Myanmar fisheries – situation report

Duncan Leadbitter
Fish Matter Pty Ltd
October 2017

Attachments

Attachment 1 Situation report

Attachment 2 Myeik meetings and workshop outcomes

Attachment 3 Other meetings - Yangon

Attachment 4 Workshop backgrounder

Attachment 5 Project proposal

Attachment 6 Workshop presentation

Attachment 1

Status and issues associated with the marine fisheries

of Myanmar with a focus on the industrial trawl
fisheries
Undertaken for Sustainable Fisheries Partnership

Duncan Leadbitter

Director, Fish Matter Pty Ltd

www.fishmatter.com.au

November 2017
Executive Summary
Myanmar’s fisheries (marine and freshwater) are amongst the largest in the Asia region and
production has grown enormously over the past few decades. The fisheries support large numbers
of small scale fishermen and an industrial fleet dominated by trawling, although there is growth in
the purse seine sector.

Scientific surveys of the status of fish stocks have been very infrequent but there are indications of
major declines in both pelagic and demersal species, declines which are backed by occasional fishery
surveys and anecdotes from the field. Ecosystem modelling suggests that marine stocks are
increasingly dominated by small, fast growing species, a pattern observed in other fisheries where
fishing pressure is excessive.

Illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing is a significant and known problem and the government
is taking steps to reduce this but enforcement has long been, and continues to be a major gap in the
capacity of the country to control the illegal take of fish, in particular.

The government has taken a number of steps to cut fishing effort and better control catches. Some
of these are very recent and their effectiveness has not yet been demonstrated. Moreover, there are
significant gaps in the monitoring and reporting of key fishery metrics such as catch and effort such
that gauging success or failure may be very challenging.
Contents
Overview ................................................................................................................................................. 5
Geography and marine diversity............................................................................................................. 5
Biodiversity and habitats .................................................................................................................... 7
Marine species of conservation importance ...................................................................................... 8
Fish and fisheries................................................................................................................................. 9
Fisheries production and products ......................................................................................................... 9
Usage of the catch ............................................................................................................................ 11
Participation in the fisheries ............................................................................................................. 14
Fisheries management .......................................................................................................................... 14
Harvest management........................................................................................................................ 14
Species protection ............................................................................................................................ 17
IUU fishing ............................................................................................................................................. 17
Management performance ................................................................................................................... 20
Status of stocks ..................................................................................................................................... 21
Ecosystem scale changes and exploring the wider consequences of fishing ....................................... 23
Summary and conclusions .................................................................................................................... 24
References ............................................................................................................................................ 26
Appendix 1 ............................................................................................................................................ 29
Overview
Fisheries and Myanmar have been in the news in recent years, primarily because of the connection
to the labour situation in Thailand but the declining state of marine resources has also attracted
international media attention https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/20/myanmar-
marine-resources-fishing-aung-san-suu-kyi,
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/31/bay-bengal-depleted-fish-stocks-
pollution-climate-change-migration). The supply of cheap labour is but one of a number of
connections between the two countries that have developed over decades due to the abundance of
seafood resources along the eastern Bay of Bengal. Myanmar also has connections with other near
neighbours such as China and a growing outlet in for its seafood products in markets further afield.

With a wide continental shelf the marine resources of Myanmar are rich and there is also a diversity
of habitats and marine species, including some which are at risk. There is growing concern about the
declining status of the marine fishery resources and the extent of Illegal, Unregulated and
Unreported (IUU) fishing.

Landings of wild caught fish (marine and freshwater) and aquaculture production have grown in a
linear fashion for the past 15 years and now total over 5 million tonnes.

There is a strong demand in Thailand for many of the marine species caught in Myanmar especially
by the factories producing processed products like surimi and fish meal. This demand has grown
because of the declining state of fish resources in Thailand, the ban on trawling in Indonesia and
growing interest in other countries in creating their own processing industries. Thailand is the main,
but not the only trading partner for Myanmar seafood products.

There is the potential to strengthen the commitment by the industry towards efforts by
governments to control fisheries exploitation and, where needed, rebuild fish stocks to a level that
should support a long term sustainable yield. Thailand’s moves towards better management of its
fish stocks and greater control over supply chains may provide useful models for industry and others
to consider.

Geography and marine diversity

Situated in the north east of the Bay of Bengal, Myanmar shares national boundaries with Thailand,
China, India, Laos and Bangladesh. It has a coastline of some 2280klm and its continental shelf
covers about 230,000 square kilometres with a relatively wider portion in the central and southern
parts. The Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) is about 486,000 sq.km.
Source: Birch et al (2016)

There are three coastal regions of note (Pe, 2004) but Birch et al (2016) divides the coast into 5
regions. The first, in the north, stretches south from the border with Bangladesh 740 klm south to
Chin state and covers the Rakhine region. The northern part is shallow and deltaic whilst the
southern part is rockier. The central region is known as the Deltaic Region is dominated by three
major rivers - Ayeyarwady, Sittaung and Thanlwin. These are contributing very large amounts of
sediment to the coast such that the deltas are growing seaward at 5 kilometres every one hundred
years, which is contributing to a very wide continental shelf. The southern region is known as the
Tanintharyi Coastal Zone, a 1200klm stretch of coast that is dominated by the Myeik (Mergui)
Archipelago which has some 800 islands.

Source : Birch et al (2016)

The hydrography of the coast is strongly influenced by the monsoons (north east and south west).
Salinity is highly variable, ranging from 18 to 34 parts per thousand due to the influence of large
volumes of freshwater being pushed into the coastal zone during the west season. These changes,
coupled with low dissolved oxygen (2mg/l) in bottom waters and upwellings in some areas have a
big influence over fish distribution and abundance.

The high productivity of Myanmar’s marine environment is probably due to the wide continental
shelf and the dynamic hydrography driven by upwellings and the seasonal influence of the monsoon.
Source: Birch et al (2016)

Biodiversity and habitats

Myanmar is located in the tropics and there are extensive areas of mangrove forests, seagrasses and
corals, which are important for the productivity and diversity of many fish species. Diversity is higher
in the south where there is less influence of the monsoon related salinity changes. Much of the
research work has focused on habitats of more immediate conservation significance (Corals,
mangroves and seagrasses) and there is little information available on rocky shores/reefs and soft
sediment habitats (Holmes et al 2014).

Subtidally, there is even less information available publicly. Large areas of the offshore marine
environment have been leased to the oil industry for exploration and in some cases seabed surveys
have been conducted (Anon 2016). The Fritjof Nansen surveys from 1980 and 2013/14 recorded
seabed habitats in the Myeik Archipelago via echosounders during their transects and supplemented
this information with visual imagery and seabed sampling, including grab sampling to sieve out
benthic infauna. A large amount of the information is yet to be analysed.
Source: Serigstad (2015)

Photo 1 – typical reef dwelling fauna in water of 130m.

Source: Serigstad (2015)

Marine species of conservation importance

Holmes et al (2014) provide a comprehensive list of marine mammals, reptiles, birds and various
marine invertebrates (e.g. corals, shrimps, molluscs and echinoderms) found in the waters of
Myanmar. For species at risk (mainly marine mammals and reptiles) the degree of interaction with
fisheries is unknown but all the various gear types in use (trawls, gill and trammel nets, purse seines,
stow nets, long-lines, traps, beach surrounding nets) are known to interact with turtles (BOBLME
(2011c, Win and Lwin 2012,Thant and Lwin 2012).

