COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMV1UNITIES 
C0M(94) 266 final 
Brussels, 28.06.1994 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 
on the arrangements applicable to tuna 
for the (inning industry' 
Report from the Commission 
on flie arrangements applicable to tuna 
for the canning industry 
Introduction 
On 13 October 1992 the Council decided, against the background of the most recent reform 
of the common organization of the market in fishery products, to maintain unchanged the 
Community arrangements for tuna under which payments are made to producers to offset the 
suspension of customs duties on the raw material imported by the canning industry. 
Hie Council requested the Commission, however, to present, before 30 June 1994, a report 
on the operation of the arrangements together with, if necessary, proposals on which, acting 
under the procedures laid down in Article 43 of the Treaty, it would decide before 31 
December 1994. 
* * * 
Tuna traded on the Community market destined for the processing industry consists mainly 
of tropical species (yellowfin, skipjack and bigeye) and to a lesser extent albacore1. 
Spain and France are the Community's two major tuna-producing countries followed by the 
islands of Portugal. All three countries are also processors. Italy has a large processing 
industry. 
Apart from catches of bigeye tuna taken by Portugal and those of albacore and bluefin taken 
by France, Spain and Italy in Community waters (the north-west Atlantic and the 
Mediterranean), most of the Community catch of tropical tuna for the industry comes from 
the west Indian and central-eastern Atlantic Oceans under fisheries agreements with the 
countries concerned or from international waters. 
Yellowfin and skipjack account for over 80% of the total Community catch, the Spanish fleet 
having taken 57% of that proportion in 1992 and the French fleet 41%. 
Catches of the two species at present come in approximately equal proportions from the 
Indian and Atlantic Oceans unlike the situation at the start of the Eighties when the 
Community fleet was operating primarily in the tropical eastern Atlantic. 
This report does not therefore examine landings of wetfish (mainly bluefin but partly 
albacore). 
Thon albacore = Yellowfin tuna = Thunnus albacares 
Thon listao = Skipjack tuna = Katsuwonus pelamis 
Thon patudo = Bigeye tuna = Thunnus obesus 
Thon germon = Albacore tuna = Thunnus alalunga 
-i_ 
The main figures considered do not go back earlier than 1988, which was the year the 
arrangements for tuna were last reformed. 
Starting with an outline of the background to the present arrangements and the challenges 
facing the industry (part I), the report goes on to consider the situation as regards production 
(part II) and processing (part III) and ends with guidelines for solutions. 
* 
* * * 
I. The present arrangements: background and challenges 
The compensatory payment mechanism for tuna was established in 1970 to counterbalance 
the drawbacks for Community producers of the arrangements applicable to imports of tuna 
as a raw material for the canning industry. 
Import duties on the raw material were suspended in order to give the industry an opportunity 
of competing with tuna canned outside the Community. 
The industry relies heavily on imports for its supplies of raw materials, Community producers 
not enjoying any Community preference. 
However, if import prices fall, they receive an allowance that guarantees them a level of 
income under certain conditions for the part of their production sold in the Community. The 
system of payments is based on a Community producer price (CPP) which is fixed annually 
by the Council on a proposal from the Commission on the basis of the average price over the 
three previous years. 
Where, during a quarter, the market price falls below 93% of the CPP, the Commission is 
obliged to implement the mechanism 
Although it was adjusted in 1988 (to limit budget costs), the present mechanism is based on 
the same principles as were laid down initially, the amount of the payment now being limited 
to 12% of the triggering threshold and the quantity eligible for the allowance being kept 
within the following parameters: 
a rnaximum of 62.8% of the quantity supplied to the industry; 
the average of the quantities sold and delivered over the three preceding years; 
the average of the quantities sold and delivered during the period 1984 to 1986 plus 
10% 
Because of the number of these parameters the administration of the mechanism is relatively 
complicated which means that quite a long period of time elapses before payment of 
allowances. It should be pointed out that delays by some Member States in providing figures 
add considerably to the time needed 
In 1992, as part of a comprehensive reform of the market organization, the Commission 
proposed to the Council a review of the mechanism in order to simplify it and also to cut 
costs. The latter part of the proposal seemed justified given the small number of beneficiaries 
and the financial burden the compensation represented as a proportion of the total markets 
organization budget (± 40% - see Annex IV). 
On account of the crisis2 then affecting the tuna market, the Council rejected this aspect of 
the reform and decided to review the situation afresh in the second half of 1994. 
With part of the Community fleet claiming that it can supply all the Community market's 
requirements, it is being requested, as a counterbalance to the abolition of the compensatory 
payment mechanism, that the Common Customs Tariff be reintroduced for the raw material. 
The canning industry, on the other hand, considers it essential to be able to obtain supplies 
of the raw material on competitive terms, which means that the suspension of customs duties 
on tuna as a raw material must be maintained. 
* 
* * * 
* IL Tuna - die raw material 
The Community catch of frozen tropical tuna and albacore in 1992 was around 435 OOOt 
(source: FAO. See Annex 1-5), i.e. 14.6% of the world market share. This was 30% up on 
1982 (11.20%), the Community catch having more than doubled between 1982 and 1988. The 
reason for this is the increase in fishing effort and the redeployment of a significant part of 
the Atlantic fleet in the Indican Ocean. 
The Community catch of the two species preferred by the industry (yellowfin and skipjack, 
see Annexes 1.3 and 1.1) rose from 150 OOOt in 1982 to 363 OOOt in 1992, a rise of around 
140%. At the same time, world production rose over the same period by 84%. 
World production of tuna rose sharply therefore in 10 years with Community production 
making a large contribution The reason for this is the emergence of developing countries 
located close to plentiful stocks. 
Structural crisis (world production up by 50% in 10 years, competition offered by the 
developing countries' fleet) and a market crisis (the US embargo on tuna taken with 
dolphin). 
The Community fleet3 has expanded against the trend in the other major industrialized 
countries (US, Japan). The US has undertaken large-scale transfers of flags while Japan has 
gradually been giving up production to concentrate on buying. 
This expansion by the Community is likely to be due to the know-how of its fleet (which, 
apart from the dynamism of the sector, has a technological dimension). It is undoubtedly 
equally due to the favourable economic and legal environment established by the Community 
consisting of 
a policy of support for improvements to production structures (Annex II); 
a network of fisheries agreements with non-member countries guaranteeing access to 
fish stocks (See Annex III); 
market organization mechanisms requiring shipowners to manage their businesses in 
a context of open competition on the international market while being guaranteed a 
minimum level of income thanks to the compensatory payment mechanism4 (see 
Annex IV). 
This could only have happened in an expanding market with a stock that poses no problems, 
even if the provisional world production figures for 1993 indicate a slight set-back compared 
with 1992 (source: Gobefish Highlights 1/94, p. 9). 
To date the international tuna fisheries organizations have not reported any particular 
conservation problems for the different species of tropical tuna targeted by the Community 
fleet (see Annex VIII). 
* 
* * * 
* 
To sum up, the existence of a competitive Community tropical tuna fleet is important for 
more than one reason The sector makes a significant contribution to the Community market's 
security of supply and is of great economic and social importance (principally by providing 
indirect employment in shipbuilding) to the fishing industry in certain regions of the 
Community. 
3 According to the information available (source: fleet register), Spain and France have 
47 and 34 large tuna freezer seiners respectively. 
It is worth pointing out that in 1991, 1992 and 1993 compensatory payments to the 
Community fleet represented around 10 to 12% of the fleet's total turnover on the 
Community market during those years. 
It also plays a major political role in relations with developing countries, some of them ACP 
States, and in international forums in which the Commmunity is represented (Annex VIII), 
not to speak of its geo-political role due to its presence in several of the world's oceans. 
Despite the serious difficulties the Community fleet has had to face, it must be said that the 
industry was able to adapt to the new economic constraints and become competitive once 
again. No more so than for other sections of the fleet, however, the Commission is unable to 
decide whether its competitiveness is determined by Community supporf. At most it can be 
said that in the 1992 crisis, the compensatory payments undoubtedly saved the day. 
Now when the US and Japan are believed to be considering subsidizing their tuna fleets, we 
need to ask whether it is wise to undermine one of the components of the Community's tuna 
policy (source: Gobefish Flash, 4/93, p. 12). 
* 
* * * 
m Canned tuna 
The autonomous suspension of customs duties on tuna as a raw material has until now been 
of critical importance in balancing the economy of the Community's tuna sector. 
It has made it possible for the Community processing industry to withstand competition, in 
some cases unfair (e.g. bonito exports from certain ASEAN countries), from a number of 
South-East Asian countries where production has soared over the last 10 years. 
In view of the fact that the fleet supplies a significant proportion of Community canneries' 
needs, consideration should be given first to the question whether Community production is 
sufficient to meet the needs of the Community market by examining the industry's supply 
balance. 
A brief study of the available figures indicates that the Community catch of industrial species 
amounts to 435 000 tonnes (Annex 1.5). Since only around half of the albacore produced is 
destined for canning, the Community production of tuna available for the industry can be put 
by and large therefore at 420 000 tonnes. According to the available statistics, in 1992 the 
industry used 360 000 tonnes of raw material (Annex V.I) to produce 273 000 tonnes of 
canned tuna (Annex VI), a utilization rate that seems on the low side. 
Taking into consideration fisheries agreements, shipbuilding and the compensating 
payments, the Community subsidy comes to around ECU 20 million annually. 
Comment: Information regarding the processing industry is exceedingly piecemeal. 
Although it enjoys total exemption from customs duty on the raw material, the industry 
is not required to notify any basic data (turnover, production costs, etc.). 
One might conclude that in theory there is a balance of around 60 000 tonnes meaning that 
Community production is sufficient to supply the processing industry. 
This overall assessment is not borne out by the closer study of individual species. 
Community production of yellowfin is 182 000 tonnes of which 114 OOOt is supplied to the 
industry by the producers' organizations on the Community market, the balance therefore 
being 68 000t. Raw material imports total 148 000t. If the industry received the entire 
Community production, there would be a shortfall of 80 OOOt which Community production 
would be unable to cover. This takes no account of the fact that Community production 
consists of both large (more than 10 kg each) and small (less than 10 kg) yellowfin. The 
Community market, for reasons of labour costs, prefers large yellowfin. 
