~ CHAPTER 9 ~ FISHERY ECONOMICS ~
(9-A) ~
Import - Export Data ~ [A1]~Global, [A2]~Developing Countries, [A3]~Europe, [A4]~First World, [A5]~Latin America, [A6]~United States, [A7]~Africa, ~SECTION (9-A) ~ Import-Export Data ~ [A1]~
Global, [A2]~Developing Countries, [A3]~Europe, [A4]~First World, [A5]~Latin America, [A6]~US, [A7]~Africa, ~Part [A1] ~ Fishery Economics ~ Import/ Export Data ~ Global ~
Fig. 26 of Ref. (
07F1) charts world fishery exports (in US$billions / year) by major commodity groups as a function of time during 1978-2004 (Commodity groups include fish for human consumption and for non-human consumption.)Fig. 29 of Ref. (
07F1) plots imports and exports of fish and fishery products for different regions as a function of time for the period 1978-2004.Fish are one of the most highly traded food- and feed commodities. The share of the fish trade in both total GDP and agricultural GDP has roughly doubled since around 1980 (
07F1).The fishery net exports of developing countries (i.e. the total value of their exports less the total value of their imports) have shown a continuous rising trend since around 1985 (US$4.6 billion in 1984, US$6.1 billion in 1994, and US$20.4 billion in 2004) (
07F1). Shrimp continues to be the most important commodity traded in value terms (16.5% of the total value of internationally traded fishery products in 2004, followed by ground fish (10.2%), Tuna (8.7%) and salmon (8.5%) (07F1). In 2004, fishmeal represented about 3.3% of the value of exports and fish oil less than 1% (07F1).In 2004, total world trade of fish and fishery products reached a record value of US$71.5 billion (export value) a 23% growth relative to 2000 and a 51% growth since 1994. In inflation-adjusted terms, exports of fish and fishery products increased by 17.3% during 2000-2004, 18.2% during 1994-2004, and 143.9% during 1984-2004 (
07F1).The share of fishery exports of developing countries as a percentage of global fishery exports increased from 37% in 1976 to 51% in 2000-2001 before declining to 48% in 2004. Fishery net exports of developing countries (i.e. total value of their exports minus total value of their imports) grew from US$4.6 billion in 1984 to US$16.0 billion in 1995 and to US$20.4 billion in 2004. These figures are significantly higher than those for other agricultural commodities such as rice, coffee and tea (
07F1).Latin America, the Caribbean, developing Asia and Oceania are strongly positive net exporters of fishery products. Africa has been a net exporter since 1985. Europe, Japan and North America all had a fishery trade deficit. In 2004, 97 countries were net exporters of fish and fishery products (
07F1).In the period 2002-2004, about 77% of the value of fishery exports of developing countries was directed to developed areas, mainly to the EU, Japan, and the US. The quantity of exports from developed countries to developing countries represented about 15% of the total value of developed world exports of fishery products (
07F1).Fish is now the world's most traded animal commodity, with about 100 million tons of wild and farmed fish sold each year. Europe is now the world's largest market for fish, worth about $22 billion/ year. Europe now imports 60% of the fish sold in the region (
08R1).See Chapter 11 Section (11-G) (Databases) "World Resources
2005" for a compilation of:
Trade in Fish and Fisheries Products (in millions of $US) (2000-2002)
(Imports) (Exports)
(Context) Total (global) fishery sales grew to $71.5 billion in 2004, up 25% from 2000 (FAO data) (
09M1). Comments: Does this include freshwater fisheries and aquaculture?Fisheries are the most globalized food industry: over 75% of the world's marine fisheries catch (over 80 million tons/ year) is sold on international markets (
01U3).The FAO report shows that total world trade of fish and fishery products increased to an export value of $55.2 billion in 2000 (
03W1).Globally, gross earnings from fish exports by developing countries grew from US$5.2 billion in 1985 to US$15.6 billion in 1999 (
03W2).Just 19 countries plus the European Union (EU) accounted for 85% of the world's marine fisheries catch of 84.7 million tons in 1995. A further breakdown shows that the fishing nations of the EU and 9 other countries took over 70% of the world total in 1995. In order of ranking by catch they were China, Peru, Chile, the EU, Japan, the USA, Russia, Indonesia, Thailand and Norway (1995 AAAS report).
Nearly 50% of fish caught today are traded between nations (32% in 1980) (98M1).
Nearly 40% of all fishery production is now internationally traded. Around 80% of fish for human consumption ends up in three main markets (Japan, the US and the EU) (
03W2).Fish imports reached a record $60 billion in 2000. Developed countries accounted for more than 80% of the value of the total fishery product imports (
03W1).Fish exports (global??) grow nearly five-fold in value since 1970, to $52 billion in 1997. (
Hilary French, "Vanishing Borders: Protecting the Planet in the Age of Globalization", World Watch, 3/27/00).The value of fishery exports (global??) in 1996 was US$52.5 billion - 11% of the value of agricultural exports that year ((99F2), p. 20).
Some 65% of the volume of world fishmeal production enters international trade. This reflects the fact that fishmeal is produced primarily in South America but is used as animal feed in feedlots in more wealthy economies elsewhere in the world. This growth in trade also reflects global growth of aquaculture, where fishmeal and fish oil are key feed ingredients (
03W2).Value of (Fish) Imports and Exports - Top 10 Countries in 1995
(98M1) (Values in billions of US dollars)
Import/ Export Data (
Ref. 25 of (98W1)) (UNFAO data of around 1994)Part [A2] ~ Fishery Economics ~ Import/ Export Data ~ Developing Countries ~
Nine of the top 40 fish-exporting countries globally are considered to have a food deficit problem among their low-income citizens (
05P1).Seafood exports from developing countries increased in volume by 75% since 1981 (93K1). Exports from developing countries: $5.2 billion in 1985; $20.9 billion in 1994. Much of this is high-priced species destined for regional urban centers and industrial nations (98W1).
Thailand continues to be the world's main fish exporter - $4.4 billion (
03W1). Comments: Thailand is also a major rice exporter.China's fish exports rose to $3.7 billion in 2000 and China is now the second largest exporter (
03W1).Part [A3] ~ Fishery Economics ~ Import/ Export Data ~ Europe ~
About 50% of the fish sold in the EU originates in developing countries, and much of it is laundered like contraband, caught and shipped illegally, in excess of the limits imposed by government quotas or treaties (
08R1).The European Commission estimates that more than $1.1 billion in illegal seafood enters Europe/ year. The World Wide Fund for Nature contends that as much as 50% of the fish sold in Europe are illegally caught or imported (
08R1).About 40% of cod caught in the Baltic Sea are illegal (
08R1).Until 1988 European Community (EC) countries were self-sufficient in fish and shellfish; now they are net importers (93K1).
Part [A4] ~ Fishery Economics ~ Import/ Export Data ~ First World ~
The US, Canada, Europe and Japan import 84% of world fishery imports by value (Ref. 96 of (94W2)). EC+ Japan+ US accounts for 88% of world fish imports (93K2). Japanese seafood imports: $4 billion in 1985, $10 billion in 1990 (94B3) (93K1). Japan's share of world imports: 8% (1969); 28% (1990) (98M1).