Marine mammals commonly interact with fishing gear, especially gillnets and in some cases purses
seines and longlines. In the central part of Myanmar there are populations of the river dwelling
Irrawaddy dolphin which is at risk, in part from fishing, and there is a conservation program in place
to ensure its continued existence.
Fish and fisheries
The fish fauna of Myanmar is diverse. The Fritjof Nansen surveys alone recorded 587 teleost species
plus 26 shark 24 ray and 3 chimaera species. Myanmar’s submission to the Convention on
Biodiversity (The Republic of the Union of Myanmar, 2014) mentions 465 marine fish species and
351 species are listed in Tun (2001). More species are found in the south although the peak was in
the 50-100m depth stratum off the Ayeyarwady coast in the centre of Myanmar (Krakstad et al 2014
and Krakstad et al 2015).

A large number of marine fish are listed as vulnerable with some as endangered. One species of
shark is probably extinct - https://myanmarbiodiversity.org/2014/fisheries-conservation-in-
myanmar/. Three other species are listed as endangered - Hilsa Shad Tenualosa ilisha, Indian
Threadfin Polynemus indicus, and Four-finger Threadfin Eleutheronema tetradactylum. Many of
those that are listed are of commercial or livelihood importance.

It is possible that as many as 58 shark and 71 ray species exist within Myanmar waters of which 24
shark species and 14 ray species are caught by fishers (Howard et al 2015). Of the sharks two are
critically endangered, two endangered, nine vulnerable and 21 near threatened and of rays two are
critically endangered, five endangered, 18 are vulnerable and nine near threatened.

Holmes et al (2014) provide a brief review of marine fishes as part of a wider review of marine
biodiversity in Myanmar which accessed a large number of local papers and theses.

Fisheries production and products

In the 2015‐2016 fiscal year, the total production of fish was 5.59 million metric tons of which 3.0
marine tonnes was marine fish (Department of Fisheries, 2017). According to SEAFDEC (2017)
catches have grown at the rate of 10% year on year from 2000 to 2014.

The Department of Fisheries (2017) list the following landings (and aquaculture production) for the
period 2006/07 to 2015/15. Marine landings have almost doubled in less than a decade.

Table 1 – Fisheries production in the period 2006/7 to 2014/15

Year Total (000t) Aquaculture (000t) Lease (000t)* Open (000t) Marine (000t)

2006-07 2859.86 616.35 170.10 548.09 1525.32

2007-08 3193.92 687.67 191.05 625.44 1689.76

2008-09 3542.19 775.25 209.72 689.71 1867.51

1009-10 3921.97 858.76 237.46 764.97 2060.78

2010-11 4163.46 830.48 250.04 913.12 2169.82

2011-12 4478.35 899.05 282.64 963.82 2332.84

2012-13 4716.22 929.38 290.00 1012.97 2702.25

2013-14 5047.40 964.12 304.44 1076.59 2702.25

2014-15 5316.95 999.63 315.36 1147.76 2854.20

* Myanmar has a system of private leasing for some areas of freshwater.

There is virtually no disaggregation of catches on a species basis although Pe (2004) provides a list of
commercially important species (Appendix 1). As shown in SEAFDEC (2017) all the marine landings in
Myanmar are listed as ‘Miscellaneous fishes’. The regional average for this type of listing is 36.7%.
Myanmar fleets accounted for the majority of reported landings (86% by weight, 17 billion USD
landed value), followed by Thai vessels with 14% of landings (4 billion USD)(BOBLME 2007). BOBLME
(2014) reviewed data collection systems in Myanmar and made a series of recommendations aimed
at making improvements.

Booth and Pauly (2011) have calculated the likely catch composition of landings in Myanmar waters
based on an algorithm (Pauly and Zeller 2015) that underpins the Sea Around Us program
(www.seaaroundus.org). The Sea Around Us site presents reconstructed catches going back to the
1950’s (Figure 1). Note that these are not based on any actual species level reporting. Myanmar
continues to not report disaggregated landing figures. According to Aye and Win (2013) there is a
flow of information from vessels as follows:

On a recent (October 2017) visit Depart of Fisheries officers stated that more detailed statistics are
collected and have been for about 10 years. At one landing site the head of the local fishermen’s
association stated that data from fishermen were remitted to the association who passed them on
to the district DoF which then passed them on the regional office and then to the national office.

Figure 1 Reconstructed landings for Myanmar for the period 1950 to 2015
There is a marked contrast between the government statistics and the calculations provided by the
Sea Around Us, most notably the decline in catches from about 2001 onwards which is at odds with
the government landings data showing a linear increase to a catch of 2.8million tonnes

According to BOBLME (2011) landings were taken almost entirely by gillnet, with a small fraction
taken by mid-water trawls, bottom trawls and shrimp trawls. This is hard to reconcile with the size of
the trawl fleet, especially in recent years which has large numbers of trawlers, pelagic gillnetters and
a small but growing longline fleet.

Reconstructed total marine fisheries catches for Myanmar were estimated to approximate 32 million
tonnes from 1950 to 2008. This estimate was 9% larger than landings reported by Myanmar to the
FAO. Inshore catches were found to be declining, while total reconstructed catches have leveled off
or are even beginning to decline.

Usage of the catch

Information supplied by the government about the usage of seafood produced illustrates the lack of
diversity in the processing sector and an ongoing focus on the supply of seafood for local
consumption, although this is changing rapidly due to the implementation of a National Export
Strategy Anon (2015). As with many countries in Asia a lot of seafood is preserved in some way via
drying, fermenting, salting and smoking. The non-human food category would involve fish sent to
the fish meal plant or used directly in either fish farming or for the raising of animals.

Table 2 – Processing pathways for seafood

Seafood usage Tonnes

Fresh 1 292 359

Frozen

Cured 3 098 993

Canned

Non-human food 656 178

Total 5 047 530

Source: Table 14 in SEAFDEC 2017, Data for 2014

For the period 1997-1999 Preston (2004) found that non-human food accounted for 131 905 tonnes
out of a total production of 940 556 tonnes (14%) as compared to 13% above, likely an insignificant
difference.

According to Pe (2004) the fishery sector in Myanmar is the fourth largest exchange earner after
agriculture, timber and minerals. Shrimp is the most important fisheries export. Although no data
are available with the breakdown of products, shrimp may account for nearly 50% of the total value
of seafood exports. Frozen shrimp are exported mainly to Hong Kong and the United States and
dried shrimp to East Asia. Recently some marine fish such as barramundi (Lates calcarifer), red
snapper, Chinese pomfret (Pampus spp.), and hairtail have been exported, with Australia being the
principal market.
The amount of fish and fishery product exported in 2015-16 was 0.369 million metric tons (7% of
total production) and which had a value of USD502.630 million. It was exported to (42) different
countries.

Table 3 The ten most exported species in 2015-16

Species – Scientific Value – Volume Likely gear Comments

common name USD exported – type
name (million) tonnes

Rohu Labeo 55.8 59241.522 Farmed Freshwater

rohita
Live mud Scylla sp 39.6 13629.602 Traps, farmed Inshore/estuarine
crab species

Live eel Anguilla 25 7222.102 Traps Freshwater

sp
Soft shell Portunis 21.3 3151.416 Traps, trawl, Inshore marine
crab sp gillnets

Fish meal 21 28702.720 Trawl, purse Would require about

seine 130 000 tonnes of
raw material

Ribbon fish Trichiurus 20.6 12600.873 trawl Offshore marine

lepturus?

Pink shrimp ? 18.4 7785.515 Trawl, farmed Inshore and offshore

(depending on marine
species)

Tiger Penaeus 17.5 3113.143 Trawl, farmed Either

prawn mondon inshore/offshore
marine or
aquaculture

Hilsa Tenualosa 17.3 7365.077 Various Estuarine, marine,

ilisha freshwater

Big eye Pennahia 12.4 9901.529 Trawl, gillnet Offshore marine

croaker anea?

