With the induction of the many new rules and regulations we propose, the livelihood of fishermen and members of fishing communities is undoubtedly at stake. Implementing quotas or , taxes, and marine protected areas may restrict fishermen's freedom to fish and eliminating subsidies or restricting technology may increase the costs. It should be noted, however, that the regulations Mission 2011 proposes are not aimed at destroying the fishing industry-- because we, too, realize the importance of fish in our lives and many of us are not necessarily willing to revert to a fish-free diet ourselves --but rather to transition from depleting fish stocks to sustaining them in order to secure the supply of fish and success of the fishing industry in years to come.
That said, change is inevitable, and there is no solution to the global fisheries problem that does not involve reducing the number of fish that is are caught, and, in turn, reducing the number of people who make a living through the fishing industry. Just as workers in the auto industry have been displaced by machines, the abacus upgraded to the calculator, and lead in gasoline was phased out in order to accommodate catalytic converters (Lovei, 1998), some fishermen will need to leave the industry and seek a new occupation in the long run. Even without the regulations we are suggesting, fishing can never be as profitable as it was in the past due to declining fish stocks. Communities centered around fishing need to adapt to a system that limits fishing , or risk a sudden, irreparable economic downturn that will result if when the fish population collapses.
It It should also be noted , that if our plans are carried out and successfully achieve our goals, then the fishing industry will ultimately benefit from these restrictions. In the initial stages fisherman will undoubtedly be hurt by many of the restrictions, however , as populations return to and are sustained at more natural levels, there will be more fish that can be harvested without the risk of fishery threatening to collapse. On the other hand, if fishing continues as it is being done now, populations will go virtually extinct and entire fisheries will be lost (Munro, 2006).
...
Mission has compiled several options to provide fishermen , who will be (or already are) displaced by our proposed solution , with employment opportunities in their field of expertise: the sea.
- tagging fish
- collecting data for the "More Research Page"
- becoming hiring them as onboard observers
Our proposed tax scheme relies heavily on collecting accurate and comprehensive data about the ecological systems of the ocean. Many researchers will be needed to collect the data necessary for setting the tax level in each region for each population. Fishermen, with their experience and knowledge of the sea, could be given the chance to apply this knowledge toward research and data collection as an alternative career.
A precedent for onboard observation of vessels already exists. In sections 201 and 403 of the Magnuson-In sections 201 and 403 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the United States has specified provisions which state that craft must have onboard observers for fishing expeditions within the EEZ. These observers are federal employees, with formal training in "collecting and analyzing the information necessary for the conservation and management ,(of fisheries)" "science and statistical analysis," and "basic vessel safety" (NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service, 2007).
The EU also suggests onboard observers, but currently these observers are not always mandatory and are paid by the fishermen themselves and not by the government, creating a sort of conflict of interest. We propose creating programs, in states most effected by this unemployment issue (not on an international scale, however, because not all countries will be affected equally by the fallout of fishery unemployment), that mandate onboard observers for the remaining fishing vessels. This program should be run through the national government so that no conflict of interest arises. In a report on the ACP-EU fisheries, the CTA and Commonwealth Secretariat suggested a perfect model for the program: "On board observer programmes should be compulsory (ensuring that no possibilities exist for circumvention). Observers should be paid through a public fund (to which EU ship owners should contribute); and not directly by the boat owner. Observers should be qualified to the same level of competence ("brevet"), ensuring the same level/quality of observership for all FPAs" (Gorez, 2003).
...
Part of our solution calls for encouraging the transition to sustainable fisheries. In this case, select fishermen who choose to pursue more environmentally healthy fishing technique and abide by the proposed Agreement techniques could qualify for government subsidies.
...
Many areas have implemented a Days at Sea program to restrict the number of days a year fishermen are allowed to take out their boats (Kesich & Bell, 2007). Proponents reason that reducing the time fishermen spend fishing, and thus the number of fish that are caught, will slow the depletion of fish stocks. This has dealt a severe blow to the industry, however, and left many fishermen frustrated and out of work. In Massachusetts, the Days at Sea program has cost the fishing industry $22 million. In response, Senators John Kerry and Edward Kennedy have pushed for a bill that will allot $15 million in aid for fishermen (Maguire, 2007). Earlier this year, the New England Fishery Management Council ruled to continue the Days-at-Sea program, because a better management alternative was not proposed in time (Kesich & Bell, 2007).
