Gobble, Gobble: Subsidies Keep Fisheries Well Fed

Recently, the NGO Oceana distributed subsidy snowglobes to WTO delegates from 150 nations. The subsidy globes each contain one fish, one factory fishing boat, and with a little agitation, lots of lots of coins that reign down on both. An index card of facts comes with the globe. The first fact: "Reducing fisheries subsidies is the single most significant action that can be taken to address global overfishing."

Acclaimed fisheries biologist Peter Larkin once described the government funds that keep fisheries afloat as "a long mane of hairy subsidies." Worldwide, fisheries subsidies are estimated at $30-34 billion annually, the overwhelming majority of which goes to industrial fisheries. Now, some of those subsides are 'good' (such as fisheries monitoring) but an estimated $20 billion are 'bad' or 'ugly' (subject to opinion).

With subsidies, policy-makers keep excess fishing capacity on the sea. When compared to other countries, the U.S. is not anywhere near the worst offenders. India, the EU, and Brazil, are among the countries with the worst subsidy portfolios. But subsidies are still an issue in the U.S. as Jack Sterne of Ocean Champions explained:

"Subsidies are an indirect issue at Ocean Champions, in the sense that many of the problems we see in U.S. fisheries today are a hangover from the intense overcapitalization that occurred following the passage of the Magnuson Act in 1976.  During that period, the U.S. did in essence subsidize the creation of a U.S. industry through loan programs, etc. that resulted in a massive increase in the size of the U.S.-flagged fleet."