 by Daniel W. Bromley August 15, 2002
These problems suggest - contrary to the declaration of Frederick Jackson Turner in 1893 on "closing of the American frontier" - that the frontier has simply moved offshore. We have now had over 25 years of ineffective attempts to manage America's fisheries. During this time many participants continued to imagine that the ocean's bounty is infinitely abundant and providentially resilient. Many politicians from coastal states were allies in criticizing federal fishery managers even when scientific evidence suggested that fishing should be reduced to protect threatened fish populations Now comes the Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) - the ultimate rabbit out of a hat. There is now a Congressional moratorium on the introduction of new IFQs but the moratorium seems certain to be lifted. What are IFQs and what will they do for the management of America's fisheries? Why such a strong interest in IFQs? Current versions of IFQs are permits entitling the fortunate recipient a perpetual opportunity to harvest a share of annual allowable catch in a particular fishery. These permits are given away free to all who have some qualifying "catch history" in that fishery. Since some recipients receive small shares in the allocation process, there is pressure for consolidation - the smaller recipients selling their petty shares to those who obtained large shares. This leads to consolidation under duress since prices are depressed - few buyers and many desperate sellers. Advocacy for such IFQs comes from an ideological lobby - privatization advocates claim that IFQs are private property rights despite the unambiguous law that IFQs are simply permits to pursue and land a share of the public's wealth of ocean fisheries. If they were property rights, we can imagine the commercial fishing industry lawyers coming to court seeking compensation for "takings" when science dictates that landings be reduced. Another ideological claim, that fishermen should be given property rights in the fishery because private ownership induces good stewardship of nature, is also false. Since the creation of Yellowstone National Park in 1872, the nation has understood that the only sure way to prevent natural assets from being plowed, harvested, or "developed," into oblivion is to bestow protection through public ownership and management. Only the citizen-owners, looking not to the present value of future earnings, but to the future value of present actions, can prevent the inevitable destruction of nature in the name of what passes these days for "progress." Another inspiration for IFQs emerges from the same source that has made for much depressing reading of late - good old-fashioned greed. Landings from America's commercial fisheries in 2000 had a value of $3.625 billion. The present value of this annual income stream capitalized at 6 percent is $64 billion dollars. Little wonder that we now encounter advocates for IFQs as the wet and modern equivalent of the Homestead Act. Do the owners (the American people) of the wealth of ocean fisheries - $64 billion of it - really wish to give it away to a few in the commercial fishing industry free of charge? If Congress lifts the moratorium on IFQs, these permits must be equitably allocated for 5-year terms to fishermen submitting the highest bids for the opportunity to catch our fish. Bids would consist of royalty payments as a percent of the value of landings from the fishery, paid only after the fish are sold. Revenue realized from auction of IFQs could both generate an owner's share for the U.S. Treasury, and - in the early stages - provide funding to underwrite a buyout of fishermen who agreed to exit the industry. Finally, fishery managers must reassert their commitment to be stewards of OUR ocean resources. With fishermen paying to harvest our fish - standard practice in other federal programs such as oil and gas production, timber harvests, grazing permits and airwaves - we would get an equitable start on closing the last American frontier.
Note: Daniel W. Bromley is Anderson-Bascom Professor of Applied Economics, University of Wisconsin-Madison. He has served on the Ocean Studies Board of the National Academy of Sciences, and is the author (with Seth Macinko) of WHO OWNS AMERICA'S FISHERIES? (Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2002).
|