Cutting the purse (seine) strings

Senators call for a worldwide end to fishing subsidies

Posted by Andrew Sharpless (Guest Contributor) at 8:36 AM on 09 May 2007

Read more about: fishing | food | endangered species | oceans

The only thing worse than overfishing our oceans and driving species to the brink of extinction is the government paying to do it. That's been the case for far too long, as upwards of $30 billion (that's billion, with a "b") worth of subsidies are handed over to the fishing industry every year. A whopping $20 billion of that is used for things like boat repairs, fishing equipment, and fuel -- expenses that allow for increased and intensified fishing practices.

This soon could be a thing of the past, now that 13 Senators from across the political spectrum introduced a resolution on Thursday night calling for the U.S. to pursue an international ban on government subsidies to the fishing industry. Days before, the U.S. Ambassador to the World Trade Organization proposed a broad prohibition against fisheries subsidies at WTO negotiations in Geneva including delegates representing the WTO's 150-member countries.

The WTO is the best chance for success in eliminating these harmful fisheries subsidies, so we need an overall deal in the Doha round of trade talks, which remains to be seen.

What is certain is that if the depletion of ocean species continues at current rates, our seafood supply could collapse before the middle of the century. According to a groundbreaking report in Science last year, scientists are concerned about the effects of marine species loss on our supply of wild seafood and other essential ecosystem goods or services. Using global catch data they found that catches of 29 percent of wild populations of seafood have already dropped to less than 10 percent of their maximum.

For story: Cutting the purse (seine) strings
20 Comments | Post a Comment

plankton

A Canadian fisheries biologist was asked (facetiously) by Farley Mowat in his book Sea of Slaughter what the most efficient method for extracting maximum protein from the sea would be, in his opinion. More nets, better technology, etc? And the guy advocated harvesting the ocean's plankton directly. Why let all of the world's oceanic creatures do all that for us? Much more efficient to take it all for ourselves...foodchain, humbug.

The Orion Grassroots Network: 1,200+ grassroots groups working for conservation & more

by Erik Hoffner at 9:02 AM on 09 May 2007

Andrew,

This is hopeful news. I was expecting a post on the proposed bottom trawling restrictions (assuming I didn't miss it). What's up with that?

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

by biodiversivist at 9:12 AM on 09 May 2007

You folks at Oceana are doing great work

This is an important vote of confidence for the negotiations on fish subsidies at the WTO -- perhaps the most path-breaking, and certainly the most environmentally significant, negotiations taking place under the Doha Round.

Andrew: when the Senators speak of subsidies, do they also have in mind payments made by governments (including by the USA, albeit at a smaller scale than by the EU) to gain access to other countries' exclusive economic zones, particularly if those payments are not reimbursed by the benefiting fishing boats? My understanding is that such payments are not covered by the disciplines being discussed.

By the way, we have a short page on fish subsidies on our website. Obviously we need to update our concluding paragraph!

These are only my personal opinions.

by Ron Steenblik at 9:15 AM on 09 May 2007

Strength of the fishing lobby

I hope this resolution passes, but its doubtful given how politically influential the seafood industry is in the U.S. Similar situation in most of the countries around the world with lots of coastline. Probably its even worse in Canada, which subsidizes both its fishing industry and the highly unpopular commercial seal hunt. 100 sealing boats became stuck in the ice last month and the Canadian coast guard (and thus the Canadian taxpayer) must have spent many millions of dollars on the resue. All to kill seal pups, already threatened by climate change and loss of ice, for their fur, which is mainly exported to the European fashion industry. Glad to see where the Canadian government priorities are.

by amc89 at 9:17 AM on 09 May 2007

"destructive subsidies"

Apparently there is some further nuance in the language of the bill. I.e., some subsidies are considered "destructive," and those are the ones that the bill is targeting; others, by contrast, are not "destructive," and they will be continued. Or at least that is how I read this.