Source: adapted from Department of Fisheries (2016)

Table 4 Top 5 export destinations - Value in USDmillion

Country Fish Prawns Other Total

Qty (t) Value Qty (t) Value Qty (t) Value Qty (t) Value

China 23953.6 45.16 4872.7 14.02 49391.6 102.31 78217.8 161.49

Thailand 123353.7 115.52 1554.1 7.243 24660 20.40 149567.8 143.17

Malaysia 1871.3 2.3 117.17 6.25 10693.8 25.68 13682.23 34.23

Saudi 20540.8 21.61 11.7 0.02 309.55 0.59 20862.04 22.23

Arabia

Singapore 16301.3 22.4 402.86 1.27 10345.7 5.98 27049.9 29.66

Source: Department of Fisheries (2017)

The main processed products exported are fish meal and surimi. According to the Thai Customs
department (www.thaitrade.com) Thailand imports of fish meal (>60% protein grade) from
Myanmar grew from about 2700 tonnes in 2013 to over 28 000 tonnes in 2016. According to APFIC
(2012) in 2010 Myanmar produced 31 600 tonnes of fish meal of which it exported 13 256 tonnes. It
was the largest exporter of fish meal in the Bay of Bengal.

According to SEAFDEC 2005 (surimi) the surimi industry started in Myanmar in 1994 and, as of 2005,
there were 5 plants in operation, four in Yangon and one in Myeik. According to Kyaw (2009) the
main species used were croakers, lizardfish, threadfins, bigeye, barracuda and goatfish, all taken by
bottom trawl. The total quantity of raw material used then was about 11 000 tonnes per year.
According to SEAFDEC (2009) production grew from just under 800tonnes in 2001 to over 1500t in
2005, almost all of which was exported. The main export market was Japan.

Table 6 Production of surimi and catch of species used for raw material (tonnes

2005 Raw Threadfin Lizard Goat Croakers Bigeye Barracudas

Surimi material
Breams fishes fishes snappers
production required

5000 17500 10500 1050 2450 280 700 350

Source: APFIC (2010)

There have been a number of policy changes that have affected interactions between Thailand
(vessels and processors) and Myanmar. The Thai processing industry (surimi and fish meal) relies on
the import of large quantities of raw material from countries like Myanmar and Indonesia and direct
access by Thai vessels to Myanmar waters has either been permitted or banned serval times over
the past few decades. The uncertainty may well be a part of the major IUU problem near the
Myanmar-Thailand border (see below).

According to Butcher (2002) fisheries access policy in Burma, especially in regards to Thailand, has
varied from total bans to various access agreements some of dubious legality. In the early 1960s the
Burmese government sought to claim as internal and territorial waters a large part of the sea
adjacent to its coast, including a baseline around the Mergui Archipelago and across the Gulf of
Martaban. During the period 1965 to 1976 the Burmese navy arrested about 200 Thai trawlers
fishing in this area. A further 67 were arrested in the period 1981 to 1985 following an agreement
between Burma and Japan about fisheries access. During this period the supply of fish to Ranong,
Thailand, fell by about 40%. Various attempts by the Burmese government to stamp out illegal
fishing by Thai trawlers and ensure that catches were landed in Burma made little progress and in
1995 the Burmese government arrested about 13 trawlers every month. A total ban followed shortly
thereafter but this was also ineffective with an estimated 500 Thai trawlers operating illegally there
in 1998.

Participation in the fisheries

Myanmar had the highest number of fishers and fish farmers (3,201,750) in the Southeast Asian
region in 2014 (SEAFDEC 2017). Of this total, 44% were involved in marine capture fisheries, 49% in
inland capture fisheries, and 7% in the aquaculture sector. In terms of the numbers of vessels there
were 13732 non powered vessels, 12490 vessels with outboards and 2736 vessels with inboard
engines in 2014.

In 2015/16 the dominant fishing gear used in the offshore area is trawl (1240 units) followed by drift
gillnet (994 units), stick held falling net (351 units), purse seine (284 units), trap (127 units) and long
line (34 units). The total number of units has grown steadily from 1871 in 2006/07 to 3030 in
2015/16. The southern region of Taninthayi has hosted the largest number of vessels over the past 5
years.

Fisheries management
Harvest management
According to Tun et al (2009) the marine fisheries of Myanmar are demarcated into four main fishing
grounds, i.e. Rakhine, Ayeyarwady, Mon, Tanintharyi (Figure 2). Within this framework the inshore
and offshore fisheries are separated via fisheries zones as follows:

Figure 2 – fisheries management zones

(a) Inshore fisheries
5 nautical miles from shore ( Rakhine Coast)
10 nautical miles from shore (Ayeyarwady and Taninthayi Coasts)
Not more than 12 HP engine & 30 feet length of boat
Main fishing gears used are drift gillnet, gillnet and long line.

(b) Offshore fisheries

Outer limit of inshore fishing zone to EEZ
More than 12 HP engine & 30 feet length of boat
Main fishing gears are trawl net, purse seine, and long line.

Details on the types of fishing gear used can be found at -

http://map.seafdec.org/Monograph/Monograph_myanmar/marine.php.

Myanmar’s vessel registration system is categorized into two types: a scheme for national fishing
vessels registration (inshore and offshore fishing vessels) and a separate scheme for foreign fishing
vessels. The national offshore fishing boats are inspected by the Department of Marine
Administration (DMA) while the General Administration Department takes care of inshore fishing
vessel registration. After the fishing vessels have been inspected, the Department of Fisheries (DOF)
issues the fishing and fish carrier license to inshore vessels based on the recommendation of the
General Administration Department. The registration of fishing vessels operating in national offshore
waters should be inspected by DMA in accordance with the inspection procedures and rules of the
IMO for registration. The DOF would only issue the necessary fishing and fish carrier license to the
vessels after recording the fishing vessels registration from the DMA.

The Department of Fisheries has, for many years, enforced a licensing system to limit entry to the
fisheries. Anybody who wants to carry out fishing, is required by law to have a fishery license which
carries with it conditions on how, when and where fishing can be carried out. Myanmar’s Marine
Fisheries Law (1990) sets out the country’s legal framework for the management of fishing capacity
and there is also law relating to fishing rights of foreign fishing vessels (1989). In addition, there are
regulations in place to implement the country’s commitment to the management of fishing capacity.
These include:

a prohibition on the building or importation of new fishing vessels;

prohibition of fishing in high seas;
transforming of trawls into other fishing gears is allowed but other fishing gears cannot be
transformed to trawls;
flag State and port State measures including the installation of VMS and implementation of
Catch Certificate scheme.

Action plans include:

promotion of effective inspections for all fishing vessels at sea;

installation of VMS in all fishing vessels for effective MCS system;
use of TEDs and JTEDs in trawl fishing vessels; and
conduct of surveys on fishing capacity of each fishing gear group.

Myanmar ratified the FAO Port State Measures Agreement (PSMA) in 2010 and has implemented
this via a decree setting out laws and regulations. All national vessels and foreign vessels operating
as part of a joint venture are required by law to land their catch in national port. There are five
designated landing ports for foreign fishing vessels (Pathein, Yangon, Myeik, Kauthaung and
Thandwe). There is also a catch certification scheme in order to meet EU regulations.

There is also a National Plan of Action on IUU linked to the PSMA being prepared as the designated
port of landing requirements are often circumvented by both nationally-flagged and Thai-flagged
vessels which illegally tranship catch from within the EEZ for landing in the port of Ranong in
Thailand.