Japan was the largest importer of fishery products - 26% of the world total (
03W1).Part [A5] ~ Fishery Economics ~ Import/ Export Data ~ Latin America ~
More than 94% of Mexico's Pacific shrimp catch (30,000 tons in 1979) is exported, bring in $80 million (80M2).
Part [A6] ~ Fishery Economics ~ Import/ Export Data ~ United States ~
Some 92% of shrimp eaten in the US is imported. In 2006, 8% of it, about 151 million pounds, (70 million kg.) came from China. In June of 2006, US food safety officials included shrimp from China on a short list of seafood they are banning until the shrimp no longer tests positive for unapproved chemicals and cancer-causing agents. That should be good news for the US shrimp fisheries, pushed to the brink of extinction by low-priced imports. The trickle of imports from China exploded after Beijing joined the WTO in 2001, a move that lifted many barriers to the US market. China has become the world's leading seafood supplier, and in 2006 was the third-largest seafood exporter to the US, supplying $1.9 billion in fish and shellfish. Since cheaper imports began flooding the US market, many North Carolina fishermen have abandoned shrimp, a trend being replicated elsewhere across the US (
07H1).In 2006, the average American ate a record 4.4 pounds of shrimp, according to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Twenty-five years ago, 60% of shrimp eaten by Americans was imported. In addition to China, shrimp imported into the US comes from places like Thailand, Indonesia and Ecuador (
07H1).In 2006, international suppliers exported 1.74 billion pounds of shrimp to the US. That dwarfs the US production of 182 million pounds in 2006, according to the NMFS (
07H1). The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration division, startled by the trend, backs pending legislation that would open new areas offshore for aquaculture operations to take root, an attempt to bolster domestic capacity to produce farm-raised seafood like black cod, tuna and oysters. "A restaurant can buy a pound of peeled and deveined shrimp, ready to drop in the pot, for $4-$5 a pound," The director of the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries, said. "Fresh, local shrimp - in order for the fisherman to make any money - requires $8-$10/ pound (07H1)."Offshore farming can reduce the nation's rising dependency on imported seafood. More than 75% of seafood eaten in the US comes from abroad, much of it raised on farms that may lack rigorous health and environmental standards
(www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/front_pag e/1072184214112720.xmlBy Michael Milstein "Ranching the Open Ocean (US) The Oregonian (12/23/03))
.The US imports 60% of its seafood, making it the second largest trade deficit after oil, according to the US Department of Commerce. That deficit grew from $6 to $10 billion between 1996 and 2000. The demand for seafood is expected to grow 70% by 2025 (
Cathy Zollo, "Fish farms may be 'wave of the future' for Gulf (US), Naples Daily News, January 19/04).(Safety of Imported Seafood) The US Food and Drug Administration is swamped by the more than 4 billion pounds of seafood entering the US annually from more than 160 countries. The number of FDA inspectors assigned to screen the nearly 10 billion pounds of imported and domestic fish each year - fewer than 200 - has not kept pace. Roughly half of the fresh and frozen salmon consumed in the US comes from Chilean farms. But the FDA tests no incoming salmon for the fungicide. The FDA does not test salmon for oxytetracycline, an antibiotic, although authorities in Japan recently seized Chilean salmon with excessively high levels of it. And it conducts no testing for ivermectin, a pesticide designed for terrestrial livestock but detected in 2001 in salmon farmed in the UK. Thousands of tons of UK salmon enter the US each year. The US FDA has identified more than 30 drugs used in foreign aquaculture, according to a report by a deputy director in the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine. Federal law bars seafood containing the drugs from entering the US. But the FDA tests for only five of them, some in only certain products. Salmon is tested for one drug, shrimp for four. By contrast, the US Department of Agriculture tests imported meat and poultry for more than 50 drugs. Its 170 import inspectors examined 16% of incoming meat and poultry in 2002. The FDA tests less than 0.5% of all imported foods for the few drugs it looks for (
Michael Milstein, "Imported seafood goes untested", The Oregonian, 9/14/03).Today, 76% of all seafood consumed in the US is imported, (National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) data. Only Japan imports more fish. From 1992-2001, imports to the US increased from less than $6 billion to nearly $10 billion. Shrimp account for 50+% of the total. The American market for other finfish from afar is growing rapidly
("Imported Fish Move In on Fin Ordinaire", New York Times, 6/25/03).US Imports and Exports of Fishery Products (in $millions/ year)
(Source: SAUS of around 1992)
Fishery Products - US Domestic Catch and Imports (Statistical
Abstracts of the US (1995)) (millions of lb., live weight)
The US is the world's third largest seafood exporter with exports valued at over $2.3 billion for 1998 (
00S1).The US consumes most of what it catches in the US, and imports 70% of its total fish consumption (81C1).
The US imported twice as much seafood as it exported in 1996, running up a $3.7 billion seafood trade deficit. US seafood exports in 1996: $2.9 billion. 1996 was at least the 26th consecutive year that the US has run up a seafood trade deficit (Pittsburgh Post Gazette, 4/10/97).
Part [A7] ~ Fishery Economics ~ Import/ Export Data ~ Africa ~
The Ghana government spends over $200 million/ year to import fish to supplement local production. (Ghanans see fish as a cheap source of protein relative to meat (
"27% of Fish Farms Abandoned - Minister", www.ghanaweb.com, 8/23/05).)Egypt now imports 150,000 tons of fish annually (
96M1).Go to
Top of this Chapter-Economic Data and IssuesSECTION (9-B) ~ Miscellaneous Economic Issues ~ [B1]~
Discounting of Future Fish Harvests, [B2]~Global -Fishing Industry Employment, [B3]~Global -Fishing Fleet Expansion, [B4]~Global -Fishery Employment, [B5]~Global - Live Fish Trade, [B6]~Global - Seafood Prices, [B7]~National Data, [B8]~Sale of Fishing Rights, [B9]~Fishing Economics, ~Part [B1] ~ Economic Issues ~ Discounting of Future Fish Harvests
It had long been possible to value a fishery by the amount the standing stock would be worth of sold on open markets. Such analyses -totaling up the poundage of a fishery resource and estimating its net worth -almost always concluded that the best economic strategy would be to sell off the entire resource all at once, and bank the proceeds, letting the cash equivalent of the resource grow monetarily (73C1) (
02P2). Comments: The same basic type of "discount economics" invariably recommends against soil conservation - instead, put the money saved in a bank, so that when there is no more soil mankind simply lives off the interest in the bank account. (Continued below).Under this economic model of the value of species, conservation of any population for future use is discouraged (97P3) (
02P2). In the past decade, however, many environmental economists have pointed out another way to treat the question. They have argued that ecosystems perform important services to local and global economies that, if they had to be replaced by technology, would be very costly (97D2) (02D4) (02P2). Thus, an important value of an ecosystem is the replacement value of the services it provides for free. Marine ecosystems provide many such services, including capture of sediments by wetlands, protection from coastal storm damage by reefs or mangroves, production of oxygen and sequestration of carbon dioxide (99C5). Such analyses suggest that the costs of replacing the values provided by open oceans and coastal ecosystems total in the trillions of dollars (97C2).Depleted Cod fisheries in New England, caused by decades of over-fishing, costs local economies over $350 million/ year (Business Week (12/29/98)).