Interesting, for us New-England-lovers, that both Snowe and Collins of Maine, Sununu of NH and Kerry of MA are co-sponsors. What is their understanding, with their constituent fisherfolk?

In general, the international community needs to develop an enlightened attitude toward ethnic or regional "traditions." This is notoriously a problematic issue, with the Japanese support of cetacean slaughter, and their attempt to frame it as a matter of national pride. Similarly, there is the Canadian government's support of the North Atlantic seal slaughter, including the suppression this year of the rights of journalists and others who wished to document it.

Thanks to Amc89, for that interesting detail about the fishing boats caught in the ice, which was news to me.

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

by caniscandida at 10:58 AM on 09 May 2007

Hook, line, and sinker

I don't think the US fishing is heavily subsidized at all, and indeed the industry is but a ghost of its previous grandeur because of something known as "days at sea" which make the trade unattractive, in addition to lack of fish and high diesel prices. Sure, some money has gone to purchasing permits and boats, although that is hard to call a subsidy when the owner and operator

But I am in agreement that ALL factory trawlers, drift net ships, and longline vessels should be outright banned. If you can't fish a hook and a line and a sinker, well, too bad.

The purse seine trawler is mainly for topwater fishing where a second small boat pulls the net around the school of fish, such as tuna, which we know sometimes have dolphin and turtles in them. The net is connected together and a "purse line" closes off the bottom and pulls the net in.
Otter frawlers do mid-water and bottom netting which is basically a huge bag with a small sock or pocket at the end where the fish can't escape. For bottom trawling, wing boards and tickler chains actually drag the bottom of the ocean or bay.
Dredge tralwers are more common in the scallop and clam industry, using heavy steel plows and cages to capture the shellfish. Interestingly, in some places the scallops and clams are actually doing very well and is about the only promising fishery in the US.
Longliners are exactly what your think, a giant spool of line rated 700 pound test or higher which be several miles to over 20 miles long. That's the style of fishing used in the book and movie 'The Perfect Storm.' Remember the part about killing sharks?

Although there are some US-registered factory ships, mostly up by Alaska and a few hundred active shrimp boats in the Gulf of Mexico, it should be pointed out that the US fishing fleet is over 95% boats of less the 40 feet long. Most of these are the lobster boats most common in Maine. A few boats actually do hook and line fishing the old fashioned way, although they sometimes use electric reels on a regular fishing pole.

But wait, before you throw the book down on all trawlers, these lobster pot fishermen and hook fishermen have to have some bait, tons of it. Alaska crab pot and Pacific cod pot fishermen need hundreds if not thousand of pounds of it per boat. Surely there is a way to keep the US fishing fleet together, at least the small guys.

And you're right, outside the huge companies such as BumbleBee and a few processors in Alaska, these fellows have absolutely no lobby. /sammie

Onward through the fog

by Sam Wells at 2:11 PM on 09 May 2007

Needed: Extreme fishing.

Pangolin's New Fishing Rules.

1)No engines allowed. Sails. Hemp sails.

2)No winches allowed. Period.

3)All lines, cables, guys, fishing line and net must be hemp or equivalent natural fiber.

4)Violators will be scuttled. Crew pickup will postdate scuttling by 24 hours.

5)Solar powered refrigerators/freezers are allowed but airfreighting of fish is strictly forbidden.

Yep, that'll improve the fisheries and keep LOTS of fisherman employed. It takes work to keep all that gear in shape.

Put the Carbon Back

by Pangolin at 2:53 PM on 09 May 2007

Great stuff....

ending natural resource subsidies of all kinds should be the #1 priority for environmentalists.

I teach environmental economics and blog at www.voicesofreason.info.

by Jason D Scorse at 7:50 PM on 09 May 2007

second

"ending natural resource subsidies of all kinds should be the #1 priority for environmentalists."

