NTT Purse-Seine Dispute Exposes Split Between Provincial Waters and Jakarta Permits

Kupang — — An older warning from Nusa Tenggara Timur fisheries officials over large purse-seine vessels highlights the divide between provincial fishing grounds and permits issued by Jakarta, but it does not by itself prove overfishing in WPP 573.

In 2018, NTT fisheries chief Ganef Wurgiyanto said large purse-seine vessels from outside the province were operating above 12 nautical miles and were using permits issued by the central government for WPP 573, according to a 2019 Mongabay report that quoted him. The same report said around 400 illegal fish aggregating devices, or FADs, linked to purse-seine fleets had been placed above 12 nautical miles in the Sawu Sea, south of Timor, around Sumba and in the Flores Sea.

The legal boundary matters because Indonesian law places provincial authority over marine resources up to 12 nautical miles from the coastline, while the central government handles waters beyond that limit. A legal and institutional review published by the PSHK Institute describes that split and notes that fishers moving across provincial sea borders may need a migratory fishing permit, or surat andon.

That framework helps explain why NTT officials sought coordination among provincial agencies, marine surveillance officers and police in dealing with offshore purse seiners. The concern was not only where the boats fished, but also whether gear and support equipment were affecting local stocks before smaller fishers could reach them.

How quota-based fishing fits in

The Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries later described WPPNRI 573 as part of quota-based fishing management. In a 2022 annual report from the ministry’s capture fisheries directorate, WPPNRI 573 was listed in quota zone 4 alongside WPPNRI 572 and the open sea.

The same ministry material said quota-based fishing would separate allocations for local fishers, industry and non-commercial activities, and that monitoring would cover permits, quota volumes, fishing gear, auxiliary equipment, fishing operations, port compliance, landed catch and distribution.

That policy shift does not confirm any specific violation in NTT. It does, however, show that the national government was moving toward tighter management of industrial fishing in the very area that had been disputed by provincial officials.

What can be confirmed

The confirmed facts are narrower than the original framing. NTT officials complained that large purse-seine vessels were operating beyond the 12-mile provincial limit, and the ministry later identified WPPNRI 573 as a quota-managed zone under the new fisheries regime.

What cannot be established from the sources used here is a current catch total for WPP 573, the number of active purse-seine vessels, or a scientific stock assessment showing overfishing in the area. The available material also does not provide vessel-by-vessel landing records or a verified count of juvenile catch.

Even so, the dispute remains important for fishers in Flores, Timor and Sumba because it sits at the intersection of three issues: who licenses fishing, where vessels may operate, and how gear such as purse seines and FADs is regulated in practice.

For local communities, the central question is whether offshore industrial fishing is being managed in a way that protects nearshore fisheries that support smaller boats and coastal livelihoods. The sources reviewed here confirm the governance dispute, but not the draft’s implied conclusion on stock depletion.

Timeline

• 2018: NTT fisheries officials warned that large purse-seine vessels were operating beyond 12 nautical miles and using central government permits for WPP 573.
• 2022: KKP described WPPNRI 573 as part of a quota-based fishing zone and said monitoring would extend to permits, gear and landed catch.

Sources

• PSHK Institute
• Mongabay Indonesia
• Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Directorate General of Capture Fisheries