EDFish

The Deadliest Catch? Less Dangerous Under Catch Shares

Under conventional fishery management, fishermen often have no choice but to go out in rough seas. Under catch share management, fishermen have the flexibility to wait and fish in good weather and safer waters.

Today the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced that in 2009 commercial fishing once again had the highest fatality rate per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. The rate was approximately 60 times the average fatality rate for all workers, and was higher than for loggers, police and sheriff’s patrol officers, as well as aircraft pilots and flight engineers.

Why is it so dangerous? To a certain degree, fishing is inherently dangerous – going out on a boat in the middle of the ocean, hauling heavy swinging pots or nets onto a deck covered in gear while waves crash around you carries a certain amount of risk. But the job can be made more dangerous due to restrictive fishery management policies that try to limit fishermen’s catch by severely limiting fishing seasons and/or days-at-sea. When faced with such restrictions, fishermen attempt to maximize their catch in these short windows of time by going out regardless of weather, working longer shifts and overloading their boats with equipment.

Keith “Buddy” Guindon from Galveston, Texas had one of the scariest moments of his career as a lifelong commercial fisherman when the Gulf’s commercial red snapper fishery used to be limited to short seasons. He and his crew fished so long and hard that one night the lookout on duty fell asleep, leaving the boat to drive itself for 2 to 3 hours through the Gulf’s now infamous oil field. Surprisingly, the boat didn’t wreck — avoiding potentially fatal consequences.

One way safety can be improved is with catch share management. Under catch shares, fishermen are required to stay within a specified cap for the season and in return have flexibility about over when to fish. The result is safer jobs. Five years after catch shares were implemented, ten U.S. and British Columbian commercial fisheries saw an average 2.5 fold increase in safety, as measured by lost vessels, search and rescue missions, injuries, deaths and safety violations.

The number of search and rescue missions for Alaska’s halibut and sablefish fishermen declined after catch shares were implemented from 26 and 33 in 1993 and 1994 respectively (pre-catch shares) to just 5 cases in 2007 and 3 in 2008 (under catch shares).   More than 85 percent Alaska halibut fishermen surveyed found fishing to be safer under catch shares.

Many people think of Alaska crab as “The Deadliest Catch” after watching the popular Discovery Channel series filmed in the Bering Sea. The Alaskan crab fisheries were quite deadly: one vessel and five crewmen were lost on average each year in the 1990s. 
The fishery became safer due to both the implementation of a dockside safety monitoring program, and by switching to catch share management. Ending the “race for fish” reduced the incentive for stacking too much gear on board (destabilizing vessels) and reduced pressure to fish in poor weather conditions. It also improved the economic stability of the industry, eliminating less seaworthy vessels and leading to the development of more professional crews, all of which contributed to improved safety.

An article in Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council, the Coast Guard Journal of Safety at Sea states, “an increased number of fishing days, increased flexibility for masters to choose when to fish, and reduced emphasis on catching power and large pot loads potentially have safety benefits and contribute to eliminating vessel losses.”  Since coming under catch share management five years ago, there has been only one crabber in Alaska who has lost his life while fishing.

The experience in Alaska illustrates how catch share programs can play an important role in improving safety. Catch shares reduce the pressure to fish in bad weather and dangerous conditions, as well as allow fishermen to work with more rest in between trips. Because catch share programs are more profitable, fishermen can also better afford to maintain their vessels.

Buddy Guindon is glad that the Gulf’s commercial red snapper fishery is now a catch share.

“It is important to note that some fisheries are far more dangerous than others,” said Dave Preble, a retired charter boat and commercial fisherman from Rhode Island, who is currently on the New England Fishery Management Council. “But all fisheries are safer under quota/hard TAC (catch share) management.”