If extinction is economically feasible, then it will tend to result not only from common-property exploitation, but also from the maximization of present value, whenever a sufficiently high rate of discount is used (Ref. 18 of (73C1)). Generally, high rates of discount have the effect of causing biological over-exploitation whenever it is commercially feasible (73C1).
Over-exploitation, in the physical sense of reduced productivity, may result from two social conditions: common property competitive exploitation, and private-property maximization of profits on a present-net-value (discounted) basis. For populations that are economically valuable, but possess low reproductive capacities, either condition may lead even to the extinction. In view of the likelihood of private firms adopting high rates of discount, the conservation of renewable resources would appear to require continual public surveillance and control of physical yields and condition of stocks (73C1).
Part [B2] ~ Economic Issues ~ Global ~ Fishing Industry Employment ~
Ocean fisheries provide direct employment to at least 38 million people worldwide, with an additional 162 million people indirectly involved in the industry. (
UNFAO data of 2008).For each person employed at sea, another three people are employed on shore (
08K1).Fish is the main animal protein of over 1 billion people. It provides livelihoods for over 200 million people and 90% of these people are in developing countries (
08K1).Table 7 of Ref. (
07F1) tabulates total world employment of fishers during 1990 through 2004. It also does the same for just fish farmers.Table 8 of Ref. (
07F1) tabulates the number of fishers and fish farmers in selected countries during the period from 1990 through 2004.The number of people employed in fisheries and aquaculture has been growing steadily in most low- and middle-income countries. It has been declining or remaining stationary in most industrial countries. There were about 1 million fishers in industrialized countries in 2004, a decline of 18% since 1990 (
07F1).In Mauritania and West Africa, 200,000 people depend on the sea for their livelihoods (
08L1).The low cost of labor and feed are huge factors in the ability of the Vietnamese to produce basa fish (Vietnamese catfish) at much lower cost than farmers in the US. Vietnam workers are paid US$26/ month vs. US$10/ hour for workers in the US
("US farmers amazed at low cost of farming basa fish" (Vietnam) www.FIS.com (7/22/02)).The low cost of labor and feed are huge factors in the ability of the Vietnamese to produce basa fish (Vietnamese catfish) at much lower cost than farmers in the US. Vietnam workers are paid US$26/ month vs. US$10/ hour for workers in the US
(US farmers amazed at low cost of farming basa fish (Vietnam)www.FIS.com (7/22/02).).In the US, $8 billion/ year and 300,000 fishing-related jobs could be gained from better management and protection of fish stocks (NMFS estimate). Globally, $25-30 billion/ year could be gained, and wild fish harvests could be increased by 20 million tons, through better fishery management (Ref. 74 of (98M7)).
Over-fishing of stocks in US waters has caused a loss of 300,000 jobs that would still be here, had our fisheries been more wisely managed, and an $8 billion decline in annual revenues (98U8).
During the 1990s, employment in capture fisheries and aquaculture continued to contract in developed economies, and to expand in developing countries. In the early 1990s, more than 90% of those fully employed in the fishery sector were employed by either developing economies or economies in transition (97F5) (
03W2).The number of fishermen and fish farmers worldwide: 13 million in 1970; 30 million in 1995. (Over 90% of them are in Asia.) The number of people worldwide dependent on fisheries for income has been estimated at 200 million. The fishing industry had total sales of $125 billion in 1995, of which about $42 billion came from fish farming (FAO statement of 5/19/98).
Some 120 million people worldwide are employed in fishery-related jobs, with 15-21 million people actually fishing (Ref. 6 of (98W1)). Over 100,000 people have been put out of their fishery-related work in recent years in industrial countries (Ref. 7 of (98W1)).
The (global) fishing industry generates $80 billion/ year, and more than 200 million people (worldwide) depend directly or indirectly on fishing for their main source of income (
06E1). Comments: The global fishing industry is heavily subsidized, so one must interpret such dollar figures with caution.The global fishing industry directly employs 200 million people (Ref. 65 of (93W1)).
Fishing Industry Employment (global) (94W2)
(Each of these 3 sectors has roughly the same capacity to bring in fish. The trend is toward large-scale fishing (94W2).)
Comparison of Fishers by Scale of Operation
Sources: FAO data and Ref. 77 of Ref. (94W2)
Comparison by Scale - - - - - |
Large|Medium|Small
employment (millions) ~ ~ ~ ~ |0.2-.3|0.9-1.|14-20
employment/$million investment| 1-5 ~| 5-15 |60-3000
Earnings/fisher ($1000) ~ ~ ~ | 15~ ~| 8 ~ ~|0.5-1.5
Marine fish caught for human~ | 15-20| 15-20|20-30
consumption (million tonnes/ year)
Marine fish caught for fish ~ | 10-20| 10-20|0
- meal, fish oil, etc.
By-Catch (million tonnes/year)| ~5-10| 5-10 |0
Fuel consumption~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ | 7.6 ~| 12.8 |26.2
- (million tons/ year)
Tons fish/ton fuel~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ |2.6-3.9|1.6-2.3|0.8-1.1
Comments:
Employment/tonne of fish caught|0.007| 0.029| 0.68
Consolidation of fisheries has marginalized small-scale fish harvesters, and trade-oriented fishery policies have left low-income consumers in a lop-sided bidding war with high-income consumers at home and abroad (98W1).
The most efficient fishing operation at present average 50 tons/ day under good conditions. The same efficiency applied to zooplankton would average much less than 0.5 ton/ day (81C1).
Part [B3] ~ Economic Issues ~ Global ~ Fishing Fleet Expansion ~
Fig.15 of Ref. (07F1) charts the distribution of decked fishing vessels by continent.
Fig.16 of Ref. (07F1) plots the age distribution of fishing vessels and fish carriers bigger than 100 gross tonnes operational at the end of 2005.
Table 9 of Ref. (07F1) tabulates the number, power, and tonnage of the powered fishing fleet in selected countries during 2000 through 2005.
The global fishing fleet comprised about 4 million units at the end of 2004. 1.3 million were decked vessels and 2.7 million were undecked (open) boats. 33% of these were powered, generally with outboard engines and 67% were powered by sails and oars (07F1).