Community production of skipjack is 181 OOOt, of which 56 OOOt is supplied to the 
Community industry and the balance available is thus 125 000t. Raw material imports amount 
to 25 000t. The surplus therefore comes to about 100 000t. 
The interdependency of yellowfin and skipjack stocks means that the production ratios for the 
two species differ relatively little. In order to catch the quantity of yellowfin needed to meet 
market requirements, the Community fleet would have to take at least 160 OOOt more 
(yellowfin and skipjack) than in 1992 which hardly seems possible at present. 
The tuna now being supplied to the processing industry no longer consists solely of whole 
fish but also of loins which are subject to a 24% customs duty. 
In 1992, for the first time, more of the Community processing market's supplies consisted of 
imports (51%) than of Community production (49%) (see Annex V-2.4). The likely reason 
for this is either lower purchase prices for imports for processing than those offered by the 
Community fleet or more profitable export prices for the Community fleet. 
Even assuming that Community production of yellowfin is sufficient to meet the needs of the 
Community market, it has to be borne in mind that not all of it is available for landing on the 
Community market. 
Tuna landings in some ACP countries (Côte d'Ivoire, Seychelles, Madagascar) represent one 
aspect of fisheries relations with those countries, even where there is no contractual obligation 
to land, as in the case of the agreement with Senegal. 
It is difficult to imagine that tuna being transferred to the Community market without 
affecting the Community's relations with those countries and the economic interests of certain 
Community businesses located in Africa 
In 1992 the Community produced 273 OOOt of canned tuna, a rise of 25% on 1988 (see Annex 
VI). 
In 1992 imports of canned tuna totalled 185 OOOt, up 77% on 1988, while exports were 
6 
marginal. The result is that the growth in apparent consumption of canned tuna7 on the 
Community market has been spectacular and sustained (317 OOOt in 1988, 452 OOOt in 1992, 
a rise of over 40% in four years). 
These figures are clear evidence of the: 
buoyancy of this market (tuna enjoys a positive image with consumers8 and is easy 
to use) provided the consumer judges the price to be within reach; 
- out-and-out competitiveness of sLe non-member countries (mainly the ASEAN 
countries) which, because their labour costs are much lower than those in the 
European Community, have entered into competition with Community industry 
notwithstanding the existing customs duties (see at Annex 7 the import arrangements). 
* * * 
To sum up, while the Commission does not have basic information œncerning the processing 
industry (specifically global turnover), that industry provides a significant number of jobs in 
the Community, mainly in regions heavily dependent on fishing and/or very remote, where 
alternative forms of employment are virtually non-existent. 
Moreover, it continues to make a major contribution to Community market supplies, 
especially in terms of quality and the special characteristics of the range of products offered 
to consumers. 
In order to maintain the competitiveness of the Community industry, given: 
its dependency on imports of the raw material; 
the competition in the finished product offered by some non-member countries; 
the fact that the cost of the raw material accounts for around two-thirds of the cost of 
manufacturing canned tuna, 
it seems advisable that it be allowed to obtain supplies of the raw material without the 
reintroduction of customs duties at consolidated CCT level. 
If not, the loss of competitiveness of the canning industry would threaten to undermine that 
of the fleet. 
* 
* * * 
Excluding variations in canned stocks. 
Apart perhaps from a small section of the population which is very sensitive to the 
"dolphin safe" aspect. 
Conclusions/options 
Over the past ten years Community tuna pohcy, featuring a high level of interdependency 
between production and processing since canning provides the main outlet for the 
Community's frozen tuna fleet, has, in spite of serious difficulties, helped achieve results (the 
development of the Community tuna fleet, now the world's largest, and the continuing 
creditable level of competitiveness of the processing industry, due to the absence of customs 
duties on supplies) which are satisfactory overall. 
This conplementary interaction between production and processing, in which the 
conpetitiveness of each of the two components is crucial to the survival of the sector, is one 
of the Community's strengths, making it less vulnerable than non-member countries which 
base their entire strategy on one component only. 
The question, however, is whether this pohcy, which seems to have proved its effectiveness 
in securing a balanced future for the sector, at a not inconsiderable cost compared with other 
parts of the Community fleet, is worthy of special consideration by the Community. 
Irrespective of which option is chosen, the Community cannot in any case give absolute 
assurances of survival to the sector, especially to the Community fleet, without taking into 
account market conditions. It cannot disregard prices on the international market which are 
largely determined by production costs in the most competitive countries. 
A choice will in any event have to be made between: 
(a) Option 1 
The reintroduction of customs duties on the raw material and the suspension 
of the compensatory payments. 
If it adopted this option, the Community would obviously make significant 
budgetary savings on the market organization for fishery products. On the 
other hand, the risk of seriously undermining the competitiveness of the sector, 
in particular processing, would be very real. 
As well as consideration of the economic relevance of a possible reintroduction 
of customs duties9, an assessment should be made too of its political 
implications, notably the likely reactions of Latin American supplier countries, 
some of which are considering fisheries agreements with the Community. 
See at Annex IX a simulation of the implications of the possible reintroduction of 
customs duties. 
(b) Option 2 
The continuation of the present arrangements, i.e. compensatory payments for 
producers to counterbalance the suspension of customs duties on imports of the 
raw material. 
In this situation a further choice would have to be made between: 
-raising the level of Community support, as recommended by the large 
majority of economic operators in the sector (see Annex X); 
leaving the present arrangements unchanged; 
changing the present arrangements fairly comprehensively, in the sense 
of simplifying them and reducing the level of support. 
Similarly it is necessary to consider whether the suspension of customs duties applicable to 
whole tuna destined for processing should be extended to tuna loins. 
This question has to be looked at again from two points of view. From an economic point of 
view it would seem at first sight that the Community processing industry (and hence jobs) 
should be the priority, meaning that duty-free status should not be extended to loins. The 
question of the continuing competitiveness of the industry in the medium term remains open 
however, given the cost of labour in the Cbmrnunity as compared with that in œmpeting non-
member countries. 
From a political point of view, the autonomous suspension of duties on loins would be 
beneficial mainly to the ASEAN countries and would reduce the scope of the concessions 
granted by the Community as part of the Generalized Systems of Preferences for drugs and 
for Central America 
The Commission requests the Council and Parliament to indicate their position on the 
different options. 
For its part the Commission will make proposals on this matter on the occasion of the next 
reform of the market organization The Commission considers it appropriate to keep the 
principles of the current arrangements on the basis of the proposal made in 1992 under the 
reform of the market organization (see Annex XI). 
list of Annexes 
1 : Catches by Member State 
2: Structural aid to the tuna fleet 
3: Fisheries agreements 
4: Compensatory allowances k 
5: Supply balance - raw materials 
6: Supply balance - canning 
7: Import arrangements 
8: International organizations 
9: Calculation (simulation) concerning the reintroduction of customs duties 
10: Position of the industry 
11 : Tuna market organization arrangements proposed by the Commission in 
1992 
10 
EXPLANATORY NOTES 
Annex 1: 
1. The expression "nominal catches" signifies the live weight equivalent of quantities 
landed (in tonnes). 
2. The information relating to nominal catches of fish in FAO Group 36 (thunnidae, 
bonito and rnarlin) is normally revised by the FAO in collaboration with the 
regional organizations responsible for thunnidae statistics (e.g. ICCAT, IATTC, 
etc). 
3. The world total given in Annex 1-5 and 6 only takes account of the four species 
considered (BET/SKJ/YFT/ALB), not overall catches of all thunnidae. 
Annex IV: 
1. Source (IV. 1 and IV.2): œmpensatory allowances paid to producer organizations 
for tuna supplied to the canning industry, a system introduced in 1988 (maximum 
allowances from the 4th quarter of 1988 to the 2nd quarter of 1993). Basic 
information provided by Member States under Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) 
No 1106/90. 
2. Actual expenditure per budget year (Annex V.3) was communicated by the 
EAGGF, Guarantee Section 
3. Payments are made about 18 months after the fishing year. 
4. The value for 1993 does not include payment of the compensatory allowance for 
the 2nd quarter of 1993. 
Annex V: 
1. The production of tuna for the canning industry and supplied by producer 
organizations* declared by Member States under Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) 
No 1106/90 includes tropical frozen fishery (France and Spain) and small-scale 
fishing for fresh tuna (in tonnes). 
2. With regard to the latter fishery in Portugal (the Azores and Madeira), the 
quantities for canning (75% of landings) mainly comprise skipjack (SKJ) and big­
eye (BET) tuna; in France and Spain (>50% of landings) they are albacore (ALB). 
3. The import figures refer to the Comext database (Eurostat) for the following codes: 
YFT > 10: - 0303 42 12, 0303 42 32 and 0303 42 52 
11 
YFT < 10: - 0303 42 18, 0303 42 38 and 0303 42 58 
ALB: - 0303 41 11, 0303 41 13 and 0303 41 19 
SKJ: - 0303 43 11, 0303 43 13 and 0303 43 19 
BET and others: - ex 0303 49 11, ex 0303 49 13 and ex 0303 49 19. 
(Base year 1992) 
4. The import figures only include products originating in non-EC countries excluding 
the SMSI (Seychelles, Madagascar, Senegal and Côte d'Ivoire). 
The figures on imports from those countries represent direct landings by part of the 
Community fleet in the countries (mainly by the Spanish fleet in the zone). 
These quantities are deemed to be of Cbrnrnunity origin and are therefore already 
included in the production figures communicated by Member States. 
5. The import figures for Italy and Spain (YFT) include corrections sent by the 
Member States. 
6. In the case of loins, the overall figures are those received from the Member States 
(Italy and France); the partial figures by species are obtained by the use of a 
distribution key based on the origin of the product and in proportion to the catches. 
Tlie loin weight : five (or whole) weight conversion was done using the following 
conversion factors: 
SKJ = 2.78 
YFT > 10 = 2.33 
YFT < 10 = 2.50 
Annex VI: 
1. The figures for production of canned tuna come from cornmunications by Member 
States (in tonnes). 