The ineffectiveness and disadvantages of using Days at Sea as a regulation method for fisheries can been seen by the reaction the Scottish people Scotland exhibited when in December of 2006, the December Council of Ministers reduced between 7 and 10% the number of days at sea by seven to ten percent for vessels fishermen targeting whitefish and prawns in Scotland. Indeed, this action disproportionately affected the prawn sector because of the smaller mesh size. Since 2000, the Scottish whitefish fleet had been cut by 65%, but the implementation of the current Days at Sea policy angered fishermen even more. As Alex Salmond, leader of the Scottish National Party (SNP), and Member of Parliament for Buchan said, "The one glimmer on the horizon is that next year Scotland has the opportunity to elect the first pro-fishing government in Scottish history" (The Buchan Observer, 2006). This only further illustrates the lack of success Days at Sea has had in the social atmosphere and the dislike it generates towards fishing policies in general.
...
Island Nations and Implications
By advocating the reduction of the Advocating a reduction in consumption of fish in the standard diet, one of the most immediate effects would be felt by will most immediately affect island states around the world. Many small island nations depend almost exclusive exclusively on fish for food - but and more importantly, as a source of protein (Natural Resources Management and Environment Department, 1996). Therefore, measures should be taken to support ease the transition of these island states from relying entirely on fish for protein and energy to subsisting on other sources of food.
One of the most immediate transitions would be from fish-based food production to more agriculturally-based food production. Island nations have generally been weak in the terms of traditional agriculture due to several issues: rampant urbanization, flourishing tourism, and a paucity of large-scale arable land. However, island states have proven to be successful at the cultivation of tropical fruits, tuber/root crops, nuts and spices, vegetables, and cut flowerscut flowers (FAO, 1999). Moreover, organic farming may be introduced to these small island states , and organic produce may potentially provide investment and revenue value for these nations. The FAO should offer assistance to sustain growth in these areas of development (FAO, 1999).
When the FAO offers assistance to these island nations, the revenue generated from the sale of these locally produced agricultural products may can be used to purchase from or exchange agricultural products with other nations (for protein alternatives such as soybeans), reducing the demands demand of these island nations for a constant supply of fish to satisfy protein and energy needs. Furthermore, this exchange of food resources may also increase the diversity of the local diet, increasing the nutritional benefits nutrition of the local population.
In addition, since many of these island nations depend on tourism for the generation of revenue, these island nations inevitably would have to import food to feed their tourists. For example, Caribbean island nations imported import $2.3 billion of food products annually to feed their tourists, while generating a negative trade deficit of $0.45 billion (FAO, 2000). Therefore, the tourism sector should pick out more of the bill, perhaps moving the costs over to the tourists. In essence, these island nations are generating debt in return for tourism, and tourism is not helping the nation (even driving the nation deeper into the food problem)in return for tourism. To combat this effect, emphasis could be placed on agricultural tourism, exhibiting the variety of methods that must be used in island agriculture. Thus, tourism should be used to increase the welfare of these island states and generate mutual benefits , rather than polarizing the economic circumstances of these island nations. With aid support from the tourism industry and the FAO in promoting local agricultural projects, small island nations may be able to reduce dependence on fish as a source of protein.
...
- The Japanese have a culture deeply rooted in fish consumption, with a seafood per capita consumption of 70 kg per year (Kakuchi, 2003) and several , Also, there are many fishing villages ' whose traditional customs surround whaling and fish consumption (Associated Press, 2007).
- Japan, with a small land area, has already maximized terrestrial food production, including a widespread aquaculture program totaling 1.5 million tons of biomass per year, or 30% of their total ingested biomass biomass (Encyclopedia of Nations, 2007).
- Japan is extremely resistant to international methods to reduce fishing. Very recently, Japan announced its intention flout the International Whaling Commission (IWC) ban on whaling and target the killing of plans to kill 1000+ whales (Associated Press, 2007). It also is reported to physically deter attempts by ecological organizations to intervene with its methods (007Enc007).
In order to reach Japan, we intend to employ positive aspects of Japan, notably:
...