Many countries have adopted policies for limiting the growth of national fishing capacity in order to protect the aquatic resources and to make fishing economically viable for the harvesting enterprises. In 2002 China adopted a 5-year program to delicense and scrap, by 2007, 30,000 fishing boats, or 7% of its commercial fleet. Indonesia and the Philippines continue to expand their fishing fleets. In the US the number of vessels over 100 gross tonnage increased by 3.5% between 2003 and 2005. Argentina and Chile have reduced the number of industrial fishing vessels. Most other Latin American countries have increased their fleet sizes. The net result of all this is that the number of fishing vessels worldwide has remained fairly constant in recent years. Comments: The average size of fishing vessels is tending upward in recent years, suggesting that total fishing capacity continues to increase despite the apparent lack of increase in number of fishing vessels (07F1).
The US effectively does not allow fishing vessels to be imported into the US (See provisions of the Jones Act.) (07F1)
At the end of 2004 the world's fishing fleet included about 4 million vessels, with the lion's share in Asia (08R2).
EU member nations account for 85,000 fishing vessels, helping to explain why European fish stocks have declined sharply (09M1).
New developments in industrial fishing over the last few decades have led to an oversupply of super sized fishing vessels plundering the ocean (05O1).
On the west coast of India in the fishery off the coast of Goa, the mechanized fishing fleet increased from 10 boats in 1964 to 2200 in 1998. The annual catch grew from 17,000 to 95,000 tons ~ well beyond sustained yield (estimated to be 71,000 tons/ year) (Frederick Noronha, "Over-fishing Along India's West Coast Threatens to wipe out Fish", Environmental News Service (10/16/00)).
Large tonnage fishing vessels (those exceeding 24 meters in length and more than 100 gross tonnes (GT)) number 35,000 worldwide - 1% of the 3.5 million fishing vessels worldwide. Yet they account for 50-60% of the world's total fishing capacity (John Fitzpatrick and Chris Newton, "Assessment of the World's Fishing Fleet 1991-1997: A report submitted to Greenpeace International, 1998).
As the US halibut fishing fleet expanded to 5500 boats, the season was reduced to 2 days/ year. As a result, fishers employ the quickest, most hazardous methods. The results: fatalities, sinkings, and enormous amounts of spoiled fish, while consumers virtually never see fresh halibut. To reach the point at which all halibut boats could profitably fish throughout the year, 95% of the boats would have to leave the fishery (94S1).
In 1998, the world's large-scale fishing fleet has at least 50% more capacity than justified by the world's fishery resources (Ref. 68 of (98M7)).
By the late 1980s, the world's large-scale fishing fleet had exceeded the maximum sustainable yield of all the world's commercial fish stocks by 30% (Ref. 67 of (98M7)).
During the 1970s and 1980s, the gross registered tonnage of the world's fishing fleet increased by 90%, while the technical capabilities of the world fleet as a whole increased by 330% (Ref. 66 of (98M7)).
Today's world fishing industry has about twice the fishing capacity needed to bring in the sustainable yield of fish (Ref. 2 of Ref. (98W1)). During 1970-90, the FAO recorded a doubling of the world's fishing fleet (from 585,000 to 1.2 million large boats, and from 13.5 million to 25.5 million gross registered tons (GRT)) (94W2). Comments: This paragraph is also in Chapter 2, Sect. (2-A).
Worldwide, 30-40% more harvest capacity exists than the resource can withstand ((96G2) p. 5).
Reducing worldwide fishing fleets could provide economic benefits (Business Week (12/29/98)).
The world's fishing fleet increased by 3% in tonnage during 1992-1997, and by 22% in terms of potential fishing capacity through new additions to the fleet and refits (98U1).
Capacity of the international fishing fleet: 13.5 million gross tons (1970) to 25.5 million gross tons (1989). The number of large vessels fishing the world's oceans: 585,000 (1970); 1,200,000 (1989) (FAO data, 94P1).
The UNFAO says that even though 11 of the world's 15 main fishing grounds are seriously depleted, an expansion of the global fishing fleet continues, with Southeast Asian nations and China being among the most aggressive (97F2).
The world's current fishing fleet catches 155% more fish than can be replaced through normal reproduction (98P2). Comments: This probably refers to the marine fleet only.
Capacity of decked boats: 13.6 million Gross Registered Tons (GRT) in 1970; 26.0 million GRT in 1992 (98W1).
Capacity of Decked Boats (98W1)
Col.2: Number of decked fishing boats
Col.3: Catch per decked-boat (tons/ boat/ year)
Col.4: Total Gross Registered Tons (GRT) of decked boats
Col.5: Catch per GRT (tons/ GRT/ year)
Col.6: Number of non-decked boats
Col.7: Catch per non-decked boat (tons/ boat/ year)
Year| ~Col. 2 |Col.3| ~ Col. 4
|Col.5| ~Col. 6 |Col.7
1970| ~575,800| 101 |10,733,000| 5.4 |1,516,400| 28
1980| ~805,500| ~78 |16,121,000| 3.9 |1,802,400| 24
1992|1,166,600| ~68 |21,891,000| 3.6 |2,345,100| 23
Source: FAO data, (98W1) (Data do not include
support vessels such as mother ships and hospital ships (11,600 vessels with
4.1 million GRT).)
The aggregate number and capacity of fishery fleets in industrial countries has been essentially unchanged since 1980. In 1992, developing countries accounted for 54% of the world's fishing fleet, and 43% of total GRT. Fleet sizes: Russia has the largest fleet (5.5 million GRT); China has the second-largest fleet (4.5 million GRT); Japan has 2 million GRT; the US has one million GRT, South Korea has just under 1 million GRT (Ref. 46 of (98W1)).
(Netherlands) Greenpeace is protesting against a new 126-meter-long trawler, another blatant example of how the Netherlands continues to expand its fishing fleet despite EU regulations. The Netherlands failed to reach any of its objectives under the previous EU program for fishing capacity reduction, the third Multi-annual Guidance Program (MAGP III, ended 1996). In 12/96, the EU adopted MAGP IV, which requires the Netherlands to complete the reductions required under MAGP III and imposes additional reductions of up to 23% by 2001 (99G1).
(Netherlands) Despite the EU agreed programs, the Netherlands continues to expand its fleet. "In 1998 the super trawler "Carolien" was launched, now the "Afrika" is about to begin fishing, and within a few months two more of these super-trawlers will be launched. The European Commission does not have any practical mechanisms to prevent the Netherlands, or any other Member State, from increasing the capacity of their fleets (99G1).
(Spain) The average gross tonnage (GT) for Spanish fishing vessels: 338 GT in 1993; 405 GT in 1995 (98U1). Spanish fishing vessels dominate EU's fleet - 32% of overall tonnage and 22% of overall power (98U1).
Greece has the most fishing boats of all EU nations: 93,809 in 1995, 101,337 in 1991 (98U1).
There are roughly 10,000 US shrimp boats, operating mainly in the Gulf of Mexico (98U2).
A recent review of Europe's fisheries by the EU indicators that the fishing fleets plying European waters would need to be reduced by 40% to bring it into balance with the remaining fish supply ((97F4), p. 65).
France, Malaysia Taiwan and Japan have instituted programs to reduce fishing capacity (FAO data, (98W1)).
