fiji-flag vessels fish within the Fiji EEZ – half of which are held by local Fiji companies and the remainder are issued to locally-based foreign companies.  The Fiji Tuna Boat Owner’s Association (FTBOA), representing local vessel owners, is supporting a reduction in licences issued to fish in Fiji’s EEZ to 50 licences, in line with recommendations from a bio-economic analysis conducted by FFA and SPC to estimate the optimal number of vessels the fishery can sustainably and economically support. Fiji Offshore Fisheries Association, representing locally-based foreign vessels, is calling for vessel numbers within Fiji’s EEZ to be maintained under a new licencing policy.[20]  

A further 90-100 foreign chartered vessels also carry Fiji flags and fish in high seas areas and other EEZs (i.e. Solomon Islands, Vanuatu), but are not authorised to fish within Fiji’s EEZ.  Concerns have been raised by local vessel owners about excessive fishing effort in high seas adjacent to the western boundary of Fiji’s EEZ, which is negatively impacting on catches within Fiji’s EEZ.  Also, catches from these vessels are directly exported, rather than being processed by Fiji-based operations, reportedly resulting in limited benefits to the Fiji economy. FTBOA is calling for careful management of waters adjacent to Fiji’s EEZ to reduce effort and ensure licences are issued to vessels which genuinely deliver economic benefits to Fiji. 

Fiji’s industry has also been consulted on the annual volume of tuna that should be harvested under a quota from Fiji’s EEZ.  While FTBOA firmly believes the annual catch should not exceed 10,000 mt based on historical and current stock levels, Fiji Offshore Fisheries Association supports an annual catch quota of 15,000 mt.[21]    

Owners of locally-based foreign and chartered vessels have criticised the introduction in 2011 of a fish levy tax of USD 350 per tonne applied to whole round fish exported directly from Fiji.  Operators argue that this policy change has prompted foreign boats to move elsewhere to more competitive operating locations, resulting in job losses.[22]  

The Fiji Tuna Management and Development Plan has been drafted and is awaiting final approval. In addition to issues relating to vessel licencing and catch quota, issues concerning fisheries development opportunities and monitoring, control and surveillance are also being considered.   

Fisheries Development

Recent developments in the Pacific Islands’ tuna fishery

A number of notable developments have occurred in the Pacific Islands’ tuna fishery over the past two months, including:

* The Cook Islands will establish a tuna fisheries office in Pago Pago to enhance the monitoring of forty longline vessels fishing in Cook Islands’ EEZ that unload catches to processing facilities in American Samoa.[23]

* A Taiwanese company, Fong Haur Fishery Co. Ltd., will construct and operate a purse seine vessel in Palau.[24]

* Negotiations are reportedly underway for the establishment of a joint-venture arrangement between Palau and the Philippines which could permit 100 handline vessels to fish in Palau waters and target sashimi-grade tuna for the Japan and US markets.[25]   

* Solomon Islands is calling for expressions of interest from ‘qualified development partners’ to establish a tuna processing facility at Tenaru, Guadalcanal Province.  Previously, the site was earmarked for Philippines’ company, Frabelle to develop a tuna loining/canning facility.  However, the Solomon Islands government has now opened up this opportunity to any suitable interested parties.  The successful investor would be guaranteed purse seine fishing days under the VDS to ensure long term raw material security for the plant.[26]

* Solomon Islands’ new Honiara-based longline processing and export facility, Southern Seas Investment Ltd. (SSI), has received its first unloading of catch and is ready to commence full operations.  SSI is owned by Taiwanese investor, Yuh Yow, in conjunction with forty longline vessels licenced to fish in Solomon Islands EEZ.  The establishment of SSI marks Solomon Islands second onshore tuna processing investment, following Soltuna (formerly Soltai).[27] 

* Tuvalu is calling for expressions of interest from potential joint venture partners to re-develop NAFICOT, a defunct tuna longline base and processing facility in Funafuti.  The facility will process and export longline-caught tuna caught in Tuvalu’s EEZ and adjacent waters.  In exchange for the onshore investment, the investor would receive guaranteed fishing access in Tuvalu’s EEZ.[28] 

* Majestic Seafoods, a new tuna processing facility established in Lae, PNG is expected to commence canning operations over the next two months.  Under Phase 1, Majestic Seafoods will have the capacity to process up to 200 mt/day, employing 2,000-3,000 workers.  Majestic Seafoods is a partnership between Thai Union (Thailand), Century Canning Corporation (Philippines) and Frabelle (Philippines/PNG), and will be PNG’s largest tuna processing investment to date.[29] 

* The Parties to the Nauru Agreement have accepted an application from Tokelau to join their purse seine vessel day scheme.  Tokelau’s request to join the VDS was part of the new Tokelau Fisheries Policy and associated Offshore Fisheries Plan, designed to maximise the economic benefits to Tokelau from tuna caught within its EEZ.[30] 

Vietnam shipyard will build more new vessels for Sapmer

Sapmer, a French fishing company based in Réunion, has announced that it will add another two new -40°C tuna purse seiners to its Indian Ocean fleet, which will bring its fleet to seven vessels.[31]  Unlike other typical purse seine operations, Sapmer operates in a different market segment.  In addition to supplying canning grade raw material (skipjack), Sapmer processes super frozen yellowfin tuna into high quality loins and steaks at Sapmer’s Mer des Mascareignes factory in Mauritius for export to Asian sashimi markets, as well as other markets including the EU and US. 