Myanmar ratified the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea in 1996, the Convention on Biological
Diversity in in 1994 and Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species in 1997. It has
not yet ratified the UN Fish Stocks Agreement (APFIC 2010).

In 2014 the government of Myanmar stopped issuing permits for foreign vessels to fish in its waters
(Aung 2014) and it has also started to implement a closed season (generally June to August but this
can vary). This closed season started as being a full ban but the impacts on trawlers was significant
and the ban was modified (San 2015). The ban became partial with effort being reduced by about a
third but this has expanded and by 2018 there will be a full ban implemented (Hla, T. personal
communication). According to Aye and Win (2013) the regulated mesh size for offshore trawl vessels
is 2 inches (5cm) and for shrimp vessels 1.5 inches (3.8cm). Registered need to have a colour coding
depending on their region of registration as follows:

Word colour on
Description Place of Licence Issue
Line Colour of Hull

Taninthayi White
Off Shore Fishing
HO/Ayeyarwaddy/Mon White
Vessel
Rakhine White

Off Shore Carrier Local Carrier Red

Joint Venture Red

Foreign Fishing OTS (Long Line, Squid, Trap) Red

Fishing Right White

SEAFDEC 2017
Species protection
A list of protected species can be found at http://www.seafdec.org/myanmar/

Holmes et al (2014) provide a detailed account of the various laws controlling activities affecting the
marine environment and there are provisions for the protection of species at risk and the
declaration Marine Protected Areas. As mentioned above Myanmar has signed the Convention on
Biological Diversity and has made commitments to implementing the CBD Aichi target in regards to
promoting sustainable fishing, as set out below:

By 2020, all fish and invertebrate stocks and aquatic plants are managed and harvested
sustainably, legally and applying eco-system based approaches, so that overfishing is
avoided, recovery plans and measures are in place for all depleted species, fisheries have no
significant adverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the
impacts of fisheries on stocks, species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limits

In 2014 (The Republic of the Union of Myanmar 2014) set out its commitment and activities with
respect to the marine environment which can be summarised as:

Monitoring fishing activities

Decreasing use of destructive fishing gears
Species specific conservation measures – turtles, dolphins and sharks

Some examples include;

established a fish breeding centre where endangered fish species are being bred, turtle
hatching stations were established
protection area for the globally vulnerable Irrawaddy Dolphin (Orcaella brevirostris), in a
section of the upper Ayeyawady River and working with local fishers (Tun 2007)
Shark Protection Area was established off of the Tanintharyi coast, stretching from Ross
Island to Lampi Island, with the objective of protecting endangered shark species from
extinction.

DoF/FFI/BOBLME (2015) question the effectiveness of the shark protection areas in the Myeik
Archipelago and even though the catching of sharks is banned, according to Howard et al (2015)
shark, and ray populations appear to be in severe decline.

IUU fishing
Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported (IUU) fishing is an issue around the world and is a serious threat
to the sustainability of fish stocks, the food security of coastal people and the incomes of compliant
businesses. It is a particular issue in developing countries (Agnew et al 2009).

By its very nature, estimating the scale of IUU fishing is extremely difficult and investigators have to
identify various proxies or conduct risk based analyses to generate estimates of what the possibly
level of removals from the fish stocks may be. Not surprisingly there is enormous variation both
within methods used and between methods.
BOBLME (2015) used a risk based analysis to generate estimates of the likely volume of IUU fish
associated with countries in the Bay of Bengal and South China Sea, including Myanmar. The
methodology made use of quantitative data (e.g. reported landings, pricing information) coupled
with qualitative judgements regarding likelihood (such as price per kilo which may influence the
likelihood of a fisher taking the risk of acting illegally, and the existence and severity of deterrents).
Unregulated fishing takes place in waters beyond national jurisdiction and is not believed to be a
major issue as the countries have laws and a system of regulations in place to control fishing.

According to BOBLME (2015) Myanmar was relatively low on the list of surveyed countries with a
risk of illegal fishing but high (second after Cambodia) on the list of countries with under reporting.
The estimated losses were between 0.41 and 1.22 billion US dollars. Unreported catches were
estimated to be between 10 and 70% of reported landings.

Table 7 – Estimates of Illegal and Unreported catches in Myanmar

Year Catch Illegal Unreported Unregulated

Min Max Min Max Min Max

2005 1228710 245742 798662 122871 860097 0 0

2006 1375670 275134 894186 137567 962969 0 0

2007 1517940 303588 986661 151794 1062558 0 0

2008 1679010 3335802 1091357 167901 1175307 0 0

2009 1867510 373502 1213882 186751 1307257 0 0

2010 2060780 412156 1339507 206078 1442546 0 0

2011 2169820 433964 1410383 216982 1518874 0 0

2012 2332790 466558 1516314 233279 1632953 0 0

2013 2483870 496774 1614516 248387 1738709 0 0

Source: BOBLME (2015)

Factors contributing the climate supporting IUU fishing were set out to be poor governance,
inadequate data collection, lack of post-harvest controls (leading to illegal transhipment) and
minimal deterrence, amongst other factors.

Booth and Pauly (2011) estimated unreported fishing by looking at the difference between apparent
versus actual per capita consumption rates of seafood. The former were determined from evaluating
the amount of seafood available for consumption (reported production minus exports) and the
latter from direct surveys of consumption. The amount of IUU fishing was estimated to be 9% of the
catch reported to the FAO with the inshore artisanal fleet dominating the unreported catch figures.

Funge-Smith et al (2015) undertook a study of selected aspects IUU fishing across Asia that had a
focus IUU fishing by foreign fishing vessels and those with foreign beneficial ownership. It also did
not cover domestic IUU fishing which may be ‘very serious’ not did it cover under reporting. The
researchers collected information from media reports, government websites and informants.

At 10% the Bay of Bengal and Malacca Strait region as a whole had the highest estimated rate of
illegal catches by foreign flagged and foreign owned vessels. The southern part of Myanmar
(Tanintharyi Coast) is one of the main regional hotspots for illegal fishing with large volumes
(estimated to be 572 000t in 2014) of low value fish being removed illegally by trawlers and purse
seiners from Myanmar waters. This fish is believed to be destined for further processing into surimi,
fish meal and fish blocks, probably in Ranong, Thailand. This type of fishing dominated the illegal
catch estimates being responsible for some 1.922 to 2.313 million tonnes or about 94% of the total
illegal catch by foreign owned/flagged vessels in the region studied. The Bay of Bengal/Malacca
Strait sub region was responsible for 716 to 745 thousand tonnes worth an estimated USD1.1 to 1.8
billion.

Table 8 – IUU hotspots in the seas of Asia

Hotspot Hotspot name Catch low Catch high Lower Upper

Number value value
Tonnes Tonnes
USDmillion USDmillion

33 Republic of Korea EEZ (Yellow 458848 688272 816 1225

Sea)

11 Myanmar EEZ (southern 572000 572000 708 708

waters bordering Thailand)

25 Arafura Sea (Indonesian EEZ) 340500 370500 408 741

18 Natuna Sea (Indonesian EEZ) 290000 335000 290 502

7 Palk Bay (Sri Lanka EEZ) 61200 61200 153 750

19 Sarawak (Malaysia EEZ) 12000 66700 18 220

Source: extracted from Table 6 (APFIC undated)

For the Tanintharyi Coast the types of illegal activities found were (quoted verbatim):

i
National offshore fishing fleet
• fishing without valid license;
• fishing in zones less than 10 nm from shore;
• transshipment at sea – 400 to 500 vessels in the Myeik area trans-ship about 90 percent of all
their catch to carriers, which charge 300 baht per barrel to transport the fish to Ranong, Thailand;
• illegal landing and trade in a foreign country;
• sea cucumber fishing in EEZ of India;
• blast fishing; and
• using illegal gear (small mesh size).