Part [B4] ~ Economic Issues ~ Global ~ Fishery Employment ~
See Chapter 11 Section (11-G) (Databases) for a compilation of Number of Fishers in 2000 for a large number of nations.
The number of fishers world-wide has more than doubled since 1970 (13 million in 1970; 30 million in 1996). The growth rate is much greater than in any other agricultural sector. The rise is attributed primarily to growth in fishing fleets and aquaculture. Nearly 95% of fishers are in developing countries, and they provide 55% of the world's fish (FAO data) (See http://www.fao.org).
Part [B5] ~ Economic Issues ~ Global ~ Live Fish Trade ~
More than 3.7 billion people worldwide are malnourished, and 3 billion are living in poverty (10P1).
Since 1980 the legal trade in live fish in California has grown from $150,000/ year to $3-million/ year in 1997, with the black market growing even faster (97C1).
Part [B6] ~ Economic Issues ~ Global ~ Seafood Prices ~
Fish prices in Europe have doubled or tripled in response to surging demand, scarcity and recent fishing quotas imposed by the EU in an effort to save native species (08R1).
In London at the end of 2007, a kilogram of cod costs $60, up a factor of 5 from four years earlier (08R1).
A single Patagonian Toothfish can fetch US$1000 (03O1).
(General) Seafood prices have been rising by 4%/ year in constant dollars in recent years (Ref. 12 of (95B1)).
(General) Between the 1970s and 1990s the global average export price of fish tripled, while the price of beef, pork and chicken rose 50-80%, making the price of fish comparable to that of red meat, and more expensive than chicken. In 1991 the price of fish was $278/ ton, compared to $284 for beef, $272 for pork, and $163 for chicken (Ref. 17 of (98W1)). Fish prices have remained relatively stable in the 1990s (Ref. 18 of (98W1)).
(Salmon) Chile and Norway are producing so much farm salmon that the price has been driven down to $1.95/ lb. in North America (97M1).
(Salmon) In the late 1980s, the US wholesale price of farmed Atlantic
salmon was $4.50/ lb. Iced Atlantic salmon filets from Chile now flood the
markets, coming off jetliners in Miami at $2.18/ lb. (????).
(Salmon) International prices of 4 of the 5 main species of wild salmon
declined 30-50% during the 1990s (00N1).
(Shark) Dockside price of shark fins: up to $32/ pound. In Asia, prices have hit $256/ pound of dried and processed fin (98T1).
(Shark) Shark's fin soup can bring $150 a bowl in Asia (98M4).
(Tuna) In Japan, bluefin tuna fetch up to US$80,000 on Japanese markets (02R2).
Part [B7] ~ Economic Issues ~ National Data ~ [B7a]~
Australia, [B7b]~Canada, [B7c]~EU, [B7d]~Japan, [B7e]~Southeast Asia, [B7f]~US, [B7g]~USSR (former), ~[B7a] ~ Economic Issues ~ National Data ~ Australia ~
Rents for the use of fishing grounds range from 11-60% of the gross value of the catch (average= 30%) (Ref. 136 of (94W2)).
[B7b] ~ Economic Issues ~ National Data ~ Canada ~
Canada's fishing industry lands 1.5 million tons/ year worth $3.1 billion (93B1).
[B7c] ~ Economic Issues ~ National Data ~ EU ~
The EU has been the world's second-largest industrial fishing-boat builder (after Japan at 19.2%), constructing 248 factory ships in the past few years ~ 16% of the world total of 1417 new industrial fishing boats (98U1).
[B7d] ~ Economic Issues ~ National Data ~ Japan (fourth-largest fish producer) ~
Japan's domestic fish production: 10 million tons/ year in the late 1980s; 6.8 million tons/ year in 1995 (13% aquaculture) (Ref. 22 of (98W1)).
[B7e] ~ Economic Issues ~ National Data ~ Southeast Asia ~
In the Gulf of Thailand, catch per hour of the same surveillance ship, with the same gear, has fallen from 250 kg./ hour in 1961 to 18 kg./ hour in 1999 (
04V1). In many areas such as the Gulf of Thailand, and coastal areas of Senegal and Vietnam, the total quantity of fish harvested has increased, but because the catch is largely composed of small, low-value species, the total catch value has declined (04V1).Japan has 450 drift-net vessels, Taiwan and South Korea each have about 150 such vessels. A Wall Street Journal article of 8/23/91 says Taiwan has 200 deep-sea drift-net vessels (91U3). A UN resolution calls for a halt to drift net fishing by 6/92. Drift-net fishing was banned in the South Pacific in July, 1991 (91U3).
In the 1970s, Japanese tastes for fresh bluefin tuna caused the price to rise from 5 cents/ lb. (cat food) to $3.00/ lb. (84R1).
[B7f] ~ Economic Issues ~ National Data ~ United States ~
Fishery Products ~ US Domestic Catch and Imports
Statistical Abstracts of the US (SAUS) also provides data for 1960, 1965, 1981-1984 and 1986-1989, and breaks human food down into its finfish and shellfish components, and provides dollar values corresponding to some of these numbers. SAUS also breaks some numbers down by state and by selected ports.
In the US, the fifth-largest fish producer, has held production steady at 5.6 million tons/ year (7% aquaculture) (Ref. 22 of (98W1)).
The Columbia River presently yields nearly 32 million pounds of fish/ year, which under 1947 values is worth approximately 17.5 million dollars. In addition, states lying in the Columbia Basin sell close to a million sport fishing licenses to fishermen whose expenditures amount to over $100,000,000/ year in the basin (49N1).
Commercial fishing is a $25 billion-a-year industry in the US. It's filled with independent-minded small operators (
Daniel J. Murphy, Investor's Daily (8/15/00).).SAUS provides a table of US fish- and shellfish catches (lb.) and $ values. Figures are broken down among 38 species.
US fish-catch tonnage has increased 60% since 1982, but the total value (inflation-adjusted) has remained stagnant. Between 1982-95 the average of all US seafood prices dropped 15% in real terms. The average price earned at the dock of individual fish fell from $0.41 (1986) to $0.25 (1995) -almost exclusively because cheaper, low-value fish accounted for a much larger share of the total catch (98M1).
The US price of fish, beef, and chicken (in constant $) are plotted vs. time (1950-1993) in Fig. 5-4, p. 87 of (94B3). US fish prices have more than doubled (in constant $ terms) since the mid-1960s. During this time, beef and pork prices have held constant, while chicken prices have declined (89L1). During the past decade the world price of seafood (in constant $) has risen nearly 4%/ year (Ref. 23 of (95B1)) (See Fig.1-3 of Ref. (95B1)).
In the US, the real price of seafood rose 40% between 1950 and the early 1990s (93K1). US consumers spent $29 billion on fish in 1987 (88G1).
