The Transhipment Intersessional Working Group. Formed in 2019 to review and strengthen regulation of fish transhipments in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. It aims to tighten controls and improve monitoring when fish move vessel to vessel, especially at sea, to prevent illegal or unreported catch. By improving policy, technology, and coordination, the group seeks to close loopholes and ensure tuna and other migratory fish are fully accounted for, supporting sustainable and responsible management.
Background and Purpose
Transhipment is unloading fish from a fishing vessel to another vessel, at sea or in port.
It expanded in Pacific tuna fisheries in the 2000s, especially for longliners operating far from port. WCPFC’s Convention encourages in-port transshipment for better reporting. In 2009 the Commission adopted CMM 2009-06 with core rules. It restricted high seas transshipment, required notifications and reports, and mandated Regional Observer Program monitoring for high seas events. Purse seine transshipment at sea is generally banned, with limited exemptions. Longline fleets can apply for high seas transshipment where in-port transfers are impracticable.
By the late 2010s, monitoring and reporting gaps remained. The Commission launched an electronic intersessional working group in 2019 to review effectiveness and recommend improvements. The mandate is to identify weaknesses and propose fixes so transhipment does not undermine management.
The TS-IWG includes members, participating territories, and observers. It works intersessionally by correspondence and meetings alongside WCPFC sessions, with support from the Secretariat, SPC, and TCC. The group balances the interests of Pacific Island countries, which benefit from in-port transshipment, and fleets that depend on at-sea transfers. Early work commissioned a comprehensive Transhipment Information Analysis to map practices and problem areas. The goal is practical, fair recommendations across the Convention Area.
Why Manage Transhipment?
Transhipment supports efficient fishing, but without controls it creates risks.
- Role in operations: Longliners targeting bigeye and yellowfin often offload to refrigerated carriers at sea, then continue fishing while carriers deliver to port. This saves time and fuel and moves fish to market faster. Purse seine at-sea transhipment is largely prohibited.
- Risks and management needs: At-sea transfers far from inspectors can enable unreported or laundered catch. IUU risks rise if oversight is weak. Data gaps distort stock assessments and compliance checks. Prolonged time at sea raises crew welfare concerns and reduces visibility of bycatch and discards. Strong, standardized management is required. Advance notifications, observers or electronic monitoring, detailed records, and Commission oversight improve accountability and protect coastal State interests. In-port transhipment supports local economies and transparency.
Stronger controls deliver benefits. Electronic reporting improves timeliness and accuracy. Independent monitoring deters violations. Better oversight upholds quotas and catch limits. More in-port offloading supports port communities and inspections. Capacity building helps developing States implement systems and train observers. Common standards for forms, protocols, and tracking improve data compatibility. Effective transhipment management increases transparency and reinforces overall fisheries integrity.
Historical Highlights
The TS-IWG has progressed toward overhauling transhipment rules.
- 2018 – Mandate for a Review: WCPFC agreed to a comprehensive review of CMM 2009-06 due to IUU risks and data gaps, and appointed co-chairs to lead an electronic working group.
- 2019 – Laying the Groundwork: The group met at TCC15 in Pohnpei to adopt Terms of Reference and a Scope of Work for a decade-scale information analysis, supported by voluntary funding.
- 2020 – Analysis Amid COVID-19: Data assembly began on at-sea transfers, observer reports, and vessel tracks. Pandemic disruptions paused some observer requirements, highlighting the value of electronic monitoring and reporting. The Commission extended the mandate.
- 2021 – Interim Results: Preliminary findings showed most events involved longliners on the high seas and revealed reporting gaps. A workshop discussed responses. Draft analysis moved forward and the timeline extended into 2022.
- 2022 – Draft Recommendations: The IWG proposed standardized observer data fields and wider electronic reporting with faster deadlines, plus VMS-based detection of vessel meetings and carrier activity reports. Draft amendment text to CMM 2009-06 advanced and the work plan continued into 2023.
- 2023 – Analysis Complete, Draft Measure: The final analysis quantified trends, hotspots, and compliance. TSIWG01 reviewed findings and produced a near-complete rewrite of the measure for WCPFC20 consideration. Many items gained broad support, with a few technical issues left unresolved. The IWG continued intersessionally to close remaining items.
- 2024 – Finalizing Reforms: Members resolved bracketed text through virtual and in-person discussions, preparing a consolidated draft for Commission adoption. The IWG met its mandate by assessing the old measure and preparing improvements.
Recent Developments and Future Outlook
As of 2025, the review has produced a blueprint for tighter control. Once adopted, the revised measure will require electronic notices and declarations in standardized formats with prompt deadlines. Monitoring will expand through electronic monitoring, approved technologies for verification, and VMS cross-checks to confirm meeting points at sea. Oversight will be more data driven.
The new regime will close loopholes linked to activities just outside the Convention Area but tied to catches from inside it. Members remain encouraged to transship in port where feasible, with clearer criteria for at-sea exceptions. Periodic in-port offloads and possible incentives for in-port transshipment are under discussion.
Many members already use electronic reporting and pilot cameras on carrier vessels. The Secretariat has platforms to receive data. Regional cooperation through FFA and others improves visibility of vessel behavior. The approach aligns with other tuna RFMOs that now require real-time reporting, observer coverage on carriers, and action against unauthorized transfers.
For the public: Seafood from the region will face greater scrutiny from ocean to market. Stronger rules and modern monitoring reduce IUU risks and increase confidence in legality. Better accounting supports accurate science and quota compliance. More in-port activity supports Pacific Island economies and enforcement. The TS-IWG’s work brings transparency to a once opaque step in the supply chain.