Foreign fishing fleet

• Foreign fishing vessels under joint venture must land all fish in Myanmar.
However, these vessels do come to Ranong port (Thailand) and sell directly.
• Vessels not deregistered are fishing with essentially dual flags, making them stateless
and illegal vessels (not deregistered from Thailand).
• Fishing without authorization and payment for unofficial license.
• Not authorized to fish in the IOTC area, landing and not reporting.
Underdeclaration of catch
 Key respondent considers that customs declarations in Thai landing ports are substantially
Underdeclared

The number of vessels is substantial, estimates in 2014 were as follows:

60 vessels OTS tuna LL (previous year 120)

400 to 500 Burmese trawlers transshipping to carriers.

About 300 Thai vessels had official licenses before the termination
of the agreement. However, the official vessels sometimes fished in
unauthorized areas.

100 or more Thai boats operate in Burmese waters with permission

(not official) purchased from local authorities.
Factors identified that predispose the existence of a hotspot for illegal fishing included the existence
of national boundaries, poor Monitoring Control and Surveillance (MCS) capacity, official tolerance
of illegal activity as it may produce material for local processing companies, economic factors and
corruption of officials. On the other side is a growing intolerance of fish theft due to the impacts it
has on local people and jobs, as evidenced by the steady stream of photos of vessel caught illegal
fishing being blown up.

Management performance
BOBLME (2011) ranked Myanmar the lowest amongst the BOBLME countries on all facets of fisheries
management relating to the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, namely:

Field 1 (Management procedures),

Field 2 (Framework – data and procedures),
Field 3 (Precautionary management),
Field 4 (Stocks, Fleets and Gear),
Field 5 (Social and Economic),
Field 6 (Monitoring Control and Surveillance),

Preston (2004) reviewed management arrangements in the wider Bay of Bengal region as part of a
report on straddling stocks and identified a number of impediments to good management which
were contributing to the decline in fish stocks around the region;

overfishing.
destructive fishing of various kinds
fishery monitoring, control and surveillance arrangements are inadequate,
pollution and unmanaged coastal development
processes for ensuring that stock assessment data are integrated into the fisheries
management decision-making process are under-developed;
there is an unrealistic expectation that stock assessment can provide robust, highly
reliable measurements, rather than estimates;
despite most fishery resources being shared among two or more countries, there are
few bilateral or multilateral attempts to assess and manage stocks;
 fishery statistics for the region are insufficiently accurate in terms of the main species
caught. A large proportion of the region’s catch is classified as miscellaneous categories,
generic groupings, or ‘unidentified’.
taxonomic inconsistencies mean that where the catch is identified, the same organism
may be reported as different species, or different organisms reported as the same
species, among BOB countries;
the availability of fishery-independent data is declining due to high costs
apart from the tuna and allied species, there is little or no attention being given in the
region to the management of shared or straddling stocks.
most countries continue to exploit fishery resources within their waters without
information on what additional exploitation may be occurring elsewhere on the same
stocks;
stock assessment capability in the region is limited in qualitative terms.
there is a need for better communication between fishery scientists and decision-
makers,
there is a need for more rigorous and objective fishery management arrangements to
reduce the degree of discretion by senior decision-makers, and introduce the consensus
views of fishery stakeholders. This should be done through the development of fishery
management plans for key fisheries, focussing on shared stocks.

Poor enforcement undermines well intentioned efforts to cut effort and catches. According to Pe
(2004) the licensing of vessels and banning of trawling within 5-mile offshore the Rakhine and
Tanintharyi coastal regions and 10-mile offshore the Ayeyarwaddy delta coastal region have not
been successful due to inadequate monitoring and enforcement.

Status of stocks
The status of fish stocks in Myanmar is a cause for major concern. A time series of Catch Per unit
Effort Data from over forty years ago documents the depletion of fish resources (Table 9) .

Table 9 Time series of CPUE from fishing surveys in Myanmar waters.

Year Activities CPUE Remarks

People’s Pearl & Fishery Corporation

1975-79 300.00
trawlers

1979 669.66 Post monsoon

R.V. Dr. Fridtjof Nansen
1980 946.33 Pre monsoon

1981 171.00
MFV. 525 ( Marine Fishery Resources
1982 Survey and Exploratory Fishing 224.00
Project) ( Bur/77/003)
1983 253.00

1986 FV. 251 228.47

 FRV. Chulabhorn( Myanmar-Thai Joint
1989 183.70
Survey)

New Fishing Australia ( Shrimp

1990 150.39
trawler)

1996 Commercial Fishing Vessel 137.00

1997 Commercial Fishing Vessel 96.12

1998 Commercial Fishing Vessel 104.80

March, April, September,

2006 Commercial Fishing Vessels 90.20
October

2007 M.V. SEAFDEC 2 89.92

Source: APFIC trawl guidelines presentation by Aye and Win (2013)

More recently the RV Dr Fritjof Nansen surveyed fish and invertebrate fauna, plankton, water quality
and habitats during two cruises in late 2013 (13 November to 17 December) and early 2015 (28 April
to 30 May)(Kakstad et al 2014 and Kakstad et al 2015). These surveys covered both the post and pre
monsoon period and found considerable variation in the abundance of fishes between the two
periods. Despite this variability it was found that the standing stocks of small pelagics was about 20%
of the previous Nansen surveys in 1979/80 (Stremm et al 1981) and demersal fish stocks had more
than halved in abundance over the same period. A comparison of the relative abundance of the
species caught over these two time periods found the same pattern experienced elsewhere in the
region (refs) in that slower growing larger species had decreased substantially whilst some of the
smaller, faster growing species had increased in abundance. In the Gulf of Thailand the so called
‘predation release’ effect whereby smaller species increase in abundance following depletion of
predators buffered the production in the Gulf of Thailand for many years despite excessive fishing
effort. However, the CPUE has finally declined to a level that has demanded a stock rebuilding
program.

The 1979/80 survey estimated a total exploitable biomass of 1.8million tonnes with a sustainable
yield of 700 000tonnes. The estimate of total biomass for the 2013/15 survey was only about 500
000 tonnes. Given the estimates of IUU fishing occurring (see above) the rapid depletion of fish
stocks appears to be continuing.

The Fritjof Nansen 2015 survey caught huge quantities (54 000 tonnes) of jellyfish which some (ref)
interpret as a sign that the serial depletion of species is creating the conditions for very fast growing
animals like jellyfish to be the only ones that can withstand the intense fishing pressure. Indeed
there is growing concern about the signals from the ecosystem

Pe (2004) lists information pointing to overfishing being an issue in each of the main fishing grounds,
as follows:

Rakhine Coast – shrimp fishing

Based on observer data, Aung (2000, quoted in Pe 2004) reported that average catch per
hour of shrimp in Northern Rakhine during 1989 declined 32 kg/hour to 13kg/hr during
1997 and thend dropped to 11kg/hr during the period 1997-2003. Tarbit (1983) estimated
that the optimum annual yield of trawl caught shrimp at 4,400 metric tonnes. There are 140
 vessels to take the supply of shrimp that could be taken by 88 vessels, hinting strongly at
overcapacity. In addition it was noted that, there are small shrimping vessels (known as baby
trawls) fishing illegally in shrimp nursery grounds for juvenile shrimp. These baby trawls are
very difficult to control.

