May 26, 2012 – FOR American fish, this is a good time to be alive. On May 14th the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reported that a record six federal fisheries returned to health last year. After a decade of similar progress, 86% of America’s roughly 250 federally monitored commercial fish stocks were not subject to overfishing; 79% were considered healthy.
This is also good for American fishermen. Commercial and recreational fishing generates an estimated $183 billion a year and supports over 1.5m full-time or part-time jobs. Rebuilding America’s 45 remaining over-exploited fish stocks, NOAA estimates, could generate an extra $31 billion a year and half a million jobs.
That is a tribute to America learning a simple truth—that scientists, not fishermen or politicians, should decide how many fish can be caught—and enforcing this with simple rules. It has taken a while. America’s main fishery law established the importance of scientific quotas in 1976. Yet this was routinely ignored because of poor science and weak enforcement, abetted by influential fishermen—notably in New England, which was built on once-rich Atlantic cod and haddock fisheries. The Massachusetts House of Representatives contains a conspicuous symbol of this: the “Sacred Cod”, a 200-year-old fish of solid pine, hanging from its ceiling.
The politicians are still interfering. On May 9th the House passed legislation forbidding NOAA from developing an innovative means of apportioning fishing quotas, known as catch shares. These are long-term, aiming to give fishermen a stake in the future of their fisheries; market-based, since they can be traded; and, in practice, good for fish. Sadly, the two Republican congressmen behind the ban consider they have been designed “to destroy every aspect of American freedom under the guise of conservation”.
Read the full article at the Economist.
Analysis: While the Economist correctly notes that American fish stocks are rebounding, it errs when it casts opposition to new catch share regulations as the product of partisan politics. Opposition to catch shares is widespread in fishing communities, and has been opposed in Congress by a diverse and bipartisan group of legislators. Catch shares are currently being challenged in court by the cities of Gloucester and New Bedford, whose suit alleges that, by instating the system without first holding a referendum of the fishery on its implementation, NOAA violated federal fisheries laws.
In Congress, previous efforts to defund catch shares have attracted considerable bipartisan support. A measure in 2011 that was similar to thelaw the Economist cites passed with both Democratic and Republican support, with efforts being led by Congressmen Barney Frank (D-MA) and Walter Jones (R-NC).