I second that.

by naturescene at 9:42 PM on 09 May 2007

U.S. fishing industry not the problem

The U.S. industry is not the main problem in global discussions on fishing subsidies. And the U.S. Government (along with the New Zealand Government and other "Friends of Fish") has been in the vanguard in calling for tighter WTO subsidy disciplines. While it does defend access payments to South Pacific island nations for its tuna fleet, it is true that compared with other countries U.S. subsidies are comparatively small.

The countries that have dragged their feet (not to mention their nets) the most have been Japan, Korea and, within the EU, the self-declared "friends of fishing" (France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, and Spain).

But before anyone seriously proposes draconian constraints on fishing gear (as opposed to how it is used, when and where it is used, and how much fish are caught), please think through the consequences. Fish makes up a large percentage of the protein of many people's diets, especially in developing countries, and fish protein is generally considered to be more healthy than most animal proteins. Fish oils are also important sources of omega 3 fatty acids, which are important in preventing heart desease and in the development of fetal brains.

Think aquaculture is the solution? Perhaps, but only if it is done very carefully. Otherwise, you may end up with these kinds of problems.

These are only my personal opinions.

by Ron Steenblik at 6:02 AM on 10 May 2007

Parallel thoughts, Ron

I was writing this at about the same time you were putting this post up.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

by biodiversivist at 6:36 AM on 10 May 2007

OK, so this is our challenge

Of course, we all want everyone to be well-nourished, including with sufficient protein (the need for which, however, has often been exaggerated), and fats, and the omega-3 fatty acids.

But we must never forget that fishing, whether by net or by hook, is a particularly inhumane form of the hunting of wild animals. NO fish, hunted and caught in either of these manners, dies quickly and painlessly.

The issue of by-catch, and entanglement in fishers' lines, involving the unintended but "collateral-damage" deaths of much more typically charismatic animals as cetaceans and sea turtles, is indeed very important. Nevertheless, they should not be reckoned the only unfortunate deaths related to fisheries. The inhumane deaths of the targeted species themselves, the bony fishes, must never be discounted.

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

by caniscandida at 9:01 AM on 10 May 2007

climate change cod

An interesting side note on this important topic from a New Bedford, MA newspaper: the great North Atlantic cod collapse may have been caused by climate change as much as by overfishing:

http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID= ...

The Orion Grassroots Network: 1,200+ grassroots groups working for conservation & more

by Erik Hoffner at 10:30 AM on 10 May 2007

Third

"ending natural resource subsidies of all kinds should be the #1 priority for environmentalists."

I third it.

Actually can we have 2 priorities- ending natural resource subsidies AND industrial animal-agribusiness?

by amc89 at 10:31 AM on 10 May 2007

Salmon Purse Seiners

Back in the '80s, I reported, "Research indicates that purse seiners caught 80%-90% of the vulnerable migrating salmon present in Johnstone Strait during what were commonly 48- or 72-hour fishing openings."

Ledbetter, Max. 1986. Competition and information among British Columbia salmon purse seiners. Ph.D. diss., University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C.

(purse seiners- http://ledbetter.freepgs.com) http://fishing.fuelspace.com http://lastmed.com

by davmax at 2:30 PM on 10 May 2007

Speaking of salmon

Over on the Daily Grist is news that "some 200 chefs in 33 states are calling on Congress to protect river habitats and deprioritize hydroelectric dams that cramp Northwest salmon's style."

Because when it comes to salmon, the nation's best chefs turn up their noses at antibiotic-ridden, pellet-eating, oft-parasite-infested farmed fish. Besides, as Waters says, "Eating wild salmon can connect you in a beautiful way to the sea."

These are only my personal opinions.

by Ron Steenblik at 2:51 PM on 10 May 2007

"beautiful way"???

There is nothing beautiful about the painful death of our fellow sentient beings.

Possibly, just as adult salmon have completed their life cycles up-river, and are about to die, it is justifiable to collect them at that point, with a view to eating them.

But surely, if what we want is to connect ourselves in "beautiful ways" to the oceans, we can find many humane alternatives to killing something and eating it.

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

by caniscandida at 10:41 AM on 11 May 2007

It's easier to moniter gear..