2. The source of the import/export figures is Comext (Eurostat). The figures have 
been reduced by the quantities of imported loins (cornmunicated by Member 
States) (Italy and France), since they are already included in the raw material 
tables. 
3. The import figures for canned tuna do not take account of an overall correction of 
21 4501 communicated by a Member State. 
Annex IX: 
1. The heading NON-EC covers the data for all non-Cornmunity countries. 
2. The heading "CENT. AM (EXCL. PAN.)..."(QII) covers imports subject to 
preferential customs duties under existing agreements. 
12 
Central America excluding Panama 
(Guatemala, Belize, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica) 
GSP Drugs 
(Ecuador, Colombia, Peru and Bolivia) 
FOD/OCT 
(French overseas departments and overseas territories) 
ACP countries 
Maghreb 
(Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia) 
Turkey 
3. The values under the GATT quota heading are obtained by the application of a 
distribution key (proportional to the annual quantities imported, by species) to the 
annual overall tariff quota (30 000 t in 1988, 17 250 t in 1989/1992). 
4. The heading "average price" gives average import prices for products originating in 
non-preferential non-EC countries. 
5. The value VI3 is the result of dividing the quantities subject to customs duties by 
the average import price (p. 4). 
13 
ANNEX I 
TUNA CATCHES BY COUNTRY 
NOMINAL CATCHES BY SPECIES, FISHING AREAS AND COUNTRIES 
SPECIES CTRY ZONE 1982 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
SKIPJACK ESP 27 NE ATLANTIC 
(SKJ) 34 EC ATLANTIC 
51 W. INDIAN 
TOTAL 0 
38,016 
14 
38,030 3 
49,449 
52,863 
102,315 0 
35,300 
77,632 
112,932 0 
47,834 
58,063 
105,897 0 
72,642 
39,168 
111,810 0 
51,083 
61,853 
112,936 
FRA 34 EC ATLANTIC 
51 W. INDIAN 
TOTAL 21,331 
771 
22,102 16,148 
45,169 
61,317 14,765 
43,082 
57,847 16,390 
30,126 
46,516 31,456 
46,903 
78,359 23,958 
36,911 
60,869 
PRT 
EC 
EC 
WORLD 27 NE ATLANTIC 
34 EC ATLANTIC 
TOTAL 
27 NE ATLANTIC 
34 EC ATLANTIC 
51 W. INDIAN 
TOTALl ALL ZONES 
TOTAL 
|%EC/WORLD ALL ZONES 
ALL ZONES 4,599 
931 
5,530 
4,599 
60,278 
785 
65,662 
775,248 
8.47% 13,786 
303 
14,089 
13,789 
65,900 
98,032 
177,721 
1,282,194 
13.86% 5,931 
1,751 
7,682 
5,931 
51,816 
120,714 
178,461 
1,222,169 
14.60% 2,252 
1,666 
3,918 
2,252 
65,890 
88,189 
156,331 
1,302,157 
12.01% 2,569 
5,475 
8,044 
2,569 
109,573 
86,071 
198,213 
1,661,064 
12.70% 2,609 
4,862 
7,471 
2,609 
79,903 
98,764 
181,276 
1,421,391 
12.75% 
SOURCE=FAO - DONNEES CAPTURES 
QUANTITES EN TONNES MET. 
ANNEX I 
TUNA CATCHES BY COUNTRY 
NOMINAL CATCHES BY SPECIES, FISHING AREAS AND COUNTRIES 
SPECIES 
ALBACORE 
(ALB) CTRY 
ESP ZONE 
27 
34 
37 
47 
51 
TOTAL NE ATLANTIC 
EC ATLANTIC 
MEDITERRANEAN 
SE ATLANTIC 
W. INDIAN 1982 
24,959 
519 
572 
106 
0 
26,156 1988 
27.267 
280 
3 
185 
0 
27,735 1989 
25,283 
141 
0 
0 
0 
26,424 1990 
25,654 
138 
84 
0 
138 
26,014 1991 
17,137 
482 
547 
0 
1,065 
19,231 1992 
17,872 
1,990 
227 
0 
1,865 
21,954 
y\ FRA 27 NE ATLANTIC 
34 EC ATLANTIC 
37 MEDITERRANEAN 
51 W.INDIAN 
TOTAL 2,855 
947 
0 
0 
3,802 2,805 
0 
31 
201 
3,037 4,050 
0 
31 
6 
4,087 3,300 
0 
121 
35 
3,466 4,123 
0 
140 
0 
4,263 6,458 
0 
11 
1,462 
7,931 
GRC 37 MEDITERRANEAN 
TOTAL 500 
500 500 
500 500 
500 500 
500 500 
500 
ITA 37 MEDITERRANEAN 
TOTAL 700 
700 3,529 
3,529 3,529 
3,529 1,191 
1,191 1,191 
1,191 1,464 
1,464 
PRT 
EC 
EC 27 NE ATLANTIC 
34 EC ATLANTIC 
TOTAL 
NE ATLANTIC 
EC ATLANTIC 
MEDITERRANEAN 
SE ATLANTIC 
W. INDIAN 
TOTAL! ALL ZONES 27 
34 
37 
47 
51 
| WORLD | TOTAL I 
[%EC/WORLD | ALL ZONES 
ALL ZONES 204 
117 
321 
28,018 
1,583 
1,272 
106 
0 
30,979 
204,372 
15.16% 155 
29 
184 
30,227 
309 
4,063 
185 
201 
34,985 
225,177 
15.54% 1X 
39 
169 
29,463 
180 
4,060 
0 
6 
33,709 
244,233 
13.80% 3,138 
47 
3,185 
32,092 
185 
1,896 
0 
173 
34,346 
230,490 
14.90% 10 
709 
21,959 
492 
2,378 
0 
1,066 
25.894 
167,647 
15.45% 1,225 
413 
1,638 
26,655 
2,403 
2,202 
0 
3,327 
33,487 
212,701 
15.74% 
SOURCE=FAO - DONNEES CAPTURES 
QUANTITES EN TONNES MET. 
ANNEX I 
TUNA CATCHES BY COUNTRY 
NOMINAL CATCHES BY SPECIES, FISHING AREAS AND COUNTRIES 
SPECIES 
YELLOWFIN TUNA 
(YFT) CTRY ZONE 
ESP 27 NE ATLANTIC 
34 EC ATLANTIC 
51 W. INDIAN 
TOTAL 
FRA 34 EC ATLANTIC 
51 W. INDIAN 
TOTAL 
PRT 27 NE ATLANTIC 
34 EC ATLANTIC 
TOTAL 
EC 
M. 27 NE ATLANTIC 
34 EC ATLANTIC 
51 W. INDIAN 
TOTALl ALL ZONES 
| WORLD | TOTAL | 
[%EC/WORLD | ALL ZONES 
ALL ZONES 1982 
0 
54,164 
55 
54,219 
31,684 
1,224 
32,908 
18 
963 
981 
18 
86,811 
1,279 
88,108 
590,298 
14.93% 1988 
0 
52,123 
43,159 
95,282 
21,259 
54,149 
75,408 
8 
93 
101 
8 
73,476 
97,308 
170,791 
911,664 
18.73% 1989 
11 
61,640 
33,852 
95,503 
30,355 
38,411 
68,766 
1 
3 
4 
12 
91,998 
72,263 
164,273 
964,372 
17.03% 1990 
20 
68,585 
45,369 
113,974 
43.820 
44,465 
88,285 
2 
42 
44 
22 
112,447 
89,834 
202,303 
1,058,105 
. 19.12% 1991 
20 
59,753 
45,152 
104,925 
34,228 
37,764 
71,992 
210 
82 
292 
230 
94,063 
82,916 
177,209 
992,682 
17.85% 1992 
20 
51,684 
42,103 
93,807 
34.312 
53,591 
87,903 
13 
47 
60 
33 
86,043 
96,694 
181,770 
1,091,754 
16.65% 
SOURCE=FAO - DONNEES CAPTURES 
QUANTITES EN TONNES MET. 
ANNEX I 
TUNA CATCHES BY COUNTRY 
NOMINAL CATCHES BY SPECIES, FISHING AREAS AND COUNTRIES 
SPECIES 
BIGEYE TUNA 
(BET) CTRY 
ESP 
FRA 
PRT 
V 
EC ZONE 
27 NE ATLANTIC 
34 EC ATLANTIC 
51 W. INDIAN 
TOTAL 
34 EC ATLANTIC 
51 W. INDIAN 
TOTAL 
27 NE ATLANTIC 
34 EC ATLANTIC 
TOTAL 
27 NE ATLANTIC 
34 EC ATLANTIC 
51 W. INDIAN 
| EC l TOTAL | ALL ZONES 
IWORLD I TOTALJ ALL ZONES 
|%EC/WORLD I ALL ZONES 1982 
387 
8,945 
0 
9,332 
4,910 
0 
4,910 
1,153 
708 
1,861 
1,540 
14,563 
0 
16,103 
221,578 
7.27% 1988 
0 
8,200 
2,846 
11,046 
3,764 
2,852 
6,616 
858 
1,395 
2,253 
858 
13,359 
5,698 
19,915 
231,771 
8.59% 1989 
0 
7,660 
3,537 
11,197 
2,909 
3,568 
6,477 
2,774 
2,189 
4,963 
2,774 
12,758 
7,105 
22,637 
237,543 
9.53% 1990 
481 
9,874 
1,436 
11,791 
4,881 
4,376 
9,257 
3,498 
2,456 
5,964 
3,979 
17,211 
6,812 
27,002 
272,171 
9.92% 1991 
481 
18,056 
7,616 
26,153 
6,473 
2,639 
9,112 
3,096 
2,482 
5,578 
3,677 
27,011 
10,255 
40,843 
248,430 
16.44% 1992 
481 
17,120 
2,925 
20,526 
8,201 
4,255 
12,456 
2,612 
2,892 
5,604 
3,093 
28,213 
7,180 
38,486 
249,531 
15.42% 
SOURCE=FAO - DONNEES CAPTURES 
QUANTITES EN TONNES MET. 
