expanded their fisheries, driving up dolphin mortality once again. Although the
IATTC had started to put in place a dolphin conservation programme, in 1986 due
to an international observer scheme it became clear that despite drops in dolphin
mortalities, they had risen to around 133,000 per year again. By then, the United
States, one of the main markets for Pacific tuna, put in place requirements for
‘dolphin-safe’ labels, which put pressure onto other tuna-fishing states. Moreover,
in 1990 the US imposed an import embargo for tuna without the label, even
accounting for tuna that could potentially have resulted in dolphin mortalities unless
reliably demonstrated by the fishing nations that that was not the case. In other
words, the US banned tuna imports unless it was shown that they were conducted in
a dolphin-safe manner. In 1991 this led to Mexico and other states taking the
embargo to the World Trade Organization (WTO) as being in breach of the freetrade provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT).
30 However, without a final ruling of the WTO, Mexico and the US settled this dispute ‘out
of court’. One of the reasons for this settlement was the Agreement for the Conservation of Dolphins (La Jolla Agreement),
31 which was concluded between several—
not all—member countries of the IATTC. The La Jolla Agreement aims to progressively reduce dolphin mortalities and to ultimately phase them out entirely. To
achieve this, a Review Panel was established which set annual ‘Dolphin Mortality
Limits’, starting at almost 20,000 in 1992 but dropping to less than 5000 by 1999.
While the La Jolla Agreement was an agreement that proved to be successful, it
was nevertheless not legally binding while some of its signatories were not members
of the IATTC. In 1995, therefore, the governments of the signatory states met in
Panama and decided to conclude a legally binding convention which would require
states to put in place measures to reduce dolphin mortalities. In 1998, the successor
to the La Jolla Agreement was adopted, the Agreement on the International Dolphin
Conservation Program (AIDCP),
32 entering into force in February 1999. The
AIDCP aims to reduce dolphin mortalities to less than 5000 dolphins per year.
The AIDCP has a membership of sixteen at the time of writing. While strictly tied to
the IATTC, the AIDCP is a stand-alone agreement with its own membership. A key
provision of the AIDCP is an observer scheme which requires tuna vessels to take
international observers on board, who oversee the operations of the vessel vis-à-vis
the convention’s provisions. The members of the convention meet back-to-back with
the annual meeting of the IATTC and establish dolphin mortality caps on a yearly
basis and for each dolphin stock, yet not exceeding 5000 per year.
30 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 14 Apr 1994 (55 UNTS 194).
31 Agreement for the Conservation of Dolphins, 21 Apr 1992.
32 Agreement on the International Dolphin Conservation Program, 21 May 1998.
120
5 The International Legal Framework for Whales
IATTC had started to put in place a dolphin conservation programme, in 1986 due
to an international observer scheme it became clear that despite drops in dolphin
mortalities, they had risen to around 133,000 per year again. By then, the United
States, one of the main markets for Pacific tuna, put in place requirements for
‘dolphin-safe’ labels, which put pressure onto other tuna-fishing states. Moreover,
in 1990 the US imposed an import embargo for tuna without the label, even
accounting for tuna that could potentially have resulted in dolphin mortalities unless
reliably demonstrated by the fishing nations that that was not the case. In other
words, the US banned tuna imports unless it was shown that they were conducted in
a dolphin-safe manner. In 1991 this led to Mexico and other states taking the
embargo to the World Trade Organization (WTO) as being in breach of the freetrade provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT).
30 However, without a final ruling of the WTO, Mexico and the US settled this dispute ‘out
of court’. One of the reasons for this settlement was the Agreement for the Conservation of Dolphins (La Jolla Agreement),
31 which was concluded between several—
not all—member countries of the IATTC. The La Jolla Agreement aims to progressively reduce dolphin mortalities and to ultimately phase them out entirely. To
achieve this, a Review Panel was established which set annual ‘Dolphin Mortality
Limits’, starting at almost 20,000 in 1992 but dropping to less than 5000 by 1999.
While the La Jolla Agreement was an agreement that proved to be successful, it
was nevertheless not legally binding while some of its signatories were not members
of the IATTC. In 1995, therefore, the governments of the signatory states met in
Panama and decided to conclude a legally binding convention which would require
states to put in place measures to reduce dolphin mortalities. In 1998, the successor
to the La Jolla Agreement was adopted, the Agreement on the International Dolphin
Conservation Program (AIDCP),
32 entering into force in February 1999. The
AIDCP aims to reduce dolphin mortalities to less than 5000 dolphins per year.
The AIDCP has a membership of sixteen at the time of writing. While strictly tied to
the IATTC, the AIDCP is a stand-alone agreement with its own membership. A key
provision of the AIDCP is an observer scheme which requires tuna vessels to take
international observers on board, who oversee the operations of the vessel vis-à-vis
the convention’s provisions. The members of the convention meet back-to-back with
the annual meeting of the IATTC and establish dolphin mortality caps on a yearly
basis and for each dolphin stock, yet not exceeding 5000 per year.
30 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 14 Apr 1994 (55 UNTS 194).
31 Agreement for the Conservation of Dolphins, 21 Apr 1992.
32 Agreement on the International Dolphin Conservation Program, 21 May 1998.
120
5 The International Legal Framework for Whales