In coastal towns of Astoria, Warrenton, Hammond and Seaside (OR), 60% of the 46 fishing boats that trawl for lingcod, rockfish and other groundfish species are at high risk of bankruptcy (
00U1).The American fish harvesting industry is going broke nationwide due to over-fishing, loss of fish habitat, over capitalization, and government mismanagement, commercial fishing organizations and environmentalists agree. Government agencies responsible for the industry say they cannot prove it is not already financially insolvent. "Most of the US fisheries stocks are facing a disaster due to over-capitalization of the fishing industry and the mismanagement practices of US Department of Commerce's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and their appointed regional fishery management councils," says Zeke Grader Jr., executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, the largest active trade association of commercial fishermen on the west coast of the US (
00S1).The American fishing industry is a $25 billion wholesale business employs 300,000 people, and had over $3 billion in landing revenues for 1998, according to US Department of Commerce figures. But the Commerce Department is unable to say if the harvesting industry is broke because the Magnuson-Stevens Act provides confidentiality for financial disclosures by vessel operators and processing businesses (
00S1)."We are very close to total closure in most of our fisheries industries because we have an industry reliant on a national resource going to hell under the management of biologists and bureaucrats operating without a long-term business plan. The fish harvesting industry in the US isn't run like a business, and you can't prove the US fish harvesting industry is financially solvent," (
00S1)."Wall Street and US commodities analysts say there is no public investment in the fish industry with the exception of shrimp due to the volatility in fish stocks and lack of financial transparency of operation (
00S1).The West Coast Seafood Processors Association does not think the public should have access to the financial solvency of the fish harvesting and processing industries because of present federal and state laws governing confidentiality of proprietary data (
00S1). Comments: Corporate law requires reporting of key financial data, so apparently these industries are private firms.The financial data that is made available to the public by the government shows the fishing industry in distress and near collapse. In January, 2000, Commerce Secretary William Daley declared the west coast ground-fishing industry a disaster with loses of $11 million in revenues (
00S1).By catch, the US is the world's fifth largest fishing nation, harvesting 10 billion pounds annually (
00S1).[B7g] ~ Economic Issues ~ National Data ~ USSR (former) ~
Countries of the former Soviet Union have seen their combined fish production fall since the late 1980s by over 50% to 4.6 million tons in 1994 (Ref. 23 of (98W1)).
Part [B8] ~ Economic Issues ~ Sale of Fishing Rights ~
The EU spends almost $400 million/ year to buy foreign fishing rights for its distant-water fleet (
08R1).(Context) In 1982, UN member nations signed a treaty that gave countries the power to restrict fishing within 231 miles of their coasts (
09M1).Impoverished nations like Mauritania (west coast of northern Africa) have been selling access to their fisheries to European and Asian nations that have fished out their own waters (
09M1). Mauritania's first deal was in 1987. At least 340 foreign boats are licensed to fish in Mauritania's waters. China, Russia, Ukraine and other nations have signed deals with Mauritania for fishing rights. The number of Mauritanian fishing boats, typically small, increased from 500 in 1986 to 3600 in 2000. Octopus stocks in Mauritanian waters have declined by 31% from historical averages (09M1). Over the past 3 decades the amount of fish in West African waters has declined by up to 50% (09M1).Senegal canceled its contract with the EU in 2006 to protect its marine fish stocks for its own fishermen. Morocco suspended its fishing agreement in 2001 for the same reason, but renewed the deal in 2006, but cut back on the number of EU boats allowed (
09M1).The EU has purchased fishing rights from more than 12 African countries (
09M1).Congress has placed a moratorium on a successful, market-based program ("individual transferable quotas" - ITQs that may be bought or sold) for managing marine fisheries. The moratorium could cause red snapper and other "overfished" species decline so severely that they cease to be commercially viable. The alternative practice (assigning an overall quota on the amount of fish that may be caught) results in dangerous and environmentally damaging "derby fishing," whereby fishermen compete over a short period to catch as many fish as possible. Derby fishing causes gluts, depresses prices and leaves much waste and spoilage. It also leads fishermen to take unwise risks, such as fishing in bad weather (
Continued below).By assigning "individual transferable quotas," fishermen can take their time. There is more incentive to conserve and to avoid risks. They can demand higher, more stable prices. Consumers can enjoy fresh fish all year. Fishermen who want to fish more can buy another's quota; those who want to fish less can sell their quotas. The program worked well in Alaska, despite a rough start. The state's halibut season was extended from two days to eight months, and fishermen reported that their quality of life improved. More important, fish stocks increased. Sen. Ted Stevens, (R-Alaska), engineered the moratorium in 1996 out of concern that using the program to prevent depletion of pollock would give Washington fish processors an advantage over Alaskan processors. The pending reauthorization of an important fisheries management law gives Congress a good opportunity to correct that mistake. In the gulf waters off Texas, red snapper stocks are falling, the fishing season is shortening, prices are falling, and recreational fishermen are wondering why they aren't catching more. Fisheries managers need flexibility to design a program that would end this disgrace
(Gulf Fishing: Market program could conserve marine fisheries Editorial in Dallas Morning News, 04/12/2000).(Mauritania) In 1996 the EU signed a $70 million/ year fisheries access-for-trade agreement with Mauritania. The agreement stipulated a 45% jump in number of boats and a 140% increase in allowable catch, despite the fact that Mauritania's fisheries are already fully exploited and some species are overexploited (Ref. 97 of (98M7)).
(Pakistan) In the coastal belt of Balochistan over a $500 million factory fishing deal between a US corporation and the government of Pakistan threatens to strip the fish populations off these rich fishing grounds. The deal was finalized by Lucien Edward Forbes and the government of Pakistan on 7/4/98 in Islamabad. Forbes and Company Inc. (Tiverton RI), is to catch 400,000 tonnes/ year. An area of 200 (square?) miles has been ear-marked for this deep-sea fishing zone, and there is virtually no government mechanism to check vessel traffic in and out of the zone. The fish will sell for premium prices in fish markets of the US, Japan and Europe where Balochistan's tuna, lobsters and shrimps are in great demand. Pakistan is to get 10% of the processed fish. Various local organizations have been protesting that the scheme will be detrimental to tens of thousands of local fishermen. The project is anticipated to employ over 4,200 Pakistanis and generate a nearly ten-fold increase in fish exports - from $150 million/ year to one billion dollars (98M5).
"Derby" Fishing vs. ITQs
Assigning an overall quota on the amount of fish that may be caught results
in dangerous and environmentally damaging "derby fishing," whereby
fishermen compete over a short period to catch as many fish as possible.
Derby fishing causes gluts, depresses prices and leaves much waste and
spoilage. It also leads fishermen to take unwise risks, such as fishing in
bad weather.