ANNEX I 
TUNA CATCHES BY COUNTRY 
NOMINAL CATCHES BY SPECIES, FISHING AREAS AND COUNTRIES 
SPECIES CTRY ZONE 1982 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
SKIPJACK 
ALBACORE 
YELLOWFIN TUNA 
BIGEYE TUNA ESP 
FRA 27 
34 
37 
47 
51 
TOTAL NE ATLANTIC 
EC ATLANTIC 
MEDITERRANEAN 
SE ATLANTIC 
W. INDIAN 
GRC 27 NE ATLANTIC 
34 EC ATLANTIC 
37 MEDITERRANEAN 
51 W. INDIAN 
TOTAL 
37 MEDITERRANEAN 
TOTAL 25,346 
101,644 
572 
106 
69 
127,737 
2,855 
58,872 
0 
1,995 
63,722 
0 
0 27,270 
110,052 
3 
185 
98,868 
236,378 
2,805 
41,171 
31 
102,371 
146,378 
500 
500 25,294 
104,741 
0 
0 
115,021 
245,056 
4,050 
48,029 
31 
85,067 
137,177 
500 
500 26,155 
126,431 
84 
0 
105,006 
257,676 
3,300 
65,091 
121 
79,002 
147,514 
500 
500 17,638 
150,933 
547 
0 
93,001 
262,119 
4,123 
72,157 
140 
87,306 
163,726 
500 
500 18,373 
121,877 
227 
0 
106,746 
249,223 
6,458 
66,471 
11 
96,219 
169,159 
500 
500 
ITA 
PRT 
EC 
EC 37 MEDITERRANEAN 
TOTAL 
27 NE ATLANTIC 
34 EC ATLANTIC 
TOTAL 
27 NE ATLANTIC 
34 EC ATLANTIC 
37 MEDITERRANEAN 
47 SE ATLANTIC 
51 W. INDIAN 
TOTAL! ALL ZONES 
[WORLD I TOTAL I ALL ZONES 
|%EC/WORLD I ALL ZONES 700 
700 
5,974 
2,719 
8,693 
34,176 
163,236 
1,272 
106 
2,064 
200,852 
1,791,496 
11.21% 3,529 
3,529 
14,807 
1,820 
16,627 
44,882 
163,043 
4,063 
185 
201,239 
403,412 
2,650,806 
15.22% 3,529 
3,629 
8,836 
3,982 
12,818 
38,180 
156,752 
4,060 
0 
200,088 
399,080 
2,668,317 
14.96% 1,191 
1,191 
8,890 
4,211 
13,101 
38,345 
195,733 
1,896 
0 
184,008 
419,982 
2,862,923 
14.67% 1,191 
1,191 
6,574 
8,049 
14,623 
28,335 
231,139 
2,378 
0 
180,307 
442,159 
2,969,823 
14.89% 1,464 
1,464 
6,459 
8,214 
14,673 
31,290 
196,562 
2,202 
0 
204,965 
435,019 
2,976,377 
14.62% 
SOURCE=FAO - DONNEES CAPTURES 
QUANTITES EN TONNES MET. 
ANNEX I 
TUNA CATCHES BY COUNTRY 
NOMINAL CATCHES BY SPECIES, FISHING AREAS AND COUNTRIES 
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EC AND WORLD CATCHES 
SKIPJACK (SKJ), ALBACORE (ALB), YELLOWFIN (YFT) AND BIGEYE TUNA (BET) 
20 
18 
16 
14 
12 
10 
8 
6 j 
4 
2 
0 
1982 
3,000,000 
2,500,000 
2,000,000 
1,500,000 
1,000,000 
500,000 
0 1,791,496 
r -
200,852 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
TRENDS IN EC AND WORLD CATCHES 
SKJ / YFT / BET/ALB 
2,969,823 
2,660,806 2,668,317 2,862,923 
403,412 -X-(YFT) 
(ALB) 
(SKJ) 
(BET) 
4 SPECIES 
2,975,377 
435,019 EC 
WORLD 
1982 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
SOURCE=FAO - DONNEES CAPTURES 
QUANTITES EN TONNES MET 
ANNEX II 
LIST OF PROJECTS FINANCED -1988-1992 - (TROPICAL TUNA FLEET) 
REGULA HON (EEC) Nu 4028/86 
f> YEAR M.S. MODERN. (MO) No. of 
CONSTRUCTION (CO) PROJECTS 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 ESP 
ESP 
ESP 
ESP 
ESP 
ESP MO 
CO 
MO 
MO 
MO 
MO 
88-92 ESP TOTAL 2 
2 
9 
7 
11 
36 AID 
MECU 
0.332 
4.671 
0.066 
1.207 
0.711 
0.231 
7.218 YEAR M.S. MODERN. (MO) No. of 
CONSTRUCTION (CO) PROJECTS 
88 
90 
92 FRA 
FRA 
FRA MO 
CO 
MO AID 
MECU 
0.459 
3.028 
0.025 
88-92 FRA TOTAL 10 3.512 
88-92 EC TOTAL 10.730 MECU 
SOlJRCK=F. STRl JCTl JRIS - Comm 27/1/94 
Annex III 
Hie Community has signed fourteen fisheries agreements, a number of which concern solely 
tuna fishing, with Afiican and Indian Ocean ACP countries so as to allow the Community 
tuna fleet to pursue tuna freely between the various fishery zones which it normally 
frequents10. 
The cost of tuna fishing under international agreements is established on the basis of the 
financial conponent of the agreements purely or essentially concerned with tuna, traditionally 
done on the basis of the reference tonnages of catches allowed for in the EEZs of the 
countries concerned11. 
For 1991/96 the cost is of the order of ECU 6 570 000 per annum for a total reference 
tonnage of 86 OOOt. 
The Community's tropical tuna fleet is currently made up of approximately 81 vessels (Spain 
has 47 and France 34); 60% of them are in the Atlantic and 40% in the Indian Ocean. Some 
vessels have licences to fish both sectors. 
As regards licences, the average rate of utilization of the tuna-fishing opportunities is 86%, 
with a variation from 52% to 100% 
Over the last three years for which information is available, the tonnage fished by the 
Community fleet in the EEZs of the ACP countries with which the Community has fisheries 
agreements is as follows (in tonnes): 
1990: 68 3401 
1991: 74 8401 
1992: 89 8501 
The final figures for 1993 are not yet available. 
The Commission does not possess accurate figures regarding the geographical distribution of 
landings. Until Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 came into force landings were not 
subject to controls. 
10 
H List of EC/ACP agreements: Mauritania, Cape Verde, Guinea, Mauritius, Comoros, 
Madagascar, Seychelles, Senegal, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Equatorial Guinea, Côte 
d'Ivoire, Sâo Tome, Angola 
The tuna conponent of mixed agreements (trawling and tuna fishing) is regarded as a 
free bonus of trawling when the financial compensation is worked out. In all the 
agreements fishing vessel owners are obliged for their part to pay the third country 
concerned ECU 20 per tonne actually caught in the waters of that country. 
c i\ 
In West Africa, major landings are made by the Community tuna fleet in the ports of Abidjan 
(Côte d'Ivoire) and Dakar (Senegal) to supply local canneries. The Protocol to the Senegal 
agreement stipulates that the Community fleet must land 16 000 tonnes of tuna per annum 
there. In the Indian Ocean, fish are landed at Victoria (the Seychelles) and Antsiranana 
(Madagascar), also to supply local canneries. 
It should be noted that both in West Africa and in the Indian Ocean the majority of catches 
is made in international waters and not in the EEZs of the countries with which the 
Community has fisheries agreements. 
v; 
ANNEX IV 
COMPENSATORY ALLOWANCE FOR TUNA 
SYSTEM INTRODUCED IN 1988 
MAXIMUM VALUES OF THE ALLOWANCE -1988 -1993 
VALUE 
IN ECU (V) 
(Tr. «QTR.) 
4Tr. 88 
1988 YFT>10 YFT<10 YFT SKJ 
35.412 1,021,923 1,057,335 
35,412 1,021,923 1,057,335 ALB BET TOTAL 
1.057,335 
1,057,335 
1Tr. 89 
2Tr. 89 
3Tr. 
4Tr. 
1989 89 
89 3 469,200 
3,794,560 
1 369.315 
0 335 280 
286,512 
420.751 
248 157 3,804,480 
4,081,072 
1.790.066 
248 157 947,939 
0 
1,036.494 
736.125 
8,633,075 1,290,700 9,923,775 2,720,555 4,752,419 
4,081,072 
2,826,560 
984,282 
12,644,333 
1Tr. 90 
2Tr. 90 
3Tr. 90 
4Tr. 90 
1990 0 
2,032,800 
2.397 198 
1 812,906 
6,242,904 0 
0 
164.280 
347.763 0 
2,032,800 
2561.478 
2.160,669 0 
295,488 
814 764 
929 660 
512,043 6,754,947 2,039,912 0 
0 
2 808 
6 090 
8,898 2,328,288 
3,379,050 
3,096,419 
8,803,757 
1 Tr. 91 
2 Tr. 91 
3Tr. 
4Tr. 
1991 3.171,840 
3 469 312 
2 112.256 
1,874,400 
10,827,808 360.294 
232,368 
341.239 
365 547 3,532,134 
3,701,680 
2 453 495 
2,239 947 800,240 
0 
1.132.720 
1 226,960 
1,299,448 11,927,256 3,159,920 0 
5.772 
7 548 
3,672 
16,992 4,332,374 
3,707,452 
3,593,763 
3,470.579 
15,104,168 
1Tr. 
2Tr. 92 
92 
3 Tr. 92 
4 Tr. 92 
1992 2,917.047 
3,088,764 
2.030 378 
1905,904 
9,942,093 350,784 
0 
298 080 
289 632 3,267.831 
3.088 764 
2 328 458 
2.195,536 
938,496 10,880,589 788 174 
960,298 
992 044 
945,572 
3,666,088 4,056,005 
4.049.062 
3,320,502 
3.141,108 
14,566,677 
1 Tr. 93 
2Tr. 93 
1993 2,924040 
3,198,272 
6,122,312 0 
207.552 2,924,040 
3 405,824 
207,552 6,329,864 618,894 
791,977 
1,410,871 0 
5,280 
5,280 29,014 
190,549 
219,563 3,571,948 
4,393,630 
7,965,578 
QTR. 