Ayeyawady Delta

Aung (2000)(quoted in Pe 2004) analysed the fishing logs of 22 commercial fishing vessels in
1980-81 and found an overall average catch per hour off the Myanmar Coast of 260 kg.
Rijavec and Tun Thein (1983)(quoted in Pe 2004) found a catch rate of about 200 kg/hr in
1981/83 period. During these periods, a fishing vessel of 80-100 GT could be filled in 14-15
days. Whilst a change from 260 to 200 kg/hr in a year or so may not indicate overfishing as
such, at present, to catch the same tonnage of fish, it has to fish about 28 days and in order
to maintain freshness of the fish, the vessels owners have to use one of the fishing vessels as
carrier vessel. Catching time for a vessel with the fish from 14 to 28 days shows that the
catch rate has decreased to 50%. It could interpret that catch rate of fishing vessel is
decreasing from 260 to 130 kg/hr.

Pe (2004) also documents anecdotal reports of declines in availability of popular species such as
pomfrets (Pampus spp) and threadfins, as well as declines in the average size of Pampus argenteus.
APFIC 2012 reported anchovies and sardines as overfished and that the CPUE of bottom trawlers had
been declining annually.

According to the APFIC Status report (2012) some fishery indicators seem to indicate a declining
trend in marine resource abundance. The size composition of the catch of some commercially
important fishes such as pomfret and hilsa shad has become smaller, and the CPUE of bottom trawl
fisheries is also declining. It is likely that some marine fishery resources in Myanmar are
overexploited and this seems consistent with the fact that the current landings are 50 percent higher
than the estimated MSY. The national MSY estimation might need to be revised if ecosystem shifts
have occurred, thereby increasing the productivity of smaller species.

Ecosystem scale changes and exploring the wider consequences of

fishing
BOBLME (2014) report on the results of a Bay of Bengal wide ecosystem modelling exercise using
Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE). Such modelling has been applied in many countries in Asia to both gain
an understanding of the consequences of current fishing practices and regimes and explore the
consequences of alternative management regimes.

The experiences in other countries with poorly managed, growing fishing capacity, particularly in the
trawl sector has been:

1. An initial depletion of stocks as tracked by declining Catch Per Unit Effort. Whilst this is not
unusual in fisheries and indeed, is often a targeted outcome during the fishdown phase of
virgin stocks, it is very common for this fishdown to continue way beyond what is justifiable
from a sustainability point of view.
2. Much of the early depletion is due to the rapid loss of slow growing larger species such as
rays, groupers and other higher order predators.
3. Growth in the biomass of smaller, prey species due to the removal of predators, at least for
a short period of time as fishing pressure increases.
 4. The creation of a new fished ecosystem dominated by smaller, faster growing species that
can withstand the extreme fishing effort

APFIC (2012) document that the catches of demersal species have generally declined in Myanmar
but catches of trash fish and surimi species have increased. This is a pattern consistent with other
countries such as Thailand where excess fishing (especially trawl) pressure is a major issue. Field
studies support the modelling results in that slower growing, larger species decline as a proportion
of the catch. For example Suvapepun (1991) comments on the disappearance of rays, marine catfish
(Tachysuridae), false trevally (Lactarius lactarius), grunters (Pomadasys spp.), pomfrets (Pampus
argenteus, Parastromateus niger), Indian halibut (Psettodes erumei) and fusiliers (Caesio sp.) from
the Inner Gulf of Thailand coincident with the excessive fishing pressure. Field studies also document
the replacement of slower growing high trophic level carnivores by faster growing, low trophic level
planktivores is common (see for example Jin et al 2013, Tang 2014, for China and Suvapepun 1991
for Thailand). None of this is unexpected as the consequences of high fishing pressure on the
abundance of larger animals is well known, at least in a general sense.

This so called ‘release of productivity’ buffers catches for a period of time and creates the illusion
that the system can cope with the high fishing pressure. However, unless fishing pressure is
controlled there will be a transition to an even simpler ecosystem state dominated by gelatinous
organisms. Indeed, the most recent FrItjof Nansen surveys found very large tonnages of jellyfish in
some areas and noted this as a source of concern (see also Hong et al 2008).

Overfishing does not just have an impact via reduction in the availability of resources but ecosystem
shifts can also have significant impacts by redistributing which fishing sectors can access and benefit
from the available biomass. The loss of larger predators like snappers and groupers and their
replacement by smaller, faster growing species may benefit the trawl fleet over those fishing with
lines which may impact upon small scale fishers, resulting in conflict. Indonesia’s trawl bans in 1980
and 2017 have been driven by a mix of inadequate controls on trawl resulting in serious conflict with
larger numbers of fishermen.

Summary and conclusions

Myanmar’s waters support a wide range of marine species of importance for commerce,
conservation and livelihoods. Fish, especially freshwater fish, have long been an important source of
animal protein for local people but a growing interest in the generation of export revenue from
increased fisheries production has placed significant pressure on some marine resources. Most
seafood exports remain within the wider region with Thailand and China dominating the export
destinations.

Catches are not well documented and are poorly reported and this, coupled with capacity issues in
regards to enforcement have made management a major challenge. IUU fishing remains a significant
problem and estimates of total catches are substantially greater than the Maximum Sustainable
Yield calculated from recent research. Modelling of the current and potential state of the marine
ecosystem suggests that there is the potential for a significant and undesirable change in ecosystem
state. There has already been a transition from a system that supported a range of large and small
species to one that is dominated by small species that are more robust to fishing pressure. However,
even these may succumb, paving the way for a system dominated by gelatinous organisms. This
would have enormous implications for commerce and food security.
The issues are not unknown to government and stakeholders. Efforts to control IUU fishing have
been taken by the government such as signing the UN FAO Port State Measures Agreement and
reducing access by foreign vessels. In the field, the fishing sector (catching and processing) are
concerned about the decline in fish resources. However, the overcapacity that dogs the fleets
creates incentives to flout the few regulations that are in place and this is driving overfishing by
catching smaller and smaller fish. The private sector clearly needs to recognise the role it is playing
and can play in reversing the decline.

Myanmar’s fisheries are very much at a cross road. The Fritjof Nansen fishery surveys of 2013 and
2015 provided a clear wake-up call that the country’s once rich marine resources require urgent
rehabilitation and improved management. Whilst the trawl sector is not solely responsible for the
issues it can and should play a key role in supporting if not driving efforts to move to a sustainable
future.
References
Agnew DJ, Pearce J, Pramod G, Peatman T, Watson R, Beddington JR, et al. (2009) Estimating the
Worldwide Extent of Illegal Fishing. PLoS ONE4(2):
e4570.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0004570

Anon (2011) Assessments of the Indian mackerel (Rastrelliger kanagurta) and the Hilsa shad
(Tenualosa ilisha) fisheries in the BOBLME countries. Report by Poseidon for The BOBLME project.

Anon (2015). National Export Strategy – fishery sector strategy 2015-2019. Myanmar Ministry of
Commerce and International Trade Centre, Republic of the Union of Myanmar.

Anon (2016). A-6 Drilling Program Environmental Impact Assessment, October 2016. Undertaken by
ERM Hong Kong for Woodside Petroleum.

Aung, S.Y. (2014). Myanmar bans foreign fishing from its waters.
https://www.asiasentinel.com/econ-business/myanmar-bans-foreign-fishing/

Aye, K.M. and Win, K.K. (2013) Trawl fishery Management, Myanmar. APFIC Regional Expert
Workshop on Topical Trawl Fishery Management 30 September – 4 October 2013, Phuket,
Thailand.

Birch, F. C. H., Pikesley, S. K., Bicknell, A. W. J., Callow, M., Doherty, P. D., Exeter, O., Godley, B. J.,
Kerry, C. R. K., Metcalfe, K., Turner, R. A., Witt, M. J. (2016) Myanmar Marine Biodiversity Atlas.
University of Exeter, UK. 79p.