By assigning "Individual Transferable Quotas," (ITQs) fishermen can take their time. There is more incentive to conserve and to avoid risks. They can demand higher, more stable prices. Consumers can enjoy fresh fish all year. Fishermen who want to fish more can buy another's quota; those who want to fish less can sell their quotas. The program worked well in Alaska, despite a rough start. The state's halibut season was extended from two days to eight months, and fishermen reported that their quality of life improved. More important, fish stocks increased ("
Gulf Fishing: Market program could conserve marine fisheries", editorial in Dallas Morning News (04/12/2000)).Part [B9] ~ Economic Issues ~ Fishing Economics ~
Economic losses in marine fisheries resulting from poor management, inefficiencies and over-fishing add up to US$50 billion/ year. Over the past three decades, these losses total over $US2 trillion. Well-managed marine fisheries could turn most of these losses into sustainable economic benefits for millions of fishers. Depleted fish stocks mean that there are fewer fish to catch, and therefore the cost of finding them and catching them is greater than in might be. Also, fleet overcapacity means that the economic benefits of fishing are dissipated due to redundant investment and operating costs (
08K1).At the global level, each ton of fish caught uses almost 0.5 ton of fuel - much of it wasted in redundant harvesting effort (
08K1).The global seafood industry is a US$400 billion industry (
08K1).The (global) fishing industry generates $80 billion/ year, and more than 200 million people depend directly or indirectly on fishing for their main source of income (
06E1). (su5)The increase in fishing means the world's fishing fleets are working harder to keep their catch rates steady. Hauls of the most popular fish have been falling since 1988 (
04V1). Comments: The fishing industry is in the process of going after less-popular fish and fishing at ever-lower trophic levels.The total value of deep sea bottom trawling that occur on sea mounts down to a depth of 2000 meters or 1.2 miles is approximately $400 million compared to the total ocean fishery of $75 billion. A Seamount is defined as an underwater volcano - active or not - that reaches at least one kilometer from the surrounding sea floor. There are tens of thousands of seamounts in the world's oceans, an estimated 30,000 in the Pacific Ocean alone ("
Scientists Call for Bottom Trawl Halt - Biologically rich seamounts and sponge colonies threatened by fishing practice", Tidepool (2/17/04)).Northwestern Hawaiian Island fishermen lose nearly $8,000/ boat/ year because catches are not high enough to make a profit. In the 1980s, lobster fishers could catch over 3 lobsters/ trap. By 1999 they had to set 3 traps just to catch 1 lobster (
iharp@aloha.net 12/11/00).About 40% of Oregon's 500 bottom-fishing vessels are at moderate to high risk of going bankrupt. In June, 2001, Congress appropriated $5 million for "disaster assistance" (
01B1).Part [B10] ~ Population Living near the Sea ~
Some 50% of the world's population lives within 65 miles from the sea (
09P1).Go to
Top of this Chapter-Economic Data and IssuesSECTION (9-C) ~ Seafood Consumption ~ [C1]~
Global, [C2]~Fish-Protein, [C3]~Indirect Fish Consumption, [C4]~Aquatic Food-Chain Consumption, [C5]~National Consumption Data, ~Part [C1] ~ Seafood Consumption ~ Global ~
Globally, fish production per capita has been declining since 1980 (
10P1).World Fisheries and Aquaculture Production and Utilization (
07F1) (Aquatic plants are excluded. Chinese data are included - fraudulent data are suspected) (All data except the last two rows are in millions of metric tonnes.)|
Production |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
|
Inland |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
~ Capture |
8.8 |
8.9 |
8.8 |
9.0 |
9.2 |
9.6 |
|
~ Aquaculture |
21.2 |
22.5 |
23.9 |
25.4 |
27.2 |
28.9 |
|
Total Inland |
30.0 |
31.4 |
32.7 |
34.4 |
36.4 |
38.5 |
|
Marine |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
~ Capture |
86.8 |
84.2 |
84.5 |
81.5 |
85.8 |
84.2 |
|
~ Aquaculture |
14.3 |
15.4 |
16.5 |
17.3 |
18.3 |
18.9 |
|
Total Marine |
101.1 |
99.6 |
101.0 |
98.8 |
104.1 |
103.1 |
|
Total Capture |
95.6 |
93.1 |
93.3 |
90.5 |
95.0 |
93.8 |
|
Total Aquaculture |
35.5 |
37.9 |
40.4 |
42.7 |
45.5 |
47.8 |
|
Total World Fisheries |
131.1 |
131.0 |
133.7 |
133.2 |
140.5 |
141.6 |
|
Utilization |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
Human Consumption |
96.9 |
99.7 |
100.2 |
102.7 |
105.6 |
107.2 |
|
Non-Human Food Use |
34.2 |
31.3 |
33.5 |
30.5 |
34.8 |
34.4 |
|
Population (Billions) |
6.1 |
6.1 |
6.2 |
6.3 |
6.4 |
6.5 |
|
Per-Capita Food Fish* |
16.0 |
16.2 |
16.1 |
16.3 |
16.6 |
16.6 |
* (kg)
World Fisheries and Aquaculture Production and Utilization (07F1) (Aquatic plants are excluded. Chinese data are excluded - fraudulent data are suspected) (All data except the last two rows are in millions of metric tonnes.)
|
Production |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
|
Inland |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
~ Capture |
6.6 |
6.7 |
6.5 |
6.6 |
6.8 |
7.0 |
|
~ Aquaculture |
6.0 |
6.5 |
7.0 |
7.6 |
8.3 |
8.8 |
|
Total Inland |
12.6 |
13.3 |
13.5 |
14.2 |
15.1 |
15.8 |
|
Marine |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
~ Capture |
72.0 |
69.8 |
70.2 |
67.2 |
71.3 |
69.7 |
|
~ Aquaculture |
4.9 |
5.3 |
5.6 |
6.1 |
6.6 |
6.6 |
|
Total Marine |
76.9 |
75.2 |
75.8 |
73.3 |
77.9 |
76.3 |
|
Total Capture |
78.6 |
76.6 |
76.7 |
73.8 |
78.1 |
76.7 |
|
Total Aquaculture |
10.9 |
11.9 |
12.6 |
13.8 |
14.9 |
15.4 |
|
Total World Fisheries |
89.5 |
88.4 |
89.3 |
87.5 |
93.0 |
92.1 |
|
Utilization |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
Human Consumption |
63.9 |
65.7 |
65.7 |
67.5 |
68.9 |
69.0 |
|
Non-Human Food Use |
25.7 |
22.7 |
23.7 |
20.1 |
24.0 |
23.1 |
|
Population (Billions) |
4.8 |
4.9 |
5.0 |
5.0 |
5.1 |
5.1 |
|
Per-Capita Food Fish* |
13.3 |
13.4 |
13.3 |
13.4 |
13.5 |
13.4 |
* (kg)
Fig. 25 of Ref. (
07F1) plots relative contribution of aquaculture and capture fisheries to human food-fish consumption (kg/ capita/ year) as a function of time from 1970 to 2004 for the world as a whole, for China, and for the World excluding China.Since the early 1990s, the per-capita consumption of fish protein has remained relatively stable at around 8.2 to8.6 grams/ day/ capita. The human intake of other animal proteins has continued to grow (