M. AN. 89-92 2,447,271 
8,861,470 351,344 
1.010,172 2,588.544 
9,871,642 867,823 
2,901,620 
I TOTAL 1 
4 QTR. 88 / 2QTR.93 | 41,603.604 5.270.162 46,873,766 13,017,349 5,195 109,782 3,479,857 
6,473 0 12,779,734 
31,170 219.563 60,141,848 
TOTAL INITIAL COM BUDGET 
MECU 89 
37.3 90 
32.0 911 
29.0 "Mi 
29.0 
I *> 
ANNEX IV 
COMPENSATORY ALLOWANCE FOR TUNA 
SYSTEM INTRODUCED IN 1988 
MAXIMUM VALUES OF THE ALLOWANCE -1988 • 1993 
BY SPECIES AND YEAR 
16,000,000 ; 
14,000,000 t 
12.000.000 -
S 10,000,000 -
jjj 8.000,000 • 
3 6,000,000 
> 4,000,000 J 
2,000.000 
0 TOTAL TUNA 
s s 12,000,000 
10,000,000 
g 8,000.000 
111 
J 6,000,000 
D 
i $ 4,000,000 t / 
/A 
2,000,000 L-*. 
0À 
© v W f> 0) 0) CP> 0) 0) 0> 0> O) YFT>10 
YFT<10 
YFT 
220,000 
O 165.000 
5 110.000 
3 
< 55.000 
> ALB 
BET 
«B « e T- CM e> 
SOD w o> A n 05 O) O) O O) 4,000,000 : 
3 3.500,000 I 
O 3,000,000 ] 
2 2,500,000 j 
- 2.000,000 ' 
3 1,500,000 ] 
< 1,000.000 | / 
> 500,000 I 
oi— SKJ 
r- CN «O 
DISTRIBUTION BY SPECIES • TOTAL 
ALB / BET (<1%) 
SKJ (22%) 
YFT < 10 ( 9%) 
YFT > 10 (69%) 
4 QTR. 88 / 2 QTR.93 
n 
ANNEX IV 
COMPENSATORY ALLOWANCE FOR TUNA 
SYSTEM INTRODUCED IN 1988 
ACTUAL EXPENDITURE PER BUDGET YEAR 
VALUE IN MECU 
1989 8,736 
1990 
1991 
1992 
1993 
TOTAL 10,060 
12,182 
16,159 
11,460 
58.597 
18,000 T 
16,000 j 
14,000 -
t 
12,000 | 
10,000 -
8.000 j~ 
6.000 { 
4,000 t 
2,000 j 
o i— 
1989 VALUE IN MECU 
1990 1991 1992 1993 
NB:Paynwnt occurs about 1% year after the fishing year. 
SOURCE: EAGGF - Guarantee. 
ÎS" 
ANNEX V'-l 
COMMUNITY SUPPLY TRENDS 
RAW MATERIAL 
FOR EC INDUSTRY 
YELLOWFIN TUNA - THUNNUS ALBACARES - ( YFT ) - > 10 Kg 
PRODUCTION 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
0 
0 
0 
58,577 
39,783 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 0 
0 
0 
69,907 
31,139 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 0 
0 
0 
73,969 
36,150 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 0 
0 
0 
74,473 
40,105 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
TOTAL EC 98,360 101,046 110,119 114,578 97,149 
IMPORTS 
- WHOLE -
from EXTRA-SF4 
(excl.Canary is.) 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 
TOTAL EC 0 
0 
0 
© 7,200 
19,182 
0 
0 
0 
© 43,693 
0 
3,753 
73,828 
IMPORTS 
'- LOINS -
from EXTRA-SF4 
(•xcl.Canary Is.) 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
fTA 
NLD 
PRT -1988 1989 1990 1991 
0 
0 
24 
© 9,502 
12,162 
0 
0 
0 
© 48,900 
0 
2,557 
73,145 © 0 
3 
98 
19,221 
15,157 
0 
20 
0 
41,172 
0 
1,561 
77,232 0 
25 
26 
© 16,783 
6,847 
0 
140 
0 
© 28,382 
0 
1,595 
53,798 
1989 1990 1991 
0 
0 
0 
© 2,029 
0 
0 
0 
0 
© 5,001 
0 
0 1992 
0 
11 
49 
© 26,101 
8,887 
18 
144 
0 
© 49,110 
0 
497 
84,817 
1992 
0 
0 
0 
© 5,285 
0 
0 
0 
0 
§> 14,747 
0 
0 
j TOTAL (weight of loirl 
j TOTAL ( converted inlo 
I whole fish weight) | 
APPARENT 
EC 
SUPPLY 0 
0 
172,188 0 
0 
174,191 187,351 © 7,030 
16,380 
184,756 © 20,032 
46,674 
228,640 
Source Données: Production - Communications Biff's Indemnité Compensatoire ; Importation - En restât - Comext; Loeges 
NOTE ©: Données corrigées par les EM's 
NOTE 1 : Facteur de conversion poids longes » poids entier: 
SKJ=2.78, YFT>10=2.33, YFT<10=2.50 
NOTE 2: ex-0303 49 11/13/19.BET/BFT et autres 
IC 
ANNEX V -1 
COMMUNITY SUPPLY TRENDS 
RAW MATERIAL 
FOR EC INDUSTRY 
YELLOWFIN TUNA - THUNNUS ALBACARES - ( YFT) - < 10 Kg 
PRODUCTION 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
0 
0 
0 
14,804 
1,632 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 0 
0 
0 
14,391 
955 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 0 
0 
0 
11,300 
698 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 0 
0 
0 
15,984 
468 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 0 
0 
0 
16,622 
349 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
TOTAL EC 16,436 15,346 
IMPORTS 
- WHOLE-
from EXTRA-SF4 
(excl.Canary Is.) 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 11,998 16,452 16,971 
1988 
TOTAL EC 0 
0 
0 
© 7,891 
5,183 
0 
0 
0 
5 
0 
11 
13,090 
IMPORTS 
'- LOINS -
from EXTRA-SF4 
(excl.Canary Is.) 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 1989 1990 1991 
0 
0 
0 
© 13,106 
404 
0 
0 
0 
198 
0 
827 
14,535 © 0 
0 
0 
13,770 
617 
16 
0 
0 
18,619 
0 
1,138 
34,160 0 
1 
0 
11,026 
634 
6 
0 
0 
11,272 
0 
791 
23,730 
1989 1990 1991 1992 
0 
0 
0 
> 5,913 
854 
0 
0 
0 
9,755 
0 
479 
17,001 
1992 
| TOTAL (weight of loiri 
| TOTAL ( converted into 
• whole fish weight) | 
APPARENT 
EC 
SUPPLY 29,526 29,881 46,158 40,182 0 
0 
33,972 
Source Données: Production • Communications EM'S rndemnrti Compensatoire ; Importation - Eurostat - Comext Loeees 
NOTE ©: Données corrigées par les EM's. 
NOTE 1 : Facteur de conversion poids longes » poids entier: 
SKJ=2 78, YFT>10=2.33, YFT<10=2.50 
NOTE 2: ex-0303 49 11/13/19.BET/BFT et autres n-
ANNEX V -1 
COMMUNITY SUPPLY TRENDS 
RAW MATERIAL 
FOR EC INDUSTRY 
YELLOWFIN TUNA - THUNNUS ALBACARES -(YFT) 
PRODUCTION 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
«L 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
0 
0 
0 
73,381 
41.415 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 0 
0 
0 
84,298 
32,094 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 0 
0 
0 
85,269 
36,848 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 0 
0 
0 
90,457 
40,573 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 0 
0 
0 
87,540 
26.580 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
TOTAL EC 114,796 116,392 122,117 131,030. 114,120 
IMPORTS 
- WHOLE-
from EXTRA-SF4 
(excl.Canary Is.) 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
OBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 
TOTAL EC 0 
0 
0 
© 15,091 
24,365 
0 
0 
0 
© 43,698 
0 
3,764 
86,918 
IMPORTS 
'- LOINS -
from EXTRA-SF4 
(exeLCanary Is.) 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 1989 1990 1991 
0 
0 
24 
© 22,608 
12.566 
0 
0 
0 
© 49,098 
0 
3,384 
87,680 0 
3 
98 
© 32,991 
15,774 
16 
20 
0 
© 59,791 
0 
2,699 
111,392 0 
26 
26 
© 27.809 
7,481 
6 
140 
0 
© 39,654 
0 
2,386 
77,528 
1989 1990 1991 
0 
0 
0 
©2,029 
0 
0 
0 
0 
© 5,001 
0 
0 1992 
0 
11 
49 
© 32,014 
9,741 
18 
144 
0 
© 58,865 
0 
976 
101,818 
1992 
0 
0 
0 
© 5.285 
0 
0 
0 
0 
© 14.747 
0 
0 
TOTAL (weight of loirl 
j TOTAL ( converted into 
| whole fish weight) | 
APPARENT 
EC 
SUPPLY 0 
0 
201,714 0 
0 
204,072 0 © 7,030 © 20,032 
0 16,380 46,674 
233,509 224,938 262,612 
Source Données: Production - Communications ENTs Indemnili Compensatoire ; Importation • Eurostat - Comext; Longes 
NOTE ©: Données corrigées par les EM's. 
