A good management regime requires sufficient knowledge of severeal
matters on the part of the managing authorities, such as stock
status, catch levels, vessels activities, fleet size, gear specifications.
Clearly it is preferable if the management plan is put in place
when the fish stocks are still abundant and at a level where they
can be harvested sustainably - this avoids the substantial social,
ecological and economic problems associated with implementing
emergency measures when a fish stock has been depleted or even
collapsed.
Experience shows that this is seldom the case. Economic short-sightedness
on the side of the responsible politicians has led to situations
in which warnings from scientists , ecologists and fishermen have
been ignored, with the collapse of fish stocks as a result.
Fisheries management should be based on the precautionary approach,
which means that it should maintain the targeted fish stocks,
as well as other species which are affected by fishing, at relatively
abundant levels. It prevents fishing activities from being so
intense as to significantly distort the ecosystem. It is not sufficient
to prevent extinctions (biological or commercial) of stocks. Management
must take into consideration the uncertainties inherent to fisheries
management, including those relating to catch statistics, scientific
research, fluctuations in recruitment, the variability in the
marine environment, etc.
If the stock level declines below the relatively abundant level
mentioned above, the harvest must be reduced so as to allow the
stock to rebuild. In cases where the stock reaches critical levels,
emergency measures, and possibly a moratorium on fishing is required.
Some fishermen will be affected by such measures and will need
to be compensated. It cannot be emphasized too much that the best
way to avoid such drastic measures is by a precautionary management
regime which seeks to avoid stock depletion and other negative
effects of fishing in the first place, rather than being forced
to take action after it has already happened. The resulting stability
in the fishery would allow fishermen to better plan their activities
and avoid adverse socio-economic consequences.
Last year, some progress was achieved in international fisheries
management through the conclusion of the negotiations of the United
Nations conference on Conservation and Management of Straddling
Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, as well as the FAO
Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. Both these agreements
do refer to the need to implement the precautionary approach in
fisheries management and are expected to be implemented to form
the basis for managing fisheries in various regions of the world.
According to Norwegian politicians, the Norwegian fishery management
is an example for the rest of the world. Norwegian marine scientists
have a large knowledge base and have a high credibility. Norwegian
management have established a ban on discards, something which
is almost unique in the world(45). The coastguard has established
good control mechanisms, which have led to several vessels having
been arrested/fined for overfishing. In the long term, one can
expect that good control will lead to less overfishing.
However, all these positive elements do not mean that Norwegian
fishery management cannot be significantly improved.
Roughly, one can divide Norwegian fishery management into two
separate and independent systems: One in the North Sea and another
in the Barents Sea. In the North Sea, Norway manages fish stocks
with the European Union. In this area, most of the stocks are
either close to or below critical mass(46), and the rules for catch
as well as control are different for Norway and the other countries.
The quotas are not always based on the recommendations from the
scientists, and combined with insuffienct control this leads to
the catch being far too high compared with the biomass of the
stocks.
In the northern regions, where Norway manages the fishing activities
together with Russia, the situation is entirely different. After
several years of overfishing of herring, cod, and other stocks,
with subsequent catastrophic results for the stocks as well as
for the fishermen who depended on them, Norway and Russia together
have created an improved management plan. The fishermen must adhere
to the same kind of rules, a common database keeps track of the
catch and the control mechanisms function satisfactorily. The
total quotas for the stocks are set, as a rule, following the
advice of the scientists, and for both herring and cod this has
had a positive effect. Unfortunately this has not been the case
with halibut and capelin, but there is reason to believe that
the positive experiences with the management of cod and herring
will be used on these stocks as well, in a not too distant future.