The new vessels will be constructed by SEAS Shipyard in Vietnam, a French subsidiary, which has already constructed three vessels for Sapmer in the past two years. It is anticipated that the new vessels will commence operations in 2013.  Sapmer has also announced that it will build a new value-added processing plant in Port Louis, Mauritius.[32]  Since it commenced operations in 2009, Sapmer’s financial performance has been very strong, fuelled largely by the rapid expansion of its tuna fishing activities (Sapmer also has fishing interests in rock lobster and Patagonian toothfish). In 2011, total revenue was € 77 million;[33] in the first half of 2012, reported revenue was € 52.5 million; a € 10 million increase on revenue generated in the first half of 2011.[34]    

To date, operations have been solely based in the Indian Ocean.  However, Sapmer has shown interest in establishing a fishing and value-added processing operation in PNG, which if it were to proceed, would mark the company’s first foray into the WCPO tuna fishery.[35]  

Tuna Markets

Cannery wages frozen in American Samoa

On 17 July, the United States Congress passed a bill which places a freeze on American Samoa’s minimum wage until 2015 at US $4.76 per hour.  Under the Fair Minimum Wage Act 2007, American Samoa’s legislated minimum wage was supposed to increase by $0.50 increments until it matched the minimum wage rate of the rest of United States of $7.25 per hour.[36]  

This development comes as a relief to American Samoa’s two tuna processing interests, Starkist (Dongwon) and Samoa Tuna Packers (Tri Marine International), who have cited minimum wage increases as a major cause of concern for the future of tuna processing in the US Territory.  Rising labour costs were a contributing factor to Chicken of the Sea (Thai Union) shutting down its operations and relocating to the US mainland in 2009.  In 2010, Starkist was also forced to downsize operations and lay off 800 workers.

Tri Marine International has indicated that delaying the minimum wage increase until 2015 will enable the company to forge ahead with its planned developments.[37]  Tri Marine is in the process of establishing a tuna canning facility at the former Chicken of the Sea site which is scheduled to commence production in late 2013. Tri Marine has also established a value-added fresh and frozen tuna export operation to handle by-catch species from longline vessels supplying albacore for canning, which commenced commercial operations in January 2012.[38] 

1 Prepared for the FFA Fisheries Development Division by Liam Campling, Consultant Fisheries Trade Analyst, FFA and School of Business and Management, Queen Mary, University of London and Elizabeth Havice, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Desktop publishing by Antony Price. The authors would like to thank Hugh Walton for his input on an earlier draft of this briefing. The contents of this briefing (including all analysis and opinions) are the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions or thinking of the FFA Secretariat or its Members.

2 PACNEWS 2012, ‘Fiji calls for regional solidarity on EPA negotiations’, Pactrade, 6 August 2012. 

3 PACNEWS 2012, ‘Pacific ACP concerned with EC push to tie global sourcing to market access to Pacific marine resources’, PACNEWS, 10 August 2012.  Available at: http://www.pina.com.fj

4 PIFS 2012, ‘The Pacific trade and development nexus’, Press Statement, 15 August 2012.  Available at: http://www.formsec.org

5 Amanda Hamilton, Elizabeth Havice and Liam Campling, ‘US files final appeal against Mexico’s favourable WTO ruling on ‘dolphin safe’ labelling’, FFA Fisheries Trade News, 5(1), Jan-Feb 2012. Available at: http://www.ffa.int 

6 WT/DS381/AB/R 2012, ‘United States – Measures concerning the importation, marketing and sale of tuna and tuna products AB-2012-2’ Report of the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organisation, 16 May. Available at: http://www.wto.org; The summary presented here draws on the following analysis of the WTO Appellate Body report:  Marie Wilke ‘Tuna labelling and the WTO: How safe is “dolphin-safe”?, Dispute Settlement and Understanding Program, International Center for Trade and Sustainable Development, 6(2), June 2012. Available at: http://www.ictsd.org; ‘WTO Appellate Body: US “Dolphin-Safe” label discriminates against Mexican Tuna’, Bridges Weekly, International Center for Trade and Sustainable Development, 16 (19), 16 May 2012. Available at: http://www.ictsd.org; ‘Dispute Settlement DS381’, WTO 2012 News Items – Dispute Settlement. Available at: http://www.wto.org 

7 Marie Wilke ‘Tuna labelling and the WTO: How safe is “dolphin-safe”?, Dispute Settlement and Understanding Program, International Center for Trade and Sustainable Development, 6(2), June 2012. Available at: http://www.ictsd.org

8 Amanda Hamilton, Elizabeth Havice and Liam Campling, ‘Earth Island Institute and PACIFICAL/PNA battle over “dolphin-safe” status’, FFA Fisheries Trade News, 5(2), March-April 2012. Available at: http://www.ffa.int

9 Seafood Source 2012, ‘WTO: US “dolphin-safe” labels too restrictive’, Seafood Source, 16 May 2012. Available at: http://www.seafoodsource.com

10 Council of the European Union 2012, ‘EU can now envisage action against unsustainable fishing’, Press Release, 2 July 2012, Brussels. 

