Sunday, January 16, 2011

A recent spate of news about the state of our fisheries left me feeling genuinely conflicted. At first reading the headline:

Has overfishing ended? Top US scientist says yes

I was ecstatic. Finally the mainstream press is reporting what we have been hearing on the docks for a while now from fishermen. As our friend, Gloucester fisherman Joe Orlando says, "The story here is one of a success. We've rebuilt the stocks. But no one wants to hear about it." Now it would seem that the story is starting to emerge.

Yet as I read further I began to have mixed feelings. If the stocks are coming back, why are we still eliminating fishing jobs? If the stocks are healthy, why are the people that fish them still suffering? In the article there is a quote from Pete Shelley of the Conservation Law Foundation,

Peter Shelley, senior counsel of the Conservation Law Foundation, an environmental group, said the industry's problems are rooted in years of overfishing, especially during the 1980s, not regulation.

"It was a bubble," he said. "Fishermen were living in a bit of a fantasy world at that point, and it wasn't something you could sustain."

I could not disagree more with Mr. Shelley. Yes fishermen caught too many fish, that much we all know. But to suggest that it was fishermen living in a fantasy land of greed and plenty denies the real world economic and regulatory issues that led to the overfishing. It is a fact that regulations encouraged the growth of the fleet that resulted in overfishing.

The sad part is that now that there are supposed to be healthy stocks of fish, regulators are forcing policies designed to consolidate the fleet and eliminate jobs. The reality is that the shape and size of the fleet is a direct result of regulations and for some reason fisheries regulators are trying to consolidate the fleet at the expense of coastal communities and community based fishermen.

A second spate of news covered the rejection by the federal government of a request for emergency action to increase fishing quotas. It is not surprising that the request for emergency action was turned down. It would have in effect been admitting that the new regulatory scheme of catch shares is not working and that the science it is based on is not valid.

I am sorry to say that in all of this news, there is the conspicuous absence of any kind of discussion for a better, safer, greener, more sustainable fleet. The pieces are in place, you have recovered stocks, a still fairly diverse fleet (though that is changing rapidly) and an opportunity to build a success story in a fishery that many have left for dead ten years ago. The hard work is done, but perhaps the most difficult work remains.

No comments:

Post a Comment