Linked Sources

Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries Summary, 2009. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf

National Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries in 2009 – Preliminary Results. Press Release. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. August 19, 2010. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf

National Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries in 2009 – Preliminary Results. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. Hours-based fatal injury rates by industry, occupation, and selected demographic characteristics. August 19, 2010. http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfoi_rates_2009hb.pdf

“Assessing the Potential for LAPPs in US Fisheries,” by Redstone Strategy Group, LLC and Environmental Defense, March 2007. http://www.redstonestrategy.com/reports.php?action=detail&publicationID=12

NOAA Fisheries Service. Catch Share Spotlight No. 1. Alaska IFQ Halibut and Sablefish Program, November 2009. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/domes_fish/catchshare/docs/ak_halibut_sablefish.pdf

“Effects of IFQ Management on Fishing Safety: Survey Responses of Alaska Halibut Fishermen,” University of Alaska Institute of Social and Economic Research, May 1999. http://www.iser.uaa.alaska.edu/Projects/ifqsurv/safety.pdf

“Report to the Governor: Three Years of Safety, Stability and Improved Resource Management,” The Coalition for Safe and Sustainable Crab Fisheries, Alaska, Washington and Oregon, 2008. http://www.wafro.com/imageuploads/file175.pdf
 
Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council, the Coast Guard Journal of Safety at Sea, Spring 2009.

Posted in Uncategorized / Tagged , , , , , , | Read 1 Response

Catch Share Design Case Study: Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Pilot Conservation Cooperation

Catch Share ConversationsOur last case study in this week’s Catch Share Conversation about harvesting cooperatives comes from the Gulf of Alaska. In 2007, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council implemented a five year pilot cooperative program in the commercial sector of the Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Fishery. The program was designed to address problems of overcapacity and derby fishing and to meet various additional goals. After three years, the pilot program is meeting its goals of ending the race for fish, improving product quality, protecting shore plants and communities, and decreasing bycatch and discards.

Alaska OutlinePrior to cooperative formation, the fishery was plagued by problems due to traditional management approaches including overcapitalization, shrinking fishing seasons, decreased safety and poor product quality. The fishing season shrunk to a dismal derby-filled three weeks. Read the full case study of how the Rockfish cooperative combines a number of design features to meet their goals including shares for target and bycatch species, provisions for new entrants, limitations on trading and more.

Posted in Pacific / Comments are closed

Catch Share Design Case Study: Chile’s Area-based Cooperatives

Catch Share ConversationsChile, on the Pacific side of South America, enjoys one of the most productive upwelling ecosystems in the world (the Greater Humboldt Current Marine Ecosystem) along much of its 2,500+ mile coastline. Around two percent of the labor force, or over 120,000 people, are employed in the fishing industry including artisanal and industrial fishermen and aquaculturists.

Chile has a well-developed system of area-based cooperatives, known as Territorial User Rights Fisheries (TURFs) or Management and Exploitation Areas for Benthic Resources (MEABRs). The system was primarily developed to manage “loco” (Concholepas concholepas), Chile’s most economically important benthic artisanal resource. Loco may only be fished by members of the area-based cooperatives and exclusive access of over 100,000 hectares has been granted to groups of artisanal fishermen (called guild associations, unions or cooperatives). 

All other species found in the TURF,except those declared as fully exploited, can be extracted by cooperative members if the species are included in the fishery management plan developed by their cooperative.3 At least 63 species including molluscs, algae, crustaceans, finfish and other invertebrates are landed under the Chilean area-based cooperative system.

Take a look at the full case study of Chile’s Area-Based Cooperatives, a part of our Catch Share Conversations series, to learn more about the cooperatives’ history, performance, and key design features.

Posted in Uncategorized / Comments are closed

Catch Share Design Case Study: The Pollock Conservation Cooperative

Catch Share ConversationsIn continuing with our look at harvesting cooperatives as a part of our Catch Share Conversations series, the Pollock Conservation Cooperative in Alaska’s Bering Sea shows a good example of how a cooperative form of catch share can lead to conservation and economic benefits for fisheries.