BOBLME (2011) Fisheries catches for the Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem since 1950.
BOBLME-2011-Ecology-16

BOBLME (2011) Performance in managing marine resources in the Bay of Bengal. BOBLME-2011-
Ecology-17
BOBLME (2011c) Marine Turtle Conservation: Review Report. BOBLME-2011-Ecology-18

BOBLME (2014) An exploratory ecosystem model of the Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem
BOBLME-2014-Ecology-09

BOBLME (2014) Review of fisheries data collection systems in Myanmar. BOBLME-2014-Ecology-27

BOBLME (2015) Review of impacts of Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing on developing
countries in Asia. BOBLME-2015-Governance-15

Booth S., and Pauly D (2011). Myanmar’s Marine Capture Fisheries 1950–2008: Expansion from the
Coast to Deep Waters. pp. 101–134. In S. Harper, D. O’Meara, S. Booth, D. Zeller, and D. Pauly, eds.
Fisheries Catches from the Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem since 1950. Sea Around Us Project.
www.seaaroundus.org

Butcher, J. G. (2002). Getting into Trouble: The Diaspora of Thai Trawlers, 1965–2002. International
Journal of maritime History, 14(2): 85-121

Department of Fisheries (2017) Fishery Statistics - 2016, Department of Fisheries, Myanmar

DoF/FFI/BOBLME (2015). Assessment of the efficacy of Myanmar’s Shark Reserves. Department of
Fisheries (DoF) Myanmar, Fauna & Flora International (FFI) and the Bay of Bengal Large Marine
Ecosystem project (BOBLME

Holmes, K.E., Tint Tun, Kyaw Thinn Latt, M. Subedee, S.V. Khadke, and A.E. Hostetler. 2014. Marine
Conservation in Myanmar - The current knowledge of marine systems and recommendations for
research and conservation. Yangon, WCS and MSAM. 198 pp.

Hong, J., He-Qina, C., Hai-Gen, X., Arreguın-Sanchez, F., Zetina-Rejon, M.J., Del Monte Luna, P. and
Le Quesne, WJ.F. (2008). Trophic controls of jellyfish blooms and links with fisheries in the East
China Sea. Ecological Modelling 212:492–503.

Howard, R., Ahmad, A. and U Saw Han Shein (2015). Shark and Ray Fisheries of Myanmar – status
and socio-economic importance. Report No. 12 of the Tanintharyi Conservation Programme, a joint
initiative of Fauna and Flora International (FFI) and the Myanmar Forest Department, FFI, Yangon,
and the Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem Project (BOBLME

Jin, X.S., Shan X.J., LI X.S., Wang, J., Cui, Y. and Zuo, T. (2013). Long-term changes in the fishery
ecosystem structure of Laizhou Bay, China. Science China - Earth Sciences. March, Vol.56 No.3: 366–
374.

Krakstad JO, Michalsen K, Krafft B, Bagøien E, Alvheim O, Strømme T, Mya Than Tun, Htun Thein,
SanThar Tun. 2014 Cruise Report "Dr. Fridtjof Nansen" Myanmar Ecosystem Survey 13 November –
17 December 2013. IMR: Bergen. 100 pages
Krakstad JO, Krafft B, Alvheim O, Htun Thein, Peter Psomadakis 2015. Cruise Report "Dr. Fridtjof
Nansen" Myanmar Ecosystem Survey 28 April – 02 June 2015 FAO-NORAD PROJECTNO:
GCP/INT/003/NOR.

Kyaw, S.J. (2009) Myanmar. Appendix 8 in End‐of‐Project Meeting of the Working Party on
Information Collection for Economically Important Species as Surimi Raw Materials in the Southeast
Asian Region Appendix 8 TD/RP/130 REPORT, SEAFDEC, Bangkok, Thailand.

Pauly D and Zeller D (Editors) (2015) Sea Around Us Concepts, Design and Data
(ww.seaaroundus.org)

Pe, M. (2004) National report of Myanmar. On the Sustainable Management of The Bay of Bengal
Large Marine Ecosystem (BOBLME) - Fishing Grounds of Myanmar and Landing Sites
GCP/RAS/179/WBG.

Preston, G.L. (2004) Review of the status of shared/common marine living resource stocks and of
stock assessment capability in the BOBLME region. Sustainable Management of the Bay of Bengal
Large Marine Ecosystem (BOBLME), GCP/ RAS/ 179/ WBG

Ramaswamy, V. and P. S. Rao (2014). Chapter 17 The Myanmar continental shelf. Geological Society,
London, Memoirs, 41, 231-240

San, M.S. (2015). Burma eases 3 month fishing ban. https://www.irrawaddy.com/business/burma-

eases-3-month-fishing-ban.html

Serigstad B. (2015). Environmental baseline and benthic habitat studies. R/V Dr. Fridtjof Nansen.
Environmental Survey in Myanmar 2015. Institute of Marine Research (IMR), Bergen, Norway
Stremme, T., Nakken, O., Aung, S. and Saetersdal, G.S. (1981) REPORTS OF SURVEYS WITH THE R/V
DR. FRIDTJOF NANSEN Surveys of the Marine Fish Resources of Burma September-November 1979
and March-April 1980. FAO, Rome and Institute of Marine Research, Bergen, Norway.

Suvapepun, S.(1991) Long Term Ecological Changes in the Gulf of Thailand. Volume 23/1991, First
International Conference on The Environmental Management of Enclosed Coastal Seas（EMECS’90),
Kobe, Japan.

Tang Q. (2014) Management strategies of marine food resources under multiple stressors with
particular reference of the Yellow Sea large marine ecosystem. Front. Agr. Sci. Eng. 2014, 1(1): 85–90

Thant, S and Lwin, M.M (2012) Distribution of Hawksbill Turtles (Erethmochelys imbricata) in
Longlonebok Island and its Adjacent Area in Myanmar. Proceedings of the 7th International
Symposium on SEASTAR2000 and Asian Bio-logging Science (The 11th SEASTAR2000 workshop) : 9-14

The Republic of the Union of Myanmar (2014). Fifth National Report to the Convention on Biological
Diversity Ministry of Environmental Conservation and Forestry, Nay Pyi Taw, March 2014

Tun, M.T. Marine Fishes of Myanmar (Pelagic and Demersal)

Tun, M.T., , Moe, Y.Y. and Hla, S. (2009) Update Fisheries Information, Environment and Overview
For BOBLME Programme. BOBLME-2009-REG-5.0-IWS-14

Tun, M. T. (2007). Efforts to Preserve a Fishery Cultural Heritage in Myanmar: The “cooperative
fishing” with Irrawaddy Dolphins. Fish for the people 5 3 2007

Win, A.H. and Lwin, M.M. (2012) Interaction between Fishing Activities and Marine Turtles in
Myanmar Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on SEASTAR2000 and Asian Bio-logging
Science (The 11th SEASTAR2000 workshop): 5-7
Appendix 1

Economically important fish species of Myanmar – extracted from Pe (2004)

Attachment 2

Myeik Workshop, meetings and inspections

14-15 October 2017

Arrangements were made with the assistance of Corin Myanmar to meet with fishing industry and
government representatives in the city of Myeik, a key port for the trawl fleet in the southern
province of Thanintharyi.

Corin Myanmar is a small, locally based NGO associated with Corin Asia which is headquartered in
Thailand and has staff in Thailand, Cambodia and Laos. Corin Myanmar has its own legal structure in
Myanmar and operates relatively independently. At present it has a fisheries project in the far south.
The key contact is Captain (Myanmar Navy retired) Win Naing who set up the meetings and the
workshop.

