Sushihunter
Active Member
http://www.redwoodtimes.com/local/ci_11023206
Fishing group blasts fishing quota privatization plan
Redwood Times
Posted: 11/19/2008 11:25:53 AM PST
The west coast’s largest commercial fishermen’s organization blasted a proposal to allocate to a select group of fishermen and fish processors most of the Pacific groundfish fishery stocks through a system of individual fishing quotas.
The Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations is calling the plan, scheduled for a vote last week by the Pacific Fishery Management Council, “a massive give-away of a public resource that will lead to consolidation and ownership by a few large processors creating a plantation-style fishery, turning fishermen into sharecroppers.”
Groundfish is one of the largest fisheries on the west coast and consists of multiple species, including numerous types of rockfish and sole (flatfish), as well as lingcod and sablefish (black cod). Fishing for groundfish is pursued by different types of gear, including bottom trawl nets, longline, hook-and-line, and traps. The quota plan under consideration is for trawling only, although it is likely to affect the fishery by other types of gear.
Groundfish stocks were badly overfished in the late 1980s and 1990s after the federal government backed a massive expansion (”Americanization”) of this fleet and an influx of new and larger vessels, particularly in the trawl fishery. This expansion was done with no research to determine the size of the fish stocks and what level of catch they could sustain. As a result overfishing occurred and a federally-guaranteed buyback program had to be instituted to reduce the number of trawlers by about half. Strict harvest controls were also implemented and a number of groundfish stocks are now showing signs of recovery.
Under the proposal being considered today by the quasi-federal Pacific Council is a scheme to issue individual quota shares to fishermen and fish processors. Although fish are a publicly-owned resource, the quota shares will then be owned by those they are awarded to and can then be freely traded, rented or sold to anyone.
”Our fish stocks are a public resource,” said Larry Collins, a San Francisco commercial fisherman and vice-president of the PCFFA, who has fished groundfish in the past. “I’ve seen what has happened to fishermen and fishing communities in New Zealand and elsewhere under these systems. They are a disaster -- enriching the few and impoverishing the many. This isn’t about conservation or economies of scale, this is an outright theft of the people’s fish.”
Restrictions called for on quota ownership
”Individual fishing quota systems only work when ownership of the fishing quota is held by those engaged in the fishing -- the captain and crew working aboard a fishing vessel,” said Zeke Grader, Executive Director of the PCFFA and an attorney. “History has shown that when shares to the fishery are not restricted to the men and women physically doing the fishing, ownership of the fishery ends up in the hands of bankers or a few large processors. Fishermen are reduced to being seafaring sharecroppers.”
Currently the North Pacific halibut and sablefish fishery restricts quota ownership to captains and crew. It is regarded as the nation’s most successful or only successful individual fishing quota (IFQ) system. In other IFQ systems, ownership of the fishery has consolidated and ended up in the hands of a few large processors. The plan under consideration by the Pacific Council would allow quota to be held by non-fishing entities, resulting in what fishermen call a “plantation-style” fishery.
In addition to restricting ownership of fishing quota to those actually engaged in fishing, the PCFFA is calling for curbs on consolidation, to assure there will be enough vessels to serve the numerous ports and fishing communities along the coast and prevent monopolistic practices in the fishery. They are calling for a 1 percent ownership control, or no more than 1.5 percent of quota on any one vessel. This is similar to the halibut and sablefish quota system in Alaska, which also restricts quota ownership to working fishermen.
The Pacific Council, however, is considering control limits of 3 percent and higher which could reduce the total fleet along the whole coast to 35 or fewer vessels. Currently slightly over 100 vessels along the west coast are trawling for groundfish or eligible for quota under this system. Under the cap proposed by the PCFFA the number of vessels could not go below 75, assuring there will be enough of a fleet to support Pacific Coast ports.
”Rather than looking at consolidation and further reduction in the fleet, we need to look at smaller, more fuel efficient trawlers that can bring better quality fish to market,” said Grader. “There is not enough fish to support an industrial model for this fishery, but there is more than ample resource to support an artisanal model that would be sustainable and provide for many more fishing communities.”
Opposition to processor-held quotas
Under the plan being considered by the Pacific Council, 20 percent of the fishing quota would be awarded certain fish processors, even though they do not fish themselves. Under the plan as it is drafted fish processors would also be eligible for another 14 percent of the total quota. The 20 percent of the quota to be given away to processors is estimated to be worth in excess of $100 million according to a UC Davis economist.
