The European Commission has given its backing to a ban in international trade in the severely endangered bluefin tuna. Sort of. In fact, the Commission has said there should be a provisional listing of the bluefin in Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, meaning international trade in it would in principle be banned, but the ban should be deferred for one year, giving industry a last chance to put its house in order.
This semi-solution is no great surprise. The Japanese are prepared to pay huge sums for bluefin. There is big money at stake for the industrial fishing concerns and their lobbyists.
In any case, the Commission has been shovelling subsidies in the direction of the bluefin fishing fleets, as I wrote in December in the British magazine Private Eye.
Here is my Private Eye article:
Every Brussels policy edict comes with green edging nowadays. So, when in September Monaco suggested that the best way to conserve the highly endangered and emblematic Atlantic bluefin tuna was to ban international trade in it, the European Commission was quick to lend its support – only to huff and puff when Spain and other Mediterranean countries declined to back it up.
But behind all the talk of sustainability, EU money has been bankrolling the bluefin-decimating fleets. Spanish green MEP Raül Romeva has discovered that the Commission has paid €33.4 million since 2000 to vessels licensed for the bluefin fishery. These boats, many owned by industrial fishing conglomerates, are rather less concerned with conservation than they are with selling at premium prices to the Japanese as much of the giant tuna as possible.
And although the Commission has repeatedly talked about the need to reduce Europe’s fishing-fleet capacity, most of the subsidy has been spent on new vessels that will terrorise any remaining bluefin for years to come. EU money has helped pay for no fewer than 121 boats that participated in the bluefin fishery in 2009, including 15 purse seiners, hated by environmentalists because they indiscriminately scoop up sealife in giant drawstring bags. Meanwhile, scappage payments have been made for just nine vessels. Pass the salt and vinegar!
#1 by Jean-Baptiste Perrin on February 24, 2010 - 10:32 am
And even if this convention annex comes into force, smaller fishers will be exempted, which means the fishing of tuna will continue.
#2 by Klaus Pedersen on March 1, 2010 - 12:15 pm
I see nothing wrong with the small fishermen using lines to continue. After all their catch is insignificant and their impact negible compared to purse-seiners.
The problem is that the “big boats” and traders are international, and they will simply go to third countries (like Libya) and find businessmen willing to pack and export their catch to Japan. The stakes are too high for them to walk away.