11 Natalia Real 2012, ‘MEPs back harsher treatment of countries that fish unsustainably’, FIS, 25 April 2012.  Available at: http://www.fis.com

12 op.cit. Council of the European Union 2012. 

13 Amanda Hamilton, Elizabeth Havice and Liam Campling ‘US and Pacific Island Parties continue to negotiate US Treaty renewal’, FFA Fisheries Trade News, 5(2), March-April 2012. Available at: http://www.ffa.int 

14 PNA Office 2012, 'PNA says value of proposed US Treaty could be greater', Press Release, 27 August 2012. Available at: http://pnatuna.org 

15 Elizabeth Havice 2010, 'The structure of tuna access agreements in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean: Lessons for vessel day scheme planning', Marine Policy, 34 (5): 979-87.

16 PNA, 'Vessel Day Scheme (VDS) report to the Eighth Regular Session of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC8)', in Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission Eighth Regular Session, Tumon, Guam, 2012. Available at: http://www.wcpfc.int 

17 Natalia Real, 'Tuna Agreement reached with US', FIS, 4 August 2012. Available at: http://www.fis.com; Islands Business 2012, ‘US announces significant financial package for Tuna Treaty negotiations’, Islands Business, 3 July 2012. Available at: http://www.islandsbusiness.com 

18 PNA Office 2012, 'PNA says value of proposed US Treaty could be greater', Press Release, 27 August 2012. Available at: http://pnatuna.org

19 The Jet 2012, ‘Almost Half of Fiji Tuna Catch is Non Targeted’, Atuna, 11 July 2012, http://www.atuna.com 

20 The Fiji Times 2012, ‘Fijian Albacore Longliner Fleet to Be Reduced or Not?’ Atuna, 20 April 2012.  http://www.atuna.com

21 The Fiji Times 2012, ‘Fiji: Tuna Expansion Ok, But Only with Local Boats’, Atuna, 25 April 2012.  Available at: http://www.atuna.com

22 Natalia Real 2012, ‘Tuna tax is harming industry’, FIS, 2 May 2012.  Available at: http://www.fis.com

23 Radio NZ 2012, ‘Cook Islands to Open Tuna Fisheries Office in American Samoa, Atuna, 13 August 2012.  Available at: http://www.atuna.com

24 Island Times 2012, ‘Taiwan Firm Wins Bid to Operate Tuna Seiner Vessel in Palau’, Atuna, 7 August 2012. Available at: http://www.atuna.com

25 Sun Star 2012, ‘100 Handline Tuna Boats Could Move to Palau Waters’, Atuna, 23 July 2012.  Available at: http://www.atuna.com

26 Atuna 2012, ‘Solomon Looking for Partners in New Tuna Processsing Plant’, Atuna, 24 July 2012. Available at: http://www.atuna.com

27 The FishSite 2012, ‘New Tuna Longlining Company Off-loads in Solomons’, Atuna, 6 July 2012.  Available at: http://www.atuna.com

28 FFA 2012, Tuvalu EOI Advert, FFA website:  http://www.ffa.int

29 Natalia Real 2012, ‘Biggest tuna cannery in the country to open soon’, FIS, 17 August 2012.  Available at: http://www.fis.com

30 PNAO 2012, ‘Tokelau joins the highly successful PNG Vessel Day Scheme, PNAO, 1 May 2012.  Available at: http://www.pnatuna.com

31 La Revenue 2012, ‘Sapmer Orders Two New Seiners at Pirou Vietnam’, Atuna, 14 August 2012.  Available at: http://www.atuna.com

32 Mauritius Government Information Service 2012, ‘Major Expansion Sapmer in Indian Ocean Tuna Fishing’, Atuna, 30 July 2012.  Available at: http://www.atuna.com

33 Sapmer website: http://www.sapmer.com

34 FIS 2012, ‘Sapmer’s Tuna Business Shows Explosive Growth’, Atuna, 1 August 2012, Available at: http://www.atuna.com

35 Hamilton, A., A. Lewis, L. Campling 2011, Report on the Implementation of the derogation to the standard rules of origin granted to the Pacific ACP States in the framework of the Interim Economic Partnership Agreement, EU DG Trade, Brussels. 

36 The News Tribune 2012, ‘US Congress Oks American Samoa Minimum Wage Freeze’, Atuna, 23 July  2012. Available at: http://www.atuna.com

37 Radio New Zealand 2012, ‘Cannery in American Samoa welcomes delay in wage hike’, 21 August 2012.  Available at: http://www.rnzi.com

38 Amanda Hamilton, Tri Marine International, pers. comm. August 2012. 

39 All databases are provided by the Fisheries Development Division at FFA.