”Giving processors quota or allowing them to own it undercuts any argument for individual quota systems making fishing safer, or improving conservation,” continued Grader. “Moreover, there is no guarantee jobs in fishing communities will be protected since a processor can take their quota and move elsewhere or just sell that quota to a processor in another port. Giving processors quota isn’t about protecting communities, but making a few individuals very wealthy.”
Community ownership of fishing quota
The recently reauthorized Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation & Management Act, nation’s primary fishing law, allows for the creation of “community fisheries” and “regional fishing associations” to hold fishing quota in trust. This new provision of Magnuson-Stevens is intended to protect local fishing-dependent communities - helping to preserve employment from fishing and the investment in plants by processors.
In fact a Government Accountability Office study of Individual Fishing Quotas found that the “easiest and most direct way” to protect the economic viability of fishing communities under a quota program is to “allow fishing communities to hold harvesting quota and decide how this quota is to be used.”
The Pacific Council, however, ignored the new provisions in the law and neither drafted language for such community-based quota control, nor did it analyze it as required by law. The PCFFA in its testimony urged the Pacific Council to take no action until a draft for community ownership of quota was written and analyzed.
The principle proponents for rushing to adopt a quota program for groundfish have come from the Bush Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service, one trawl organization and the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF). EDF has advocated for “market-based” solutions for natural resources, including water marketing, such as the sale of farm water to developers. The organization also brought trawlers, who expect to do well in any allocation, to Washington, editorial boards, and now to the Pacific Council to lobby the plan.
PCFFA, along with Food & Water Watch, the Marine Fish Conservation Network and other organizations have argued that before any plan goes ahead there should be a referendum among those affected to get their approval. Proponents of the Pacific Council plan, however, oppose such a vote.
”Let’s face it, they don’t want a vote because they know very well it’s likely to get turned down in its current form,” said Eureka fisherman Dave Bitts, president of the PCFFA. “We’re frankly tired of a few NGOs [non-governmental organizations] who know nothing about fishing trying to shove, first, MPAs [no-fishing “marine protected areas”] and now IFQs down our throat. They’re not helping the fish but they sure as hell are killing fishermen.”
Jim's Fishing Charters
www.JimsFishing.com
http://ca.youtube.com/user/Sushihunter250
Fishing group blasts fishing quota privatization plan
Redwood Times
Posted: 11/19/2008 11:25:53 AM PST
The west coast’s largest commercial fishermen’s organization blasted a proposal to allocate to a select group of fishermen and fish processors most of the Pacific groundfish fishery stocks through a system of individual fishing quotas.
The Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations is calling the plan, scheduled for a vote last week by the Pacific Fishery Management Council, “a massive give-away of a public resource that will lead to consolidation and ownership by a few large processors creating a plantation-style fishery, turning fishermen into sharecroppers.”
Groundfish is one of the largest fisheries on the west coast and consists of multiple species, including numerous types of rockfish and sole (flatfish), as well as lingcod and sablefish (black cod). Fishing for groundfish is pursued by different types of gear, including bottom trawl nets, longline, hook-and-line, and traps. The quota plan under consideration is for trawling only, although it is likely to affect the fishery by other types of gear.
Groundfish stocks were badly overfished in the late 1980s and 1990s after the federal government backed a massive expansion (”Americanization”) of this fleet and an influx of new and larger vessels, particularly in the trawl fishery. This expansion was done with no research to determine the size of the fish stocks and what level of catch they could sustain. As a result overfishing occurred and a federally-guaranteed buyback program had to be instituted to reduce the number of trawlers by about half. Strict harvest controls were also implemented and a number of groundfish stocks are now showing signs of recovery.
Under the proposal being considered today by the quasi-federal Pacific Council is a scheme to issue individual quota shares to fishermen and fish processors. Although fish are a publicly-owned resource, the quota shares will then be owned by those they are awarded to and can then be freely traded, rented or sold to anyone.
”Our fish stocks are a public resource,” said Larry Collins, a San Francisco commercial fisherman and vice-president of the PCFFA, who has fished groundfish in the past. “I’ve seen what has happened to fishermen and fishing communities in New Zealand and elsewhere under these systems. They are a disaster -- enriching the few and impoverishing the many. This isn’t about conservation or economies of scale, this is an outright theft of the people’s fish.”
