Throughout the congress, students from Ratana Chuenpagdee's World Fisheries course at Memorial University in Newfoundland, Canada, will be guest-posting here on the blog. Part of their assignment is to respond to comments and get involved in discussions with people attending the conference, and with other students around the world.
We welcome comments, and encourage you to join the debate!
You hear a lot about how climate change and pollution are major factors in the endangerment of ecosystems.
However, the truth of the matter is that fishing practices are actually the lead concern for impact on ecosystems, and food security issues. Global fishing practices need to be maintained in a sustainable manner to ensure the protection of marine species.
Historical examples of extermination or depletion of fish species, including the prime example of the cod fishery in Newfoundland, show that fishing practices are a major cause of the endangerment of marine species.
One of the major problems is fishing down the marine webs (ecosystems). The endangerment of fish stocks also happens when fishing boats participate in illegal fishing, IUU (Illegal, Unrelated and Unreported), which allows fishing boats to take more fish than they're designated without being fined.
One of the major problems is fishing down the marine webs (ecosystems). The endangerment of fish stocks also happens when fishing boats participate in illegal fishing, IUU (Illegal, Unrelated and Unreported), which allows fishing boats to take more fish than they're designated without being fined.
So, who is to blame for the endangerment of marine species?
Consider the “need” to bring salmon and tuna into restaurants for consumption...
In a previous post, we read about the general lack of awareness of the average consumer when it comes to where their seafood comes from. In most cases, we're not only unsure of how our dinner makes it from the sea to our supper, we also have little information about which fishery practices are being used, and how much of a supply is caught at a time.
It leads to some major questions...If there was a stronger consumer demand for information on the food sold at grocery stores, would the fishing industry respond with safer fishing practices? And what can we do about illegal fishing? Can we even say that we practise fisheries management if IUU fishing continues to take place?
Consider the “need” to bring salmon and tuna into restaurants for consumption...
In a previous post, we read about the general lack of awareness of the average consumer when it comes to where their seafood comes from. In most cases, we're not only unsure of how our dinner makes it from the sea to our supper, we also have little information about which fishery practices are being used, and how much of a supply is caught at a time.
It leads to some major questions...If there was a stronger consumer demand for information on the food sold at grocery stores, would the fishing industry respond with safer fishing practices? And what can we do about illegal fishing? Can we even say that we practise fisheries management if IUU fishing continues to take place?
It is easy enough to just say that fisheries need to be sustainable, but taking it beyond mere lip service is a trickier matter.
In our opinion, aquaculture is not the solution.
When farming fish, fishmeal/feed is needed which then takes more fish out of the ocean, and a major food security debate is linked to this discussion. Animal feeds lessen the nutritional value and the change of fish diet does not offer a sustainable option.
We believe that the only truly effective option is a stronger system of MCS (Monitor, Control and Surveillance) to manage the effects on the ecosystem. By using enforcement, hopefully less fish will be endangered, and at least the total number of fish caught will be logged.
What do you think?
Post by Lynn, Jennifer, Janelle and Jessica
In our opinion, aquaculture is not the solution.
When farming fish, fishmeal/feed is needed which then takes more fish out of the ocean, and a major food security debate is linked to this discussion. Animal feeds lessen the nutritional value and the change of fish diet does not offer a sustainable option.
 |
| Is enforcement the answer? |
What do you think?
Post by Lynn, Jennifer, Janelle and Jessica
Has enforcement lead to the consumption of fewer illegal drugs?
ReplyDeleteIt's part of the equation, but in the end it boils down to a issue of demand. Demand for something will ultimately drive the market and right now there is an unsustainable global demand for seafood.
Good post--I look forward to meet you all at the conference.
Cheers,
Andy Bystrom
Costa Rica
Hi Jennifer, Janelle and Jessica, thanks for your reflections. I have a question for you: considering the variety of stakeholders involved in fisheries, who must be involved in the MCS system that you proposed? Who has the responsability?
ReplyDeleteRAQUEL
Enforcement is important, necessary and effective, but only to a certain degree. Single-focus on bigger MCS may not work in alleviating illegal fishing, as evident from past and current practices.
ReplyDeleteWhat about the idea of self-enforcement? Either through fishers collectively watching each other using social pressure or self-restraint(!) by individual fishers/fishing boat..
Such group- or self-driven enforcement may prove to be quite effective (in tandem with some traditional MCS), but how does it exactly come about? That’s the question I’d like to pose.
It definitely would involve consumers being aware of illegal fishing issue and acting with conscience about their fish purchase, as well as more inclusive and democratic rule-making in the fisheries management process, because we can assume that fishers would be more likely to follow those rules that they contributed to formulating.
It is never an easy question, but here I tease with the possibility of ‘voluntary' group/self-enforcement. Something to think about anyway!
Andrew Song
Andy, I like your comparison of illegal fishing to illegal drugs. Enforcement has not lead to the decline of illegal drugs. This post related to Andrew’s post on voluntary enforcement. If we stick with the example of illegal drugs, would more people be inclined to put pressure on people they knew that sold illegal drugs, or would they be more inclined to just accept it? The same could be said with fishers illegally fishing. If there is a great demand for seafood, and fishers know that they will be able to gain profit, I doubt they will stop at just their quota of seafood.
ReplyDeleteIn class we had a discussion about the number of bycatch caught in fishing nets. In one of the readings, the fishers had logbooks to document the bycatch, but they weren’t being filled. If these log books were not being filled, how would we know if the voluntary enforcement would work? Andrew, I like your idea of voluntary enforcement, but I am curious of how it would be managed.
Raquel, when thinking locally about MCS I come to the example of the Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Government’s Inland Fish Enforcement mandate which apprehends individuals who have been illegally poaching either in coastal or inland waters. Considering that the government is a major stakeholder in this mandate, I am guessing that other stakeholders would be DFO, and municipal governments. Also, organizations that deal with the conservation would be involved in this process. Other than that, I’m sure there would be other stakeholders involved in the process.
Information about Inland Fish Enforcement found at:
http://www.justice.gov.nl.ca/just/department/branches/division/division_inland_fish_enforcement.html
Andrew brings up a good point about voluntary group enforcement. In my experience this kinda works on the local level, but only when there is a economic encentive for fishermen to do such a thing--like say a niche market they can access for products that are fished sustainably.
ReplyDeleteThanks for all of the posts, it is great to see the above dialog, there are some great points surfacing. I am going to switch directions a little and comment on the following statement "So, who is to blame for the endangerment of marine species". I feel like this question in itself has a narrow focus. Rather than trying to point a finger, I think it could be more useful to understand the factors which contribute to the endangerment of marine species which are made reference too. Once this understanding is developed, we are perhaps in a better position to move forth. There is a utility for enforcement, however it is also important to recognize that it has a high associated cost, and does not help to address the environmental and social factors which contribute to ecosystem harm.
ReplyDeleteFood for though.
Kim.