4
area was
were
(i) for development purposes a precise definition of the IPFC
not necessary because projects, both regional and country,
own objectives supported from different
and they had their and areas of concern
sources
(ii) recognizing that effective management was dependent upon good basic data, IPFC should undertake as a major responsibility the upgrading of statistics from areas 71 and 81 and the adjacent areas of 61 and 77, it being understood that IOFC had major responsibility for statistics in area 57
(iii) for
stock
where the
under species
study purposes assessment overlapped into areas covered by other organizations, IPFC should ensure that there was adequate dialogue with such organizations by way of joint meetings to ensure that realistic assessments of the stock over its whole range
were made
(iv) where particular stocks were exploited by several countries from more than one region IPFC should ensure that there was adequate discussion with these countries and relevant regional organizations in order to formulate realistic management measures within specific areas.
15.
Of the subsidiary bodies, only the CDMSCS has an area of competence which When the Committee was established it was is different from that of the IPFC. agreed that it would carry out its functions and responsibilities in the South China Sea and adjacent waters up to the outer limit of the zones in which its as well as in regard to member countries have jurisdiction over fisheries, common stocks occurring also in contiguous waters.
16.
At their joint session held in 1982, IOFC and IPFC reviewed their area of competence. Some members suggested a boundary line defining more clearly the area of competence of each Commission in order to minimize the cases of double membership. A majority of members thought that the existing arrangements were satisfactory for the moment. Several members however expressed the wish that the question should again be considered at future sessions.
17. It should be noted that since then, a number of Pacific island countries joined the South Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) and de facto IPFC had no activities in this area. In this connection the attention of IPFC is drawn to document IPFC/ExCo/64/9 which was discussed by the Executive Committee with regard to the redefinition of statistical boundaries in this region.
Membership
18.
Membership in the IPFC is open to Member Nations and Associate Members of FAO who may become Members of IPFC by depositing an instrument of acceptance of the IPFC Agreement with the Director-General of FAO. A two-thirds majority membership of IPFC is required for the admission to membership of IPFC of any a Member of the United Nations, of any of non-member nation of FAO which is its Specialized Agencies or the International Atomic Energy Agency which
in declaration made
a formal submits
for membership and a an application
the in force as
time of the IPFC Agreement instrument that it accepts admission. Participation by-such a nation in the activities of IPFC is however, contingent on the assumption of a proportionate share in the expenses of the Secretariat, as determined by FAO.
19. The present 19 members of the Commission,
all Member Nations of FAO.
Inf.12 (page 4),
are
at
who are listed in IPFC/90/ Of these, the last Member
?