Restrictions called for on quota ownership
”Individual fishing quota systems only work when ownership of the fishing quota is held by those engaged in the fishing -- the captain and crew working aboard a fishing vessel,” said Zeke Grader, Executive Director of the PCFFA and an attorney. “History has shown that when shares to the fishery are not restricted to the men and women physically doing the fishing, ownership of the fishery ends up in the hands of bankers or a few large processors. Fishermen are reduced to being seafaring sharecroppers.”
Currently the North Pacific halibut and sablefish fishery restricts quota ownership to captains and crew. It is regarded as the nation’s most successful or only successful individual fishing quota (IFQ) system. In other IFQ systems, ownership of the fishery has consolidated and ended up in the hands of a few large processors. The plan under consideration by the Pacific Council would allow quota to be held by non-fishing entities, resulting in what fishermen call a “plantation-style” fishery.
In addition to restricting ownership of fishing quota to those actually engaged in fishing, the PCFFA is calling for curbs on consolidation, to assure there will be enough vessels to serve the numerous ports and fishing communities along the coast and prevent monopolistic practices in the fishery. They are calling for a 1 percent ownership control, or no more than 1.5 percent of quota on any one vessel. This is similar to the halibut and sablefish quota system in Alaska, which also restricts quota ownership to working fishermen.
The Pacific Council, however, is considering control limits of 3 percent and higher which could reduce the total fleet along the whole coast to 35 or fewer vessels. Currently slightly over 100 vessels along the west coast are trawling for groundfish or eligible for quota under this system. Under the cap proposed by the PCFFA the number of vessels could not go below 75, assuring there will be enough of a fleet to support Pacific Coast ports.
”Rather than looking at consolidation and further reduction in the fleet, we need to look at smaller, more fuel efficient trawlers that can bring better quality fish to market,” said Grader. “There is not enough fish to support an industrial model for this fishery, but there is more than ample resource to support an artisanal model that would be sustainable and provide for many more fishing communities.”
Opposition to processor-held quotas
Under the plan being considered by the Pacific Council, 20 percent of the fishing quota would be awarded certain fish processors, even though they do not fish themselves. Under the plan as it is drafted fish processors would also be eligible for another 14 percent of the total quota. The 20 percent of the quota to be given away to processors is estimated to be worth in excess of $100 million according to a UC Davis economist.
”Giving processors quota or allowing them to own it undercuts any argument for individual quota systems making fishing safer, or improving conservation,” continued Grader. “Moreover, there is no guarantee jobs in fishing communities will be protected since a processor can take their quota and move elsewhere or just sell that quota to a processor in another port. Giving processors quota isn’t about protecting communities, but making a few individuals very wealthy.”
Community ownership of fishing quota
The recently reauthorized Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation & Management Act, nation’s primary fishing law, allows for the creation of “community fisheries” and “regional fishing associations” to hold fishing quota in trust. This new provision of Magnuson-Stevens is intended to protect local fishing-dependent communities - helping to preserve employment from fishing and the investment in plants by processors.
In fact a Government Accountability Office study of Individual Fishing Quotas found that the “easiest and most direct way” to protect the economic viability of fishing communities under a quota program is to “allow fishing communities to hold harvesting quota and decide how this quota is to be used.”
The Pacific Council, however, ignored the new provisions in the law and neither drafted language for such community-based quota control, nor did it analyze it as required by law. The PCFFA in its testimony urged the Pacific Council to take no action until a draft for community ownership of quota was written and analyzed.
The principle proponents for rushing to adopt a quota program for groundfish have come from the Bush Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service, one trawl organization and the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF). EDF has advocated for “market-based” solutions for natural resources, including water marketing, such as the sale of farm water to developers. The organization also brought trawlers, who expect to do well in any allocation, to Washington, editorial boards, and now to the Pacific Council to lobby the plan.
PCFFA, along with Food & Water Watch, the Marine Fish Conservation Network and other organizations have argued that before any plan goes ahead there should be a referendum among those affected to get their approval. Proponents of the Pacific Council plan, however, oppose such a vote.
”Let’s face it, they don’t want a vote because they know very well it’s likely to get turned down in its current form,” said Eureka fisherman Dave Bitts, president of the PCFFA. “We’re frankly tired of a few NGOs [non-governmental organizations] who know nothing about fishing trying to shove, first, MPAs [no-fishing “marine protected areas”] and now IFQs down our throat. They’re not helping the fish but they sure as hell are killing fishermen.”
Jim's Fishing Charters
www.JimsFishing.com
http://ca.youtube.com/user/Sushihunter250