NOTE 1 : Facteur de conversion poids longes » poids entier: 
SKJ=2.78, YFT>10=2.33, YFT<10=2.50 
NOTE 2: ex-0303 49 11/13/19,BET/BFT et autres u 
ANNEX V -1 
COMMUNITY SUPPLY TRENDS 
RAW MATERIAL 
FOR EC INDUSTRY 
SKIPJACK TUNA - KATSUWONUS PELAMIS - (SKJ) 
PRODUCTION [ 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 
TOTAL EC | 
IMPORTS 
- WHOLE -
from EXTRA-SF4 
(excl.Canary Is.) \_ 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 1989 1990 1991 
0 
0 
0 
48,721 
7,386 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
13,179 
69,286 
1988 
TOTAL EC J 0 
0 
0 
9,601 
4,111 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
© 2,959 
16,671 
IMPORTS 
'- LOINS -
from EXTRA-SF4 
(excl.Canary Is.) 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 0 
0 
0 
46,207 
3,296 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
6,804 
56,307 0 
0 
0 
37,976 
3,702 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
3,542 
45,220 0 
0 
0 
43,228 
1,818 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
7,276 
52,322 
1989 1990 1991 
0 
0 
0 
13,784 
1,170 
18 
17 
0 
1,150 
0 
1,649 
17,788 0 
0 
0 
© 19,443 
3,367 
0 
39 
0 
110 
0 
4,305 
27,264 0 
0 
0 
© 12,789 
244 
0 
0 
0 
23 
0 
6,878 
19,934 
1989 1990 1991 
0 
0 
0 
© 606 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 1992 
Ô" 
0 
0 
48.889 
1,144 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
6,316 
56,349 
1992 
0 
0 
14 
11,583 
34 
0 
19 
0 
0 
0 
6,797 
18,447 
1992 
0 
0 
0 
© 2,374 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
TOTAL (weight of loirj 
| TOTAL ( converted inlo 
; whole fish weight) | 
APPARENT 
EC 
SUPPLY 0 
0 
85,957 0 
0 
74,095 0 
0 
72,484 © 606 
1,685 
73,941 © 2,374 
6,601 
81,397 
Source Données: Production - Communications ENTs rntfemnrti Compensatoire ; Importation • Eurostat - Comext; Longes 
NOTE ©: Données corrigées par les EM's. 
NOTE 1 : Facteur de conversion poids longes » poids entier: 
SKJ=2.78, YFT>10=2.33, YFT<10=2.50 
NOTE 2: ex-0303 49 11/13/19,BET/BFT et autres n 
ANNEX V-l 
COMMUNITY SUPPLY TRENDS 
RAW MATERIAL 
FOR EC INDUSTRY 
ALBACORE - THUNNUS OBESUS - (BET) 
PRODUCTION 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
0 
0 
0 
6,464 
466 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
823 0 
0 
0 
2,041 
96 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
3,247 0 
0 
0 
658 
120 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
3,942 0 
0 
0 
2,391 
64 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
3,555 0 
0 
0 
1,725 
207 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
2,867 
TOTAL EC 7,753 5,384 4,720 6,010 4,799 
IMPORTS 
-WHOLE -
from EXTRA-SF4 
(excl.Canary Is.) 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
OBR 
ORC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 
0 
4 
0 
1,103 
67 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
380 © 1989 1990 1991 
0 
2 
0 
1,217 
179 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
526 © 0 
0 
0 
1,109 
174 
0 
0 
0 
© 0 
0 
3,317 0 
0 
0 
2,150 
24 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 © 1992 
0 
0 
0 
© 359 
164 
0 
0 
0 
© 0 
0 
174 
TOTAL EC 1,554 1,924 4,600 2,174 697 
IMPORTS 
'- LOINS -
from EXTRA-SF4 
(excl.Canary Is.) [_ 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
OBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 u 
TOTAL (weight of loirj 
TOTAL ( converted inlo 
whole fish weight) | 
APPARENT 
EC 
SUPPLY 0 
0 
9,307 7,308 0 
0 
9,320 8,184 0 
0 
5,496 
Source Données: Production - Communications EM'S Indemnili Compensatoire ; Importation - Eurostat - Comext; Longes 
NOTE ©: Données corrigées par les EM's. 
NOTE 1 : Facteur de conversion poids longes » poids entier: 
SKJ=2.78, YFT>10=2.33, YFT<10=2.50 
NOTE 2: ex-0303 49 11/13/19.BET/BFT et autres 
So 
ANNEX V -1 
COMMUNITY SUPPLY TRENDS 
RAW MATERIAL 
FOR EC INDUSTRY 
ALBACORE - THUNNUS ALALUNGA - (ALB) 
PRODUCTION 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
0 
0 
0 
324 
111 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
15 0 
0 
0 
62 
10 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
46 0 
0 
0 
183 
5 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
4,397 0 
0 
0 
835 
109 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
3 0 
0 
0 
1,247 
252 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1,121 
TOTAL EC 450 118 4,585 947 2,620 
IMPORTS 
- WHOLE -
from EXTRA-SF4 
(excl.Canary Is.) 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 
0 
0 
0 
© 402 
1,462 
0 
0 
0 
62 
0 
0 1989 1990 1991 
0 
0 
0 
© 4,160 
1,619 
0 
0 
0 
92 
0 
0 0 
0 
0 
7,441 
1,936 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 0 
0 
0 
5,211 
1,337 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 1992 
0 
1 
0 
7,247 
805 
0 
0 
0 
0 
62 
0 
TOTAL EC 1,926 5,871 9,377 6,548 8,115 
IMPORTS 
'- LOINS -
from EXTRA-SF4 
(excl.Canary Is.) \_ 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
TOTAL (weight of k>ir| 
TOTAL ( converted info 
! whole fish weight) | 
APPARENT 
Î EC 
SUPPLY 0 
0 
2,376 0 
0 
5,989 0 
0 
13,962 0 
0 
7,495 0 
0 
10,735 
Source Données: Production • Communications EM'S indemnité Compensatoire ; importation - Eurostat - Comext; Longes 
NOTE ©: Données corrigées par les EM's. 
NOTE 1 : Facteur de conversion poids longes » poids entier: 
SKJ=2.78, YFT>10=2.33, YFT<10=2.50 
NOTE 2: ex-0303 49 11/13/19.BET/BFT et autres 
li 
ANNEX V -1 
COMMUNITY SUPPLY TRENDS 
RAW MATERIAL 
FOR EC INDUSTRY 
TOTAL TUNA 
PRODUCTION 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
TOTAL EC 
IMPORTS 
- WHOLE -
from EXTRA-SF4 
(excl.Canary rs.) 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 0 
0 
0 
128,890 
49,378 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
14,017 
192,285 
1988 
TOTAL EC 0 
4 
0 
© 26,197 
30,005 
0 
0 
0 
© 43,760 
0 
© 7,103 
107,069 
IMPORTS 
•- LOINS -
from EXTRA-SF4 
(excl-Canary Is.) 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
GBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD -
PRT 1988 
I TOTAL (weight of loirj 
j TOTAL ( converted info 
[ whole fish weight) 
APPARENT 
EC 
SUPPLY 0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
299,354 0 
0 
0 
132,608 
35,496 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
10,097 
178,201 0 
0 
0 
124.086 
40,675 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
11,881 
176,642 0 
0 
0 
136,911 
42,564 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
10,834 
190,309 
1989 1990 1991 
0 
2 
24 
© 41,769 
15,534 
18 
17 
0 
© 50,340 
0 
5,559 
113,263 0 
3 
98 
© 60,984 
21,251 
16 
59 
0 
© 59,901 
0 
10,321 
152,633 0 
26 
26 
© 47,959 
9,086 
6 
140 
0 
© 39,677 
0 
9,264 
106,184 
1989 1990 1991 
291,464 0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
329,275 0 
0 
0 
© 2,635 
0 
0 
0 
0 
© 5,001 
0 
0 
© 7,636 
18,065 
314,558 0 
0 
0 
139,401 
28.183 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
10,304 
177,888 
1992 
0 
12 
63 
© 51,203 
10,744 
18 
163 
0 
© 58,865 
62 
7,947 
129,077 
1992 
0 
0 
0 
© 7,659 
0 
0 
0 
0 
© 14,747 
0 
0 
© 22,406 
53,274 
360,239 
Source Données: Production • Communications ENTs mdemnitt Compensatoire ; Importation - Eurostat - Comext; Longes 
NOTE ©: Données corrigées par les EM's. 
NOTE 1 : Facteur de conversion poids longes » poids entier: 
SKJ=2.78, YFT>10=2.33, YFT<10=2.50 
NOTE 2: ex-0303 49 11/13/19.BET/BFT et autres M 
ANNEX V - 2 
RAW MATERIAL FOR THE INDUSTRY 
PRODUCTION AND IMPORT TRENDS 
j PRODUCTION | 
YELLOWFIN - THUNNUS ALBACARES - (YFT) • > 10 Kg 
YELLOWFIN- THUNNUS ALBACARES • ( YFT) - < 10 Kg 
TOTAL YELLOWFIN - THUNNUS ALBACARE8 • ( YFT) 
SKIPJACK - KATSUWONUS PELAMIS -(SKJ) 
BKJEYE - THUNNUS OBESUS • (BET) 
ALBACORE-THUNNUS ALALUNOA -(ALB) 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
98,360 101,046 110,119 114,578 97,149 
16,436 15,346 11,998 16,452 16,971 
114,796 116,392 122,117 131,030 114,120 
69,286 56,307 45,220 52,322 56,349 
7,753 5,384 4,720 6,010 4,799 
450 118 4,585 947 2,620 
TOTAL 192,285 178,201 176,642 190,309 177,888 
I IMPORTS (WHOLE + LOINS) «' 
YELLOWFIN - THUNNUS ALBACARES - (YFT) - > 10 Kg 
YELLOWFIN- THUNNUS ALBACARES • ( YFT) - < 10 Kg 
TOTAL YELLOWFIN - THUNNUS ALBACARES - ( YFT) 
SKIPJACK • KATSUWONUS PELANHS - (SKJ) 
BIOEYE - THUNNUS OBESUS • (BET) " « 
ALBACORE-THUNNUS ALALUNOA -(ALB) 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
73,828 73,145 77,232 70,178 131,491 
13,090 14,535 34,160 23,730 17,001 
86,918 87,680 111,392 93,908 148,492 
16,671 17,788 27,264 21,619 25,048 
1,554 1,924 4,600 2,174 697 
1,926 5,871 9,377 6,548 8,115 
TOTAL 107,069 113,263 152,633 124,249 182,351 
APPARENT EC SUPPLY 
YELLOWFIN - THUNNUS ALBACARES - (YFT) - > 10 Kg 
YELLOWFIN- THUNNUS ALBACARES - ( YFT) - < 10 Kg 
TOTAL YELLOWFIN • THUNNUS ALBACARES • ( YFT) 
-(SKJ) 
-(ALB) SKIPJACK • KATSUWONU8 PELAMIS 
BIOEYE - THUNNUS OBESUS - (BET) 
ALBACORE - THUNNUS ALALUNOA j | 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
172,188 174,191 187,351 184,756 228,640 
29,526 29,881 46,158 40,182 33,972 
201,714 204,072 233,509 224,938 262,612 
85,957 74,095 72,484 73,941 81,397 
9,307 7,308 9,320 8,184 5,496 
2,376 5,989 13,962 7,495 10,735 
TOTAL 299,354 291,464 329,275 314,558 360,239 
Source Données: Production - Communications EM's Indemnité Compensatoire ; Importation - Eurostat - Comext Longes • ENTs. 
u NOTE 1 :Donnees import. YFT/BET corrigées par les EM's. 