Meeting with local governor

After arrival in Myeik on 4 October, we met with the new governor of the region to brief him on the
aims and objectives of the workshop. He is appointed by the government in Yangon and has been in
his post for about 3 months. He was concerned that I was representing an International NGO which
are increasingly unwelcome in Myanmar due to the crisis in Rakhine state where INGOs have been
blamed for precipitating the Rohingya unrest. Once we had addressed his concerns we were free to
proceed.

The workshop session was held at the offices of the Myanmar Fisheries Federation on the 15th.
Present were about 20 people from the catching and processing (mainly fish meal) sectors and from
the Department of Fisheries. A copy of the agenda is attached along with the information provided
to participants. Note that the timings were amended as a result of a late start due to heavy rain.

After covering background information the group was split into two and tasked with exploring the
two workshop topics. The key outcomes were as follows:

1. Issues of concern
Declining state of fish resources – fish meal producers now produce about 3000t per month
which is down from 5000t per month 15 years ago. This equates to about 150 000t per year
of raw material, down from 250 000t. The vast majority of fish meal (estimated 90%) is
derived from raw material. The remainder is produced from surimi processing waste. There
are 5 fish meal plants in the city and one surimi plant.
Impacts of smell on surrounding communities – the city has grown towards the industrial
area over the years and new residents are increasingly unhappy about the smells from the
plants. Finding solutions is challenging to the lack of technical expertise and costs, especially
in the light of declining throughput.
Loss of mangroves – the area of mangroves has declined by about 50% due to a mix of
reclamation and cutting for charcoal production.
Sedimentation from the catchments – land clearing and fires are resulting in a lot of
sediment flowing into the local waterways which is impacting habitats and port facilities.
IUU fishing – is an ongoing problem and arrests of illegal fishing vessels (both from Myanmar
and Thailand) continues. Recently (last year or so) the Myanmar government stopped
permitting the Thai vessels to fish in Myanmar waters to reduce fishing pressure and ensure
that resources are allocated to Myanmar nationals as much as possible.
 Inadequate controls on catches – there is a partial seasonal closure whereby for a 3 month
period the government reduces access by two thirds. Effectiveness is unclear as there as
insufficient time to discuss what monitoring programs are in place. There was also concern
about some vessels not complying with mesh size requirements and using meshes smaller
than permitted (2.5 inch).
Fish bombing – this remains an ongoing issue that has been documented in the literature. A
bit unclear whether locals are involved but the claims were made against Thai fishermen.
The Navy has tried to catch people in the past but it is far from easy.
The oil industry – concerns about the impacts of this industry on habitats. Note that the
Fritjof Nansen survey found evidence of sediment pollution by drilling muds.
Climate change – currents seem to be changing and this may be affecting fish behaviour and
distribution.

2. FIP opportunities

Some of issues identified are not solvable via the current FIP models but there may be other
ways of making progress. A number of suggestions were made (see below).

Outcomes

DL to introduce Captain Win to George Woodman from StopFishBombing to see what

support and collaboration may be possible
DL to provide some suggestions to Captain Win about who may be able to assist on the
mangrove issue – maybe the Mangrove Action Project?
DL to contact IFFO to see what may be possible in terms of providing contacts or technical
advice on dealing with smells from fish meal plants
Copies of the main presentation were provided to those that supplied a memory stock.
Several left email addresses for Captain Win to send on copies
DL to write up the notes from the workshop and send to Captain Win for distribution.
DL to liaise with Captain Win about seeking funding to get a FIP going.

Small group session Background session

Visit to local landing site

We visited a local landing wharf for raw material being transported to a nearby fish meal factory and
watch the fish being unloaded and transported by truck a short distance to the factory. Once the
trucks are loaded they proceed to a weigh station prior to dumping the fish in the receiving area of
the plant.

Each factory seems to have its own unloading wharf. The vessels may have unloaded larger fish
elsewhere and then moved to the fish meal unloading wharf as the trash fish is a lower priority. The
fish is stored in drums with a small amount of ice which will help improve quality. As the fish was
dumped into the receiving area at the plant it was quite clearly cooler than the surrounding air.
According to one of the plant owners at the workshop the supply of fish that was in poor condition is
illegal.

A wide variety of species were observed and there seems to be quite a great deal of variation, with
some drums being dominated by different species to others. This variation was also observed at the
fish meal plant.

The fish meal plant appeared to be fuelled by wood as large numbers of logs were seen out the back.
We did not have time to talk with plant personnel. I was advised subsequently that the plants often
use mangrove as fuel and this may have contributed to the loss of mangroves in the region.

There were a number of vessels embedded in the sediment which seems to be accumulating in the
vicinity of the wharf area. According to Captain Win these are illegal vessels which have been seized
and tied up.

Fish being unloaded Diversity of species

Fish being unloaded at fish meal plant

Attachment 3 - Meetings in Yangon

Meeting 1

Mr U Tin Hla – Myanmar Fisheries Products Processors and Exporters Association

Mr Hla introduced the Association and its role in facilitating the development of the Myanmar
seafood industry. A lot of their direction is set by the Myanmar Export Strategy, and he provided a
hard copy to me. It was part funded by the International Trade Centre.

He suggested that a meeting be held at some stage with the chairman of the Myanmar Fisheries
Federation and that a one day seminar may be a good way of educating people about FIP and other
opportunities.

He mentioned that some species were getting scarce and smaller in size and he hoped that the
increasing scope of the annual closed season (set to be 100% closure of industrial fleets for 3 months
next year) would be beneficial.

The main destinations for fish meal were China and Japan and that in 2015, 21 000 tonnes were
exported, worth about USD30million. Most surimi processors are in Yangon but Andaman Resources
is based in Myeik. Malaysia is a common export destination.

There are increasing demands for better traceability but monitoring and enforcement is very poor.
About 20 companies handling wild harvest resources have received EU approval. The EU provides
some technical assistance and also some Aquaculture Best Practice Advice. There was some interest
in ASC certification.

Meeting 2

Lars Joker (larsjoker@gmail.com ) – coordinator of a DANIDA funded project on small scale fisheries.

Stephen Roberts (steveroberts54@gmail.com) – manages a Trade Investment Program which is

funded by GIZ and operates out of the Myanmar Department of Fisheries

Mr Tint Wai (tintwai55@gmail.com) – Myanmar Department of Fisheries officer.

DANIDA is funding a project to assist the Myanmar Department of Fisheries to establish a

Monitoring Control and Surveillance system. Part of the project runs out of the port of Myeik and is
based on a comanagement approach. There is quite a lot of antagonism between the small scale
inshore fishers and the larger vessels, many of which do not respect the zoning boundaries which
allocate inshore and offshore areas to each sector.

Steve’s project is focused more on seafood quality issues as his background is focused on quality
assurance. He spent a lot of time in the western pacific working on tuna.
Attachment 4

Proposed Meeting with fishing industry participants

Myeik, Myanmar
16 October 2017

Draft agenda
1. Introduction to Fish Matter – role and purpose of meeting

2. Introductions to meeting participants

3. Introduction to the concept of Fishery Improvement Projects(FIPs)

4. Market opportunities arising from participation

5. Process of creating and running a FIP

6. Potential participants – potential role of CORIN Asia

The meeting will canvass ideas and is not aimed at making any obligations.
If the participants want to explore opportunities further we will need to pursue funding
options.
The meeting is being funded by Sustainable Fisheries Partnership, a non – government
organisation that works with the fishing industry to link sustainable practices with market
opportunities.
Fish Matter is a fisheries management consultancy based in Australia. Its director, Duncan
Leadbitter, has 30 years experiences in fisheries management.