Transcript
BUBBA COOK: Credit where credit's due. The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission and the Forum Fisheries Agency have both instituted measures designed to address observer safety and security, mostly through the implementation of various technology tools: two-way communicators, personal locator beacons that provide some level of security for those observers, as well as procedures most recently at the last Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission that require flag states and coastal states to engage in certain activities to ensure that observer safety and security is addressed in the instance of a missing or injured or assaulted observer. So they have put measures and policies in place. Where the failure has occurred, in my view, is in the implementation of those policies and procedures. Even though the initial requirements for technology were put in place back in December of 2015, we've heard that a number of the countries still haven't implemented that policy. That the observers that are being deployed haven't being issued those tools, and if they are issued those tools, there's the bigger question of whether they are keeping those tools on their person at all times.
JOHNNY BLADES: Of the deaths or of the cases where there are question marks around the disappearance or deaths of observers in the Pacific region in recent years, is there any pattern to the fact that several of them have come from Papua New Guinea?
BC: Yes and I'm not afraid to say that in two of those instances, one of them was almost certainly murder and another was highly suspicious of being murder. So it raises a lot of questions any time that an observer goes missing, but the fact that this was the fourth observer from PNG, it immediately raised concerns about the potential for foul play.
JB: When you said those two were probably murdered, why do you think they were murdered?
BC: In Charlie Lasisi's case, the fact that we do know is that he had observed an instance on board the vessel that he threatened to report, that was an illegal activity - now what that illegal activity was is still under question because we've heard different stories - but the crew saw that as a threat so they... felt the need to dispose of him. And we know that there were six crew members that were brought up on charges and those charges were subsequently dismissed. And it never was fully investigated to the extent that it should have been. And despite the best efforts of a number of journalists who tried to investigate that case, they basically hit brick walls every time they tried to investigate it.
JB: And of course wasn't that the case pertaining to the Filipino fleet that is in and out of Madang (PNG north coast) all the time, the Dolores fleet?
BC: That is correct.
JB: And they're quite an established player in PNG's fisheries landscape, aren't they?
BC: Absolutely. The Philippines has heavy engagement in that part of the Pacific, and obviously a strong interest not just in the fishing industry but also in the processing industry out of PNG as well.
JB: Is the WWF doing anything about this James Numbaru case? Are you pressing any authorities to look into this further?
BC: Yeah we're going to push for full transparency for the case, and all cases involving observers. Like I said, it really is about understanding what happens so we can prevent it from happening in future. And obviously in this case, despite the best efforts of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission and the Pacific Islands' Forum Fisheries Agency, there was still an incident with an observer that results in a fatality, and we simply can't have that. One observer missing is too many. We need to bring these boys home. For our part, we're going to continue to advocate for improved safety and security for observers, and advocate for that transparency in the process. There needs to be record keeping and reporting of every incident. And that record keeping and reporting needs to be made available to the public so we can understand and learn from those instances and prevent it from happening to others.
JB: I understand there are different lengths of time that different observers are on these boats. So I'm just wondering are the risks more if it's a longer stint? You know, could there be something done about that? I suppose it all comes down to money fleets may not want to come in to port more often to chop and change with observers, but could that be factored in?
BC: Sure and it's actually a very valid point that you bring up there. One of the issues that facilitates those long trips out at sea is for instance the longliners' ability to trans-ship out in the high seas, so they're able to get their fuel, their food, they're able to take the fish that's on their ship and transfer it to another vessel at sea, and that allows them to stay out for extremely long periods of time that make it difficult to get an observer on board those vessels. That's a problem because first of all, if you do get an obsever on board that vessel it's very difficult to get them off because they stay out at sea for a very long period of time. And second, it's difficult to get them on in the first place because they don;t come in frequently, and we need the information fro those longliners. At present we have about 2.6 or maybe 2.8 percent observer coverage on longline vessels throughout the region, which is abysmal. We should have at minimum a 20 percent observer coverage to even be statistically valid.