NOTE 2: ex - 0303 49 11 / 13 / 19, BET / BFT et autres. 
ANNEX V - 2 
RAW MATERIAL FOR THE INDUSTRY 
PRODUCTION AND IMPORT TRENDS 
YELLOWFIN - THUNNUS ALBACARES - (YFT) - > 10 Kg 
m IMPORTS 
• PRODUCTION 
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
YELLOWFIN- THUNNUS ALBACARES - ( YFT) - < 10 Kg 
m IMPORTS 
• PRODUCTION 
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
TOTAL YELLOWFIN - THUNNUS ALBACARES - ( YFT) 
g 160,000 f o S IMPORTS 
D PRODUCTION 
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
Source Données: Production - Communications EM's Indemnité Compensatoire ; Importation - Eurostat - Comext; Longes - EM's. 
NOTE 1 :Donnees import. YFT/BET corrigées par les EM's. 
NOTE 2: ex - 0303 49 11 /13 /19, BET / BFT et autres. 
ANNEX V - 2 
RAW MATERIAL FOR THE INDUSTRY 
PRODUCTION AND IMPORT TRENDS 
SKIPJACK - KATSUWONUS PELAMIS -(SKJ) 
B IMPORTS 
• PRODUCTION 
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
BIGEYE - THUNNUS OBESUS (BET) *» *2 
S IMPORTS 
• PRODUCTION 
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
ALBACORE-THUNNUS ALALUNGA - (ALB) 
B IMPORTS 
• PRODUCTION 
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
Source Données: Production • Communications EM's Indemnité Compensatoire ; Importation • Eurostat - Comext Longes - EM's. 
^ NOTE 1 rDonnees import. YFT/BET corrigées par les EM's. 
NOTE 2: ex-030349 11 /13/19, BET/ BFTet autres. 
ANNEX V - 2 
RAW MATERIAL FOR THE INDUSTRY 
PRODUCTION AND IMPORT TRENDS 
TOTAL TUNA 
(YFT) (SKJ) (BET)*2 (ALB) 
400,000 
350,000 
300,000 
w 260,000 r 
« ' 
§ 200,000 
o 
*~ 150,000 
100,000 
50,000 
0 B IMPORTS 
D PRODUCTION 
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
SUPPLY 
PRODUCTION / IMPORTS 
100% — 
90% 
80% \ 
70% : 
60% *s="-
50% 
40% 
30% -
20% 
10% 
0% < IMPORTS 
-e62.80°^ 
PRODUCTION 
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
1988 1989 
36% 
64% ! Li PRO. 
I 
i • IMP. 39% 
61% 
1990 
i n 46% PRO. 
54% 
IMP. 1991 
39% 
61% PRO. 
IMP. 
1992 
51% "; 49% PRO. 
IMP. 
Source Données: Production - Communications EM's Indemnité Compensatoire ; Importation • Eurostat - Comext; Longes - EMs. 
NOTE 1 :Dpnnees import. YFT/BET corrigées par les EM's. 
NOTE 2: ex - 0303 49 11 /13 /19, BET / BFT et autres. 
s7C 
ANNEX VI 
COMMUNITY SUPPLY TRENDS 
TINNED TUNA 
PRODUCTION 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
OBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 
EEC TOTAL 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
2 
0 
48 
82,687 
46,871 
0 
89 
0 
80,000 
0' 
8,175 
217,872 2 
0 
48 
93,575 
54,308 
0 
136 
0 
85,000 
0 
10,005 
243,074 2 
0 
48 
102,437 
52,507 
0 
174 
0 
86,100 
0 
12,774 
254,042 2 
0 
48 
117,365 
55,622 
50 
309 
0 
87,000 
0 
16,393 
276,789 N/D 
0 
N/D 
109,126 
53,285 
N/D 
N/D 
N/D 
93,100 
0 
17.333 
272,844 
IMPORTS 
from EXTRA-CE 
(excl. Canary Is.) 
BEULUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
OBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 
EEC TOTAL 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
1,591 
3,226 
612 
117 
54,019 
41,622 
651 
279 
711 
1,732 
11 
104,571 1,450 
2,668 
319 
187 
55,579 
57,322 
460 
629 
1,045 
1,344 
0 
121,003 4,923 
3.135 
610 
259 
59,212 
47,475 
528 
543 
1,984 
1,637 
34 
120,340 4,588 
5,515 
453 
879 
66,251 
65,379 
780 
576 
2,198 
2,957 
1,414 
150,990 7,799 
22,092 
2,791 
1,381 
61.021 
67,501 
1.231 
781 
3.715 
15.340 
1,587 
185,239 
EXPORTS 
to EXTRA-CE 
(excL Canary/DDR) 
BEL/LUX 
DEU 
DNK 
ESP 
FRA 
OBR 
GRC 
IRL 
ITA 
NLD 
PRT 
EEC TOTAL 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 
19 
17 
56 
2,971 
1,384 
282 
15 
0 
469 
8 
291 
5,512 46 
18 
3 
3,903 
1.364 
58 
37 
0 
2,721 
9 
854 
9,013 187 
18 
17 
2,050 
1,312 
72 
12 
0 
839 
7 
742 
5,256 45 
1,128 
10 
2,840 
1.665 
165 
13 
0 
900 
19 
516 
7,301 73 
94 
44 
2.564 
1,480 
161 
45 
15 
1,146 
25 
469 
6,116 
APPARENT 
EC 
CONSUMPTION 316,931 355,064 369,126 420,478 451,967 
•u * Longes non inclus 
ANNEXVII 
1. The current Community import arrangements for tuna are as follows: 
customs duties (20% for yellowfin, 22% for skipjack) have been suspended on 
imports of whole tuna for use as a raw material for the processing industry in 
accordance with Council Regulation (EEC) No 3759/92 of 17 December 1992 
on the common organization of the market in fishery and aquaculture products. 
The disadvantages of these arrangements for Community producers are offset 
by the system of compensatory allowances. 
tuna loins are generally classed within tariff heading 16.04, for which the 
customs duty is 24%. They do not benefit from the suspension of duties on 
import into the Community. They do, however, benefit from general tariff 
measures applied under agreements such as the Lomé Convention or the 
Generalized System of Preferences. 
canned tuna is classed under tariff heading 16.04. It is subject to the same 
customs duties and tariff rules as tuna loins. Since 1 January 1993, for a 
transitional period of four years, canned tuna originating in countries which 
have not concluded a preferential agreement with the Community has been 
subject to a system of quotas. These arrangements replace and are intended to 
eliminate the previous national arrangements. 
2. Tuna for use as a raw material and canned tuna are not covered by the same rules. 
The suspension of duties on tuna intended for use as a raw material is an autonomous 
measure and the Community therefore has the legal right to reimpose duties within the 
limits of binding under GATT. The Council decided at the end of 1992, however, to 
maintain the suspension of customs duties. The duties apphcable to canned tuna are 
bound under GATT, the system of quotas being a transitional measure which cannot 
be converted into a definitive measure to restrict imports without contravening the 
Community's international commitments. The system of quotas is of limited scope, the 
annual quantities increasing progressively by around 10% per year and it will be 
abolished on 1 January 1997. 
U 
ANNEX VIII 
The importance of its tuna-fishing industry (14% of the world tuna catch) and the exclusive 
competence it enjoys in the fisheries sector require that the Cornmunity be present in the 
various international bodies responsible for tuna fishing. 
The Cornmunity is therefore actively involved in the scientific work of the following 
international organizations and participates as an observer in the drafting of reœmmendations 
intended to ensure the rational exploitation of tuna resources outside the EEZs: 
the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), 
for which the Cbrnmunity has negotiated entry and is awaiting final ratification 
to become a full member, 
the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (LATTC), covering the Pacific, 
whose recent work has had a direct impact on the tuna/dolphin problem 
For several years the Community has also been making a financial contribution to the work 
of the Indo-Pacific Tuna Development and Management Programme (IPTP), set up by the 
United Nations pending the establishment of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC), 
created by the FAO in November 1993, of which the Community will be a full member. 
To date, the international organizations concerned with tuna fishing have not detected any 
special problems with regard to the conservation of the various species of tropical tuna fished 
by the Community fleet. 
