The Oceans

The oceans are on the verge of complete collapse, a fact found by several reputable reports: the decrease in biodiversity due to overfishing and invasive species, the chemical threats of global warming and pollution, and destructive and increasingly efficient fishing technology - among other causes - have been found to fundamentally alter the state of the oceans in a decidedly negative manner.

...

Findings released more than a year ago in Science Magazine provide overwhelming evidence that loss in marine biodiversity, which is "directly caused by exploitation, pollution, and habitat destruction, or indirectly through climate change and related perturbations of ocean biochemistry" (Worm et al., 2006, p. 787), lead to significant overall decrease in productivity. This decrease in biodiversity and subsequent decrease in productivity, as well as the disruption of ocean currents from global pollution (Pew), directly impacts all of humanity, from those who eat and catch fish to the land-locked nations without any immediate connection to the fishing industry. Boris Worm, the scientist who introduced the idea of "no fish by 2050," quoted in an article as saying, "we're going to run out of viable fisheries, out of all seafood species by the year 2050" (ScienCentral, 2006), in conjunction with several other authors, issued the report in Science Magazine relating the devastating effect of the loss of biodiversity:
"Human-dominated marine ecosystems are experiencing accelerating loss of populations and species, with largely unknown consequences. We analyzed local experiments, long-term regional time series, and global fisheries data to test how biodiversity loss affects marine ecosystems services across temporal and spatial scales. Overall, rates of resource collapse increased and recovery potential, stability, and water quality decreased exponentially with declining diversity. Restoring of biodiversity, in contrast, increased productivity fourfold and decreased variability by 21%, on average. We conclude that marine biodiversity loss in increasingly impairing the ocean's capacity to provide food, maintain water quality, and recover from perturbations. Yet available data suggest that at this point, these trends are still reversible" (Worm et al., 2006, p. 787).

The World Fisheries

"In 2000, the FAO stated that 72% of the world's marine fish resources are either fully exploited or in decline. This state of overexploitation has led to practices in cascade fishing, where smaller, immature individuals or different stocks of lesser value and quality replace the former stocks that existed in higher trophic levels. Thus, leading to the current declining trend in fish harvest from high-value demersal fish to lower-value pelagic fish" (Duke). According to Annual Commercial Landing Statistics from NOAA, the tonnage of fish caught in US fisheries from 1950 to 2006 has nearly doubled to more than 4.3 million tons per annum, with a peak in 1997 at nearly 4.8 million tons (NOAA, 2007), yet because of this increase in production, the fish stocks have decreased by 90% since 1950 (Big-Fish, 2003). "Only 10 percent of all large fish - both open ocean species including tuna, swordfish, marlin and the large groundfish such as cod, halibut, skates and flounder - are left in the sea, according to research published in today's issue of the scientific journal Nature" (Big-Fish, 2003). The fisheries are as susceptible to collapse as the ecosystems upon which they depend.

...

A major problem facing the enforcement of international fishing regulations is the issue of flag hopping and fishing under flags of convenience.  The phenomenon is a direct result of many countries opening their fishing registries to fishing companies of other nationalities. By allowing this, countries can increase the revenue that they gain from fishing, and this has made the idea of open registry very popular in poorer countries such as Panama and Bolivia.  All of this sounds fine, when the country allowing open registry follows international protocol.  However, the reason flag hopping is so detrimental to international fishing regulations is that many countries where open registry is popular, do not abide by international fishing laws nor do they sign on to international treaties.  This means that fishing companies that register under the flag of these countries no longer have to abide by these laws either.  They can go into marine reserves and fish, they can fish as much as they want to and with no fear of repercussion, and if they country decides that they wish to comply with international regulations then the fishing company can simply switch flags in order to continue fishing outside of regulations, hence the term flag hopping.  Boats can switch flags without ever docking in the port of the country that they wish to switch to.  This phenomenon creates a tremendous loophole in the enforcement of international fishing regulations and negatively curbs the effects of fishing regulations (Desombre, 2005).

World Fish Production

Figure-1

Figure-2

Figure-3

Table-1

Current Catch

As you can see from figures 1 and 2, the overall amount of fish being put out to market all over the world is increasing every year. The amount of fish pulled from our oceans is beginning to level off while the amount of fish provided by aquaculture is increasing, but the oceans still cannot support the amount of fish that we are extracting. This means that the amount of fish being pulled from the ocean currently (wild catch) must decrease for the ecosystem to stabilize.

...

China is a major fish producer but is also a major consumer. Over the last few years, China has been putting more stock into aquaculture which has caused the amount of fish they produce to increase overall and the amount of wild catch to level off.

International Cooperation

Currently, there are several international organizations working towards aspects of our goal to save the oceans. The UN has employed several research and management groups and set out governance of the oceans by the Law of the Sea and subsequent agreements and annexes. Other organizations for protection of the oceans fall under Regional Fishery Bodies (RFBs), also known as Regional Fishery Management Councils.

...

The Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection, or GESAMP, is a research team that works on science of sustainable oceans. GESAMP is a joint initiative supported by several UN organizations, including UNEP, FAO, the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (UNESCO-IOC), the World Meteorological Organization (WMO)), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and the UN Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO).

Regional Fishery Bodies (RFBs)

Regional Fishery Bodies are essential to the protection of marine resources and the management of the oceans.

...

The use of RFBs to promote regional cooperation and implementation of international fishery agreements is still a promising idea. In order for their potential to be met, they must be made much more powerful and gain the ability to utilize the instruments given to them by international agreements (Role of Regional Fishing Bodies, 1999).

Subsidies

Fishing subsidies come in many forms. Direct government payments to the industry include a grants made for the purchase of new fishing vessels, vessel decommissioning payments (buybacks), fishermen's unemployment insurance, compensation for closed seasons, equity infusions, and price support programs (Schrank, 2003).Current

Subsidies

Many countries subsidize their fishing industries because of the important role it plays in their job economy and food supply. Annual subsidies for fishing amount to $10 to $15 about $26 billion world wide, only $7 billion of which goes towards fisheries management and the support of conservation. On the other hand, $16 billion---possibly more than 25 percent of the annual $56 billion trade in fish (CITATION NEEDED).

American and Canadian fisheries have been highly subsidized for many years in order to develop their domestic fisheries. Apart from that, they have also used approximately US$3,000,000,000 on income maintenance for unemployed fishermen and fish plant workers and improving fisheries science. In 1990s, when people started to realize the problem of overfishing, both countries started to subsidize to develop technologies to reduce capacity. (Schrank, 2003)

Norway, one of the largest cod-catching countries, grants loans to their fishing industries to support the export of their fishing market. They also grant loans to vessel arrangements, price support, insurance subsidies, operating subsidies, minimum income guarantees, vacation support and unemployment insurance, bait subsidies, gear subisidies and damage compensation) (Schrank, 2003)

Some are harmful; some may help to solve the problem of overfishing. In view of this, WTO agreed on restricting subsidies designed to promote export and establish controls over other form of subsidies. Canada, Japan, and other countries with a large fishery industry, however, endorse the "no-need approach" in which no restriction of subsidies should be imposed as they dispute the casual link between subsidies and overexploitation of fish resources. They propose fisheries management regimes deal with catch controls (quotas), effort controls (restrictions on boat size, engine power and days at sea, etc.) and right-based structures (permits, individual transferable quotas, etc.). Therefore, in Japan's view, it would be unfair if these varying situations are ignored and certain fisheries subsidies automatically prohibited. (Benitah, 2004)
Other countries propose the Traffic Light approach: red (forbidden subsidies), green (permitted subsidies), amber (slow down, which means that subsidies may be subjected to a complaint on the basis of their adverse trade effects). By this approach, desirable subsidies will be maintained while direct payment to promote export would be banned or discouraged.
This measure has been supported by countries like Norway. (Benitah, 2004)

The Problem

However, difficulties exist in the elimination of subsidies. As subsidies are regarded as one of the invisible protectionist measures, it is almost impossible to measure the amount of subsidies that a country provides to is fishing industry.

Currently subsidies are costing the governments around the world billions of dollars and only harming the state of fisheries by increasing the fishing effort and making it easier for us to deplete the fishing stock. Money is directed to lower the costs of shipbuilding, to compensate fishermen, and to establish joint fishermen, among other things. Studies show that fishing subsidies for the Distant Water Fleets of developed nations are harming the economy and growth of developing nations.

--is going towards the sponsorship of fishing fleets, thus encouraging the global fishing effort and increasing fishing capacity. This has lead to a 250% increase in the global fishing fleet (Sumaila & Pauly, 2006).

Fishing subsidies come in many forms. Direct government payments to the industry reduce operating costs of fishing vessels in order to encourage fishing. Such assistance include a grants made for the purchase of new fishing vessels, vessel decommissioning payments (buybacks), fishermen's unemployment insurance, compensation for closed seasons, equity infusions, and price support programs (Schrank, 2003). When implemented by developed countries for their Distant Water Fleets (DWF), it gives the vessels an advantage over the fishing boats of developing countries. Indirect financial assistance comes in the form of subsidizing shipbuilders and fish processors, credit and loan assistance, and tax reductions. Governments can also help their fishermen by imposing trade restrictions such as import tariffs, which ensures that foreign prices are not lower than domestic prices, and import quotas, which restricts the number of fish that can be imported.

Almost half of the subsidies issued in the world are from 38 different developed nations. The other half is accounted for by 103 different developing nations. This disparity only increases the advantages fishing fleets of developed nations have over their developing counterparts.

In France, construction subsidies are directed at DWFs catching tuna in the Indian ocean with purse seine. Furthermore, the government sponsors the deflagging of their own ships so that their vessels can be recommissioned under the flag of another country. Spain, too, offers up to a 55 percent construction subsidy, and subsidize joint ventures with Angola, Algeria, Argentina, Falkland Islands, Morocco, Mauritania, Senegal, Namibia, and other countries in Africa and South America, mainly to catch shrimp. A one third reduction in the Spanish fishing fleet is due to reflagging and recommissioning (MRAG, 2000). Vessel operators only pay about one third of the fees associated with obtaining a license and permit to fish in another country's waters. In offering these subsidies, countries are essentially encouraging the flag-hopping that was discussed earlier. Furthermore, this increases the fishing capacity of countries that are already under-compensated; in 1996, Guinea Bissau only received 1 percent of the profits made from the tuna caught in their waters (Kura et al., 2006).

