One aspect of today's omnipresent sustainable-seafood movement that often gets short shrift is the sustainability of the industry itself - by that, I mean the fishermen and the processors that make seafood available to us all. Indeed, science should guide fishery-management decisions; but if key stakeholders are eliminated from the process, then we're missing the boat.
During the week of June 9, the Pacific Fishery Management Council will vote to adopt either a shared-market system, similar to what's currently in place, or individual fishing quotas (IFQs) that would allow only owners of government-issued permits to participate in the Pacific whiting and groundfish fisheries. More than 300 stakeholders in the West Coast seafood industry representing more than 3,600 jobs say IFQs, which Alaska has turned to for several of its fisheries with varying degrees of success, would essentially create a monopoly.
The Portland, Ore.-based Coastal Jobs Coalition, comprising industry leaders, restaurant owners and other local businesses, argues that a shared market would protect jobs in coastal communities, guarantee fair access to resources, stabilize prices for consumers and encourage environmental stewardship.
"An individual quota system has the potential to be a great solution for the region's seafood industry, as it can help to manage our natural resources and alleviate the pressure to race for fish. The proposed new rules, however, allow a select group to reap the benefits," says Heather Munro Mann, deputy director of the West Coast Seafood Processors Association. "The rest of the coastal community's stakeholders - from workers in processing plants to restaurants, retailers and consumers - face considerable insecurity."
While researching the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act when it was reauthorized in early 2007, I spoke to Clem Tillion, a hard-nosed Alaskan who was a charter member of the North Pacific Fishery Management Council. Tillion supported IFQs, which were not at all popular when first introduced. One thing he said stuck with me: "The purpose of fisheries is not to provide jobs," he said. "You serve the fishermen best if you keep the resource healthy."
But I also spoke to David Benton, director of the Marine Conservation Alliance in Juneau, Alaska, who told me that a cookie-cutter approach to fishery management isn't the way to go. "One size does not fit all," he said. "Each [plan] needs to be designed and tailored for each individual fishery."
Nothing should prevent the conservation of wild fisheries and jobs within the seafood industry; a healthy balance is essential. If some of the largest West Coast seafood companies and organizations can agree to share access to the resource, then it's a solution that bears a closer look. Come June 9, let's hope the council has done just that.
Thank you,
James Wright
Assistant Editor
SeaFood Business