^ 
ANNEX IX 
SIMULATION OF CUSTOMS DUTIES 
IMPORTS FOR THE INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION OF PRODUCTS 
COMING UNDER CN CODE 1604 
SPECIES: 
PRESENTATION: 
NC: 
REP: YELLOWFIN TUNA 
(WHOLE) 
(>10 kg) 
•3«3 4212 
YFMOE (OUTTJ 
•Mother) 
MO kg) 
0303 42 32 
0303 42 52 
YTT>10A (WHOLE) 
(<10 kfl) 
•303 4211 
YFT<10E (OUTTJ 
uriottwr) 
(<10 ka) 
•30342 31 
0303 42 50 
YFT<10A ALBACORE 
•3*34111 
0303 4113 
•303 411* 
ALB BIOEYE 
and othtr 
•«-•303 4* 11 
•x-43*34*13 
«-03034*1* 
•FT SKIPJACK 
•3*3 4311 
0303 431* 
•304 4313 
•KJ 
QUANT^Ton—» 
EXTRA-CE 
A. CENT. (SF PAN) 
8PODROOUE 
DONVTOMACPlHVT 
<QH) 
EXTRA-CE SF 
A. CENT. (8P PAN) 
8P0 OROOUE 
DOMn-OMACPMVT 
<Q1») 1988 
isn 
1SM 
1$»1 
1892 
1988 
198» 
ISM 
1W1 
1992 
isn 
1989 
1990 
1991 
1992 73,067 
83,573 
107,621 
76,970 
105,660 
30.797 
31,749 
48,413 
44,621 
38,535 
42,270 
51,824 
59,208 
32,349 
67.125 4,470 
2,293 
650 
309 
1,195 
1.335 
348 
0 
0 
0 
3,135 
1,945 
650 
309 
1,195 30,599 
37,520 
56,641 
32,718 
18,550 
17,712 
23,572 
19,988 
13,936 
4,808 
12,887 
13,948 
36,653 
18,782 
13,742 12 
0 
292 
320 
787 
12 
0 
0 
65 
110 
0 
0 
292 
255 
677 2,344 
6,002 
12,808 
6,634 
8,096 
405 
201 
3,079 
269 
287 
1,939 
5,801 
9.729 
6,365 
7,809 35,012 
26,287 
31,690 
23,787 
6,768 
19,739 
14,663 
10,688 
16494 
2,071 
15,273 
11,624 
21,002 
7,293 
4,697 61,747 
52,273 
51,440 
20,828 
20,348 
46 722 
36,123 
24,513 
6352 
3,167 
15,025 
16,150 
26,927 
14.476 
17,181 TOTAL 
TUNA 
TOR 
MDU3TRY 
207,251 
207,948 
261,142 
161,566 
161,404 
116 722 
106,656 
106,681 
81,737 
48,978 
90,529 
101,292 
154.461 
79 829 
112,426 
lOATT QUOTA 
(Kl) 
(R7) 
IQT.EXTRA-CONT. 
(OU) 
-QM-R1 (pa 
-Qlt-IU (Ha 1989 
89-92 
19SS 
1989 
1990 
1991 
1992' 14100 
8,108 
28,170 
43,717 
51,101 
24,242 
59,018 900 
173 
2,235 
1,773 
478 
137 
1,023 4.200 
3,105 
8,687 
10,843 
33,548 
15,677 
10,637 0 
0 
0 
0 
292 
255 
677 600 
1,208 
1,339 
4,594 
8,522 
5,158 
6,602 5,100 
1,725 
10,173 
9,899 
19,277 
5,568 
2,972 5,100 
2.933 
9,925 
13.218 
23,995 
11,544 
14,249 30,000 
17.250 
60,529 
84.042 
137,211 
62,579 
95,176 
AVERAGE PRICE 
(000ECU/T) 1988 
1989 
1990 
1991 
1992 1 29 
1.14 
1 04 
085 
0.97 1.54 
1.39 
1.33 
1.06 
1.24 1.00 
098 
092 
0.81 
087 0.00 
0.00 
1.18 
1.48 
1.14 1 65 
1.65 
1.32 
1.27 
1 75 1.41 
109 
1.01 
087 
0.81 0 85 
0 74 
072 
073 
062 1.21 
108 
0 97 
086 
096 
VALUE 
(000 ECU) 
(VU) 
-OU • PI 1988 
1989 
1990 
1991 
1992 36,267 
49,700 
53,088 
20,602 
57,218 3,445 
2,470 
637 
145 
1,269 8,696 
10,587 
30,749 
12,720 
9,261 0 
0 
345 
378 
774 2,212 
7,590 
11,206 
6,539 
11,541 14,312 
10,744 
19,500 
4.839 
2,404 8,399 
9,733 
17,228 
8,398 
8,807 73,331 
90,824 
132,753 
53,621 
.91,274 
TOTAL 
DUTIES 
toum) (20%) (22%) (20%) (22%) (22%) (22%) (22%) 
(000 ECU) | 1988 7,253 758 1,739 0 487 3,149 1,848 
1989 9,940 543 2,117 0 1,670 2,364 2,141 
OH) 1990 10,618 140 6,150 76 2,465 4,290 3,790 
-vu'DB 1991 4,120 32 2,544 83 1,439 1,065 1.848 
1992 11,444 279 1,852 170 2,539 529 1,938 18,283 
18,778 
27429 
11.180 
18,781 
U* SOURCE=COMEXT 26 4 94 
Annex X 
TUNA FISHING 
REFORM OF THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET 
The European Union organizations of tuna canners: 
ANFACO (Spain) 
ASCONSER (Spain) 
C.S.C (France) 
ANCIT (Italy) 
ANICP (Portugal), 
the following organizations of owners of freezer tuna purse seiners of the European Union: 
OPAGAC (Spain) 
ORTHONGEL (France) 
meeting in Brussels on 4 May 1994 adopted a common position on the reform of the 
organization of the market in tuna, summarized below (a full version will be submitted to 
the Commission as soon as possible): 
1. On the compensatory allowance scheme: 
abolition of the quantity ceilings, 
abolition of the value ceilings or their increase to 20% of the triggering 
threshold, 
abolition of the additional compensation paid by the producers' 
organizations, 
freedom for the producers' organizations when paying such allowances to 
divide them between their members or to use them for joint measures as 
they decide. 
2. Regarding the reference prices: 
strict application of Article 22 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3759/92 of 
17 December 1992. 
3. Maintenance of the CPP at the current level in 1995. 
U\ 
4. Confirmation of the decision to maintain a 'dolphin safe' pohcy. 
5. Maintenance of the current common customs tariff. 
The abovementioned organizations also decided to create a joint liaison committee 
composed of the chairmen and directors of the said organizations and sufficient members 
to ensure parity. 
The aim of the committee is to monitor the reform of the common organization of the 
market in tuna, ensuring that the joint objectives set out in this declaration are achieved 
to ensure the correct application of the 'dolphin safe' policy, 
to study all questions œncerning the regulation of external trade in all 
products covered by the sector, 
to seek, in the trade relations between shipowners and canners, suitable 
means of applying the principle of Community preference in practice in 
accordance with the existing laws and regulations, 
finally, the abovementioned organizations request that their liaison 
committee be closely involved in the drafting of Community decisions on 
tuna and tuna products. 
Done at Brussels, 4 May 1994 
<tt 
Annex XI 
Chapter 5 
Tuna for canning 
Article 17 
1. For each of the products listed in Annex III, a Community producer price shall be fixed 
before the beginning of each fishing year and determined in accordance with the first and 
second indents of Article 9(2). 
That price shall be valid throughout the Community and shall be fixed for each fishing 
year. 
In fixing this price, account shall also be taken of the need to: 
- take into consideration the conditions of supply of the Community canning industry, 
- help support producers' incomes, 
- avoid the formation of surpluses in the Community. 
2. The Council, acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission, shall set 
the Community producer price referred to in paragraph 1 before the beginning of each 
fishing year. 
3. Member States shall notify the Commission of average monthly prices recorded at 
representative wholesale markets or ports for products of Cornmunity origin as referred 
to in paragraph 1 which have defined commercial characteristics. 
4. For the purpose of paragraph 3 the representative markets and ports of the Member States 
shall be those where a significant proportion of Community production of tuna is 
marketed. 
5. Detailed rules for the application of this Article, in particular the setting of conversion 
factors for the various species, sizes and presentations of tuna and a list of the 
representative markets and ports referred to in paragraph 3, shall be adopted in accordance 
with the procedures laid down in Article 32. 
*t\ 
Article 18 
1. For the quantities of products listed in Annex III, fished by their members and sold and 
delivered to the canning industry on the customs territory of the Community, an allowance 
shall be granted to producers' organizations where it is found, in respect of a given 
calendar quarter that, simultaneously: 
- the average selling price recorded on the Community market, and 
- the free-at-frontier price mentioned in Article 22, plus any apphcable coimtervailing 
charge, 
are both lower than a triggering threshold of 85% of the Community producer price for 
the product in question. 
2. The allowance may not exceed: 
- the difference between the triggering threshold and the average selling price of the 
product in question recorded on the Cbmmunity market, or 
- a flat-rate amount equivalent to 10% of the said threshold 
3. The quantities of each of the products eligible for the allowance shall be subject to a 
ceiling equal to the average of the quantities sold and dehvered, on the conditions referred 
to in paragraph 1, during the equivalent quarter of the three fishing years preceding that 
for which the allowance is paid. 
4. The amount of the allowance granted to each producers' organization shall be equal to: 
- the amount laid down in paragraph 2 for quantities of the product in question which 
have been disposed of in accordance with paragraph 1 and which do not exceed the 
average quantities sold and dehvered under the same conditions by its members in the 
equivalent quarter in the three fishing years preceding that for which the allowance 
is paid, 
- 95% of the amount laid down in paragraph 2 for quantities of the product in question 
which exceed the average quantities referred to in the previous indent, up to a limit 
of 110% of those quantities, 
- 90% of the amount laid down in paragraph 2 for quantities of the product in question 
which exceed those laid down in the previous indent and which are equal to the 
surplus of the quantities resulting from the allocation among producers' organizations 
of the quantities ehgible for an allowance under paragraph 3. 
^ 
The allocation shall be made between the producers' organizations concerned 
proportionately on the basis of their respective production during the equivalent quarter 
in the three fishing years preceding that for which the allowance is paid. 
5. Producers' organizations shall allocate the allowance granted to their members 
proportionately on the basis of the quantities produced by them and sold and dehvered in 
accordance with paragraph 1. 
6. Detailed rules for the apphcation of this Article, in particular the amount of the allowance 
and the rules for its grant, shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down 
in Article 32. 
^ 
ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(94) 266 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 10 03 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-94-2S4-EN-C 
ISBN 92-77 71082-9 
Offîcc for Official Publications of the r?urope<m Commimitws 
L-298S Luxembourg 
Ct t