Argentina's Federal Fisheries Council approves transferable quota system for king crab; Santa Cruz and Buenos Aires vote against

Argentina's Federal Fisheries Council (CFP) signed Resolution 16/2026 on 5 November 2026, approving by majority vote an individual transferable catch quota (CITC) system for southern king crab (Lithodes santolla) from the 2026/2027 season through the 2040/2041 season. Santa Cruz abstained in the vote and Buenos Aires voted against.

The resolution provides that vessels whose catch of the species accounted for more than 2% of the total during the 2018/2019 to 2025/2026 seasons may receive quotas. Quotas are allocated by area, with area boundaries defined under Resolution 12/2018. Quota calculation weights five factors: catch history at 80%, labour at 10%, production at 5% and investment at 5%, with a deduction of 0.001% for each penalty in force.

Articles 5 and 6 of the resolution reserve 5% of the maximum allowable catch (CMP) as a management reserve and allocate a further 5% to the CITC redistribution fund. Article 8 provides that quotas not registered by 30 December 2026 are transferred to the fund. Article 13 sets a transfer fee of 496,500 pesos per tonne, and Article 11 requires operators receiving quotas from the fund or the reserve to pay that fee.

According to the technical annex of the competent authority, the six vessels receiving quotas have their allocations calculated by weighted factors across seven areas. The companies receiving quotas are Centomar, Wanchese de Argentina and Bentónicos de Argentina.

Article 4 of the resolution caps the maximum concentration for a single company or corporate group at 45% of the maximum allowable catch and specifies that the cap applies "per area"; however, the technical annex verifies this cap on an aggregate basis across the whole species. Calculated on a per-area basis, the results differ: Centomar, through the combined total of the Dukat, Talismán and Chiyo Maru N° 3, exceeds 45% in areas C I and C II; Bentónicos de Argentina exceeds the limit in area S III through Tango I and Tango II; Centomar and other companies exceed it in area S II through Chiyo Maru N° 3, and likewise in area S IV. Only in area S I does no group exceed the cap. The technical annex lists these figures by area, but the cap is verified on an aggregate basis across the whole species.

Santa Cruz recorded technical, legal and institutional objections at the meeting. The province argues that the system affects the 345 tonnes of quota it currently manages, that the resolution does not adequately distinguish jurisdiction, and that juveniles of the species grow mainly in provincial coastal waters. The resolution does not mention provincial quotas, instead allocating CITC by each vessel's catch history and by the areas defined in Resolution 12/2018. In the technical annex of the competent authority, the reserve is allocated by jurisdiction, with Santa Cruz receiving 34.5 tonnes (24.5 tonnes in area C V and 10 tonnes in area S III), an allocation not written into the text of the resolution. The 345 tonnes cited by the province does not appear in either document.

Buenos Aires questioned the CFP's authority under Articles 3 and 4 of the Federal Fisheries Law to establish CITC in provincial public waters. The resolution relies on Articles 9, 27 and 28 of Law 24.922 and does not address the question of water jurisdiction. The provincial representative said: "This very clearly shows the result of a lack of foresight and improvised response, and of a lack of handling of this kind of immature initiative. It has too many problems in the areas where it conflicts with the (national and provincial) constitutions and the (national and provincial) fisheries laws."

The province also questioned the procedure. According to its representative Carla Seain, the project was processed without a prior discussion stage, was neither submitted to the meeting nor debated at the table, while the minutes approving it were being printed. The signature page of the technical annex shows that the document was entered into the GEDO system on 5 November itself.

Regarding the quota term, Buenos Aires noted that a 15-year term is granted in provincial waters, whereas permits issued by the provinces are valid for much shorter periods. The resolution sets the 15-year term under Article 9 of the general regime and does not link it to the validity of fishing permits.

The National Institute for Fisheries Research and Development (INIDEP) assessed the system in Official Technical Report 22/2026. According to the summary recorded in the minutes, the institute concluded that it found no biological incompatibility with implementing the system and highlighted comprehensive monitoring in the central and southern maritime areas, temporary closures and the mandatory use of escape rings.

The report also notes that the approach used for the king crab quota system is not expected to be repeated in the shrimp quota system due to be launched soon; a lack of consensus could jeopardise implementation of a restructuring measure awaited by the entire fishery.