American and Canadian fisheries have also been highly subsidized for many years in order to develop their domestic fisheries. Apart from that, they have also used approximately $3 billion on income maintenance for unemployed fishermen and fish plant workers and improving fisheries science. In 1990s, when people started to realize the problem of overfishing, both countries began subsidizing the development of technologies to reduce capacity (Schrank, 2003).

Norway, one of the largest cod-catching countries, grants loans to their fishing industries to support the export of their fishing market. They also grant loans to vessel arrangements, price support, insurance subsidies, operating subsidies, minimum income guarantees, vacation support and unemployment insurance, bait subsidies, gear subisidies and damage compensation (Schrank, 2003).

In view of the harmful nature of some subsidies, WTO agreed on restricting subsidies designed to promote exports and establish controls over other form of subsidies. Canada, Japan, and other countries with a large fishery industry, however, endorse the "no-need approach" in which no restriction of subsidies should be imposed as they dispute the casual link between subsidies and overexploitation of fish resources. They propose fisheries management regimes deal with catch controls (quotas), effort controls (restrictions on boat size, engine power and days at sea, etc.) and right-based structures (permits, individual transferable quotas, etc.). Therefore, in Japan's view, it would be unfair if these varying situations are ignored and certain fisheries subsidies automatically prohibited. (Benitah, 2004)

Works Cited: 

Marine Resources Assessment Group (2000). Impact of Fisheries Subsidies on Developing Countries. Retrieved November 23, 2007 from http://www.onefish.org/servlet/BinaryDownloaderServlet?filename=1079973819915_DFIDSUMMARYNOV2000.doc&refID=20413^{Image Added}. Works Cited:  

 Milazzo, M. (2000). The World Bank: Subsidies in World Fisheries: A Re-examination. Technical Paper, No. 406, 4-6.

Benitah, M. (June 2004). Ongoing WTO Negotiations on Fisheries SUbsidies. ASIL Insights, 1-3-3.

Kura, Y., Revenga, C., Hoshino, E., & Mock, G. (2004). Fishing for Answers: Making Sense of the Global Fish Crisis. World Resources Institute.

Schrank, W. (2003). Introducing Fisheries Subsidies. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper, 437, 1-5

Sumaila, U.R. & Pauly, D. (2006). "Catching More Bait: A Bottom-up Re-estimation of Global Fisheries Subsidies." Retrieved November 23, 2007, from http://www.oceana.org/fileadmin/oceana/uploads/dirty_fishing/cut_the_bait/2007_Subs_outreach_kit/Pauly___Sumaila_Report_on_Subsidies_Oct06.pdf.&nbsp^{Image Added};

International Council for the Exploration of the Seas

The International Council for the Exploration of the Seas (ICES) is a scientific organization based in Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES "coordinates and promotes marine research in the North Atlantic" with the help and expertise of more than 1600 scientists from its twenty member countries ("About us - What do we do?").\[1\] ICES uses its research to create cohesive marine management plans for its members.

...

+Footnotes+
\[1\] Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America are members of ICES. Australia, Chile, Greece, New Zealand, Peru, and South Africa are affiliate countries.
\\

Fishing Technology

Modern fishing technology was built to catch as many fish as possible as efficiently as possible, and it is very effective at doing its job. Unfortunately, it achieves this effectiveness at the expense of the health of the oceanic ecosystem. The three overarching problems of current fishing technology are: the destruction of the ocean floor and environs, ghost fishing, and bycatch.

...

all of the works cite are on the More Research page

Whaling

Photo © Greenpeace / Jeff Pantukhoff.
School children in Baja, Mexico send a powerful message before an IWC meeting.

...

Several aboriginal communities that depend on whale meat for nutrition have been allowed to hunt whales, with catch limits set by the IWC (IWC, 2007a). An Aboriginal Whaling Scheme will be established and will comprise the scientific and logistical aspects of the management of all aboriginal fisheries.

Cruise Ship Pollution

Mission 2011 is about saving the oceans and the fisheries, and an integral part of solving the current problem is taking action against all forces of nature which are destroying marine life and the marine environment. One such force which the public is not aware of are the 'Floating Cities' known to the general public as cruise ships. California Represenative Sam Farr is from California, and his whose district includes the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. He , writes, "The pristine ocean cruisers we see in TV commercials are also massive ocean polluters, often generating and dumping wastes equivalent to those of a small city into our coastal waters." (This a from a quote inside a source, the CQ researcher - I'm not exactly sure how to cite it.) Even more devastating are the effects of cruise ships near delicate environments such Caribbeancoral Caribbean coral reefs, where the effects of pollution are magnified.

...