The Pollock Conservation Cooperative (PCC) was established in 1999 and is made up of six member companies operating 19 catch-processor vessels. As an industry led initiative, the PCC is used to coordinate harvesting activities that promote conservation of fish stocks and better utilization of landed fish. The PCC has resulted in slower paced pollock fishing, a longer season – from 74 days in 1998 to 285 days in 2009, and 50 percent more product per pound of fish landed.

Read the CSC Pollock Conservation Cooperative of the Pollock Conservation Cooperative to learn more about its history, performance, and key design features.

Posted in Pacific / Tagged , , , , | Comments are closed

Catch Share Conversations: A look at Catch Share Design Options — Harvesting Cooperatives

Catch Share ConversationsOnce managers and fishermen decide to implement a catch share program, the next critical step in achieving the conservation, economic and social goals of the fishery is to effectively design the catch share program. Catch shares management is not a one-size-fits-all approach; rather programs are designed to meet the specific needs and goals of each fishery. From determining who holds the allocation privilege to how shares or quota are allocated to whether or not allocation is transferable, there are many factors to consider along the way of designing an effective catch share management system.

Our new monthly EDFish series, Catch Share Conversations, takes a look at some of these decision points or conversations in the design process. This month we offer a look at harvesting cooperatives, which have a variety of benefits and some challenges.

In harvesting cooperatives, groups of organized fishery participants jointly manage secure and exclusive access to the fishery. In return for this privilege, cooperatives are accountable for operating a sustainable fishery within the scientifically determined catch limit and/or dedicated area. Examples of cooperatives include the New England groundfish sectors program and the Bering Sea’s Pollock Conservation Cooperative.

You can read our Catch Share Conversations Backgrounder for a deeper look at harvesting cooperatives. In the next few days on EDFish, we’ll also share three specific case studies of cooperative-based catch shares.

Posted in Uncategorized / Tagged , , , | Comments are closed

Wisconsin Great Lakes ITQ Program: Stability and Profitability in a Changing Ecosystem

Kate Bonzon, EDF Director of Design Advisory Services

Kate Bonzon, EDF Director of Design Advisory Services

When you think about catch shares, do you imagine marine fisheries? While catch shares are generally used in the salty world of the ocean, there are actually a number of catch share programs in freshwater lake fisheries as well. In fact, the United States’ oldest catch shares occur in the Great Lakes!

In 1971, in response to concerns about stock sustainability and increasing conflicts between user groups, the state of Wisconsin developed a catch share for the Lake Superior commercial lake trout fishery.1  Following the success of this program, and in response to shorter and shorter seasons, managers expanded the Wisconsin catch share program to fisheries on Lake Michigan.  Chub and yellow perch came under a catch share in 1983, and rainbow smelt, lake whitefish and round whitefish were added in 1989.2 Fishermen and managers agree that the catch share program has successfully maintained stable and profitable commercial fisheries in the Wisconsin waters of the Great Lakes. 

“ITQs [Individual Transferable Quotas] allow you to make business decisions, and feel confident in those decisions; in general, the fishery is more professional.”3

– Charlie Henriksen, President
   Wisconsin Commercial Fishermen’s Association and Lake Michigan whitefish fisherman

A Declining Ecosystem
The Wisconsin waters of the Great Lakes have supported fishing operation since the 1800s, fishing operations that led to significant decline in stocks in the early and mid-1900s.  While fishing effort and harvests have been stabilized with more effective management, other factors continue to contribute to changes in the lakes’ ecosystems. Wetlands degradation, invasive species and pollution all threaten the health of the lakes and fish stocks that live in them. Development of coastal lands has contributed to extensive reduction of coastal wetlands on Lake Michigan.4

The remaining wetlands provide vital habitat for fish stocks that contributes to fish health and productivity, and these are threatened by dredging and nutrient runoff.  Invasive species are also a threat to the Lake Michigan and Lake Superior ecosystems.  By 1999, new species were being introduced to Lake Michigan at a rate of one per year.5 Species such as sea lampreys, zebra mussels and quagga mussels negatively impact fish stocks through predation and resource competition. Read More »

Posted in Uncategorized / Comments are closed