One of the problems in regulating fisheries is that the distances are quite large and sneaking up on radar equipped fishing boats (all of them) is quite difficult.

Easier by orders of magnitude is to regulate the gear and means of propulsion used and therefore restrict the amount of fish it is profitable or possible to catch.

Once the fishing fleet is limited to sail for propulsion and hemp for lines and nets a radical change happens. Miles long drift nets are no longer possible. Miles long longlines are no longer possible. The fish have to reach a critical mass before it is even reasonable to throw a line over the side.

A little understood secondary problem with industrial fishing is that abandoned, sunk or torn nets and lines become floating deathtraps for fish turtles and whales. Because these are made of sythetic fibers treated for UV resistance they effectively kill sea life until they sink or snag on shore. Even sunk they kill until they are absorbed into the bottom muck.

Given the choice of dead oceans or draconian restrictions on gear we are currently choosing dead oceans.

Put the Carbon Back

by Pangolin at 12:12 AM on 14 May 2007

Ghost fishing

Thank you, Pangolin, for reminding us of the problem of so-called "ghost fishing" -- the entrapment of fish and other aquatic life in lost or abandoned nets and traps. I have seen some estimates of mortality in lost or abandoned crab traps off of British Columbia, and while I don't recall their estimated contribution to total crab mortality, I recall being shocked the percentage was so high. So, yes, there are changes in fishing gear and practices that could certainly reduce this type of problem.

These are only my personal opinions.

by Ron Steenblik at 12:32 AM on 14 May 2007
[ Parent ]

"choosing dead oceans"

Thanks to Pangolin and Ron for commenting on a subject that I had not given much attention to, "ghost fishing." One might think that the fishers themselves would be smart enough to realize that their discarded gear will keep on killing, and, never mind that they have no regard for the lives of marine creatures, those added accidental deaths cannot at all help their own fisheries.

Pangolin, your sail-and-hemp idea is wonderful. But I daresay it has no hope whatsoever of becoming actual legislation. On the other hand, there may be a market for "sail-and-hemp-caught" seafood, if fishers should be willing to be certified accordingly. Such a market would be analogous to the markets for "organic," "free-range" meat products, and for vegetable products certified as "organic," "fair-trade," "shade-grown," etc. We animal-rights types would not be 100% thrilled, of course, but at least this would be a step in the right direction, which we could get behind.

Since I think this is the first time that I am addressing you directly, let me tell you that your name is very cute. But I am not at all sure it suits you. UCalPress's "Encyclopedia of Animals says:
<<
A covering of horny body scales growing from a thick underlying skin distinguishes pangolins from all other mammals. An extraordinary tongue, longer than the animal's head and body, is coiled in the animal's mouth when at rest, but can be extended and flicked into ant nests and termite mounds. Pangolins lack teeth, relying instead on powerful muscles and small pebbles in their stomachs to grind up their food.
>>

Inasmuch as you are from San Francisco or thereabouts, one can easily believe that you work on your abs. But as for the toothlessness, and the tongue, I rather doubt that those characteristics quite fit.

More important, there is that bit of a poem by the Archaic Greek (7th century BCE?), Archilochus, from the island of Paros in the Cyclades, which more or less goes, "The fox is wise, knowing very many things; but the hedgehog knows one great thing." And the British political philosopher Isaiah Berlin famously picked up on that metaphor.

Now pangolins -- about which Archilochus certainly, and Berlin not impossibly knew nothing -- seem to have the wisdom of the hedgehog, curling themselves up in tight balls and relying on their hard scales to defend them from hyenas and leopards and lions.

But YOU are certainly not a hedgehog. You have written a number of very intelligent and thought-provoking comments to Gristmill, whether or not we should be prepared to call them "foxy," and I want to tell you that I am appreciative and grateful. By the same token, however, methinketh that thou art a false Pangolin.

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

by caniscandida at 6:39 AM on 14 May 2007

ADVERTISING POLICY

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.