07F1).Until the mid-1980s, the average per-capita apparent fish supply in LIFDCs (Low-income-Food-Deficient Countries) was 25% of the estimated supply in industrialized countries. The gap has been reduced progressively, with strong growth since the mid-1990s (2.1% average annual percentage growth during 1995-2003). In 2003, at 14.1 kg/ year it stood at about 50% of that in industrialized countries (29.7 kg/ year) and 60% of the per-capita fish supply of developed countries (23.9 kg/ year). However, if China is excluded, per-capita supply in the other LIFDCs is still relatively low, at an estimated 8.7 kg/ year in 2003 with a growth rate of 1.3%/ year since 1993. Not withstanding the relatively low fish consumption by weight in LIFDCs (excluding China) the contribution of fish to total animal protein intake in 2003 was significant at about 20%. This figure may be higher than indicated by official statistics due to unrecorded contributions of subsistence fisheries. Yet, since 1975, when it peaked at 24.1%, the share has slightly declined not withstanding the continued growth of fish protein consumption (from 2.2 grams to 2.7 grams / person/ day during 1975-2003). This is because of the increase in consumption of other animal proteins (
07F1).104 million tonnes of fish were available globally for consumption in 2003, but only 7.0 million tonnes were consumed in Africa (8.2 kg/ capita/ year); 2/3 of the 104 million tonnes total were consumed in Asia, of which 36.3 million tonnes were consumed outside China (14.1 kg/ capita/ year) and 33.1 million tonnes were consumed in China (25.8 kg/ capita/ year). Per-capita consumption in Oceania was 23.5 kg/ year; North Americans consumed 23.8 kg/ year; Europeans consumed 19.9 kg/ year; in Central America and the Caribbean 9.4 kg/ year. In South America 8.7 kg/ year were consumed (
07F1).Per-capita fish consumption in Sub-Saharan Africa decreased from a high of 9.9 kg/ capita in 1982 to 7.6 kg/ capita in 2003 (
07F1).People around the world are eating a lot more fish - global consumption doubled in a recent 25-year period, to more than 90 million tons (dressed weight?). Some 30% of the seafood eaten in the US in 2004 will come from "aquaculture" farms, most of them in Asia
(National Public Radio, "Ocean Researchers Take Fish Farming Off Shore (US) (8/4/04).).Since 1988, when the world's seafood supply peaked at 34 pounds/ person/ year, the combined effects of over-fishing and increasing human populations have reduced the amount of (wild?) fish and shellfish available to about 25 pounds/ person/ year now, according to the findings. The trend is projected to continue downward to less than 17 pounds/ person/ year by 2020 (
01H1).In 1990, apparent direct food consumption of fish, crustaceans and mollusks amounted to 71.2 million tonnes (live-weight equivalent). This figure increased to 97.2 million tonnes in 1999. Average apparent consumption of fish increased from 13.4-kg./ capita in 1990 to 16.3 kg./ capita in 1999 (
03W2).Per-capita consumption of seafood tripled between 1950-1977 (98H1).
Excluding China, apparent consumption per person in the rest of the world declined from 14.4 kg. in 1990 to 13.1 kg. in 1999 (
03W2).Globally, fish provide about 16% of animal proteins consumed and are a valuable source of minerals and essential fatty acids. Regionally, these consumption figures vary, with fish accounting for an average of 30% of consumed animal proteins in Asia, 20% in Africa, and 10% in Latin America and the Caribbean (
03W2)."About 56% of the world's population derives at least 20% of its animal protein intake from fish says the FAO report. Global annual consumption is expected to gradually increase from the current average of 16 kg. to 19-21 kg. in 2030 (
03W1).Fish provided 16.5% of the total animal protein consumed by humans in 1997 ((99L3), p. 63), and 6% of all protein - plant and animal -that human eat ((96W2), p. 3).
In Asia, fish provides 28% of total (animal?) protein intake (4 times the share in North America) (97W1).
Africa gets 3 times as much (percentage-wise?) of its animal protein from fish as in North America (97W1).
Over one billion people rely on fish as their primary source of animal protein ((96W2), p. 3) (Ref. 8 of (98W1)).
Less than 1% of world food-calories are obtained from aquatic environments (94K1).
Some 36% of the marine catch is used for animal (livestock) feed and other industrial products (Ref. 11 of (98W1)).
Fish consumption = 14.4 kg./ capita/ year (98M1).
Amount of fish caught per capita, worldwide, and sold for human consumption in 1996: 16 kg. (98M2). Compare this number to the amount of sea urchins, sponges and other marine life that was hauled up with the fish and discarded (per-capita) (est.): 200 kg. (98M2).
The US EPA estimates fish consumption rates for subsistence fishermen to be 86.3 grams/ day though a recent report found fish consumption rates among Native Americans in Minnesota to be as high as 390 grams/ day (Clean Water Network, Status Report 5/28/99).
The supply of fish reached 14 kg./ person/ year in 1997, primarily due to continued growth in aquaculture (98W1). Consumption averages 28 kg./ capita/ year in industrial countries (98W1). In developing countries, fish consumption is 10 kg./ person/ year (98W1).
By 1993, the global fish catch/ capita had declined 7% from the historical 1989 high (94B2).
Some catch data (kg./ capita) (plot in Ref. (94B2))
|
Year |
1951 |
Mid-1960s |
1980 |
1989 |
|
Catch |
10 |
16 |
16 |
19 |
Seafood Consumption (kg. live-weight/ capita/ year) circa 1985 (94B3)
|
Japan |
69 |
US |
19 |
Argentina |
7 |
Algeria |
4 |
|
S. Korea |
51 |
UK |
19 |
Bangladesh |
7 |
India |
3 |
|
Philip. |
34 |
Poland |
19 |
Turkey |
7 |
Iran |
3 |
|
Spain |
33 |
Italy |
18 |
Brazil |
6 |
Pakistan |
2 |
|
USSR |
28 |
Australia |
17 |
China |
6 |
Sudan |
1 |
|
France |
26 |
Indonesia |
14 |
Egypt |
6 |
Ethiopia |
1 |
|
Canada |
22 |
Viet Nam |
12 |
Nigeria |
6 |
. |
. |
|
Thailand |
22 |
Mexico |
10 |
Kenya |
5 |
. |
. |
Part [C2] ~ Seafood Consumption ~ Fish-Protein ~
Fig. 22 of Ref. (
07F1) charts protein supplies by continent and major food group (2001-2003 average) (in grams/ capita/ day) (total, vegetable, animal, meat/ offal, milk/ dairy, fish, eggs)See Chapter 11 Section (11-G) (Databases) "World Resources
2005" for a compilation of:
Fish protein consumption as a % of Animal Protein supply in 2002 for a large
number of nations and regions.
People receive about 6% of total protein and 16% of their animal protein from fish. Nearly one billion people, predominantly in Asia, rely on fish for at least 30% of their animal protein supply (
Meryl Williams, "The Transition in the Contribution of Living Aquatic Resources to Food Security", Food Agriculture and the Environment Discussion Paper 13, Int'l Food Policy Research Inst., Washington DC, April 1996).North and South Korea, Ghana, Indonesia, Congo, Japan, Malawi and the Philippines depend on fish for more than 50% of their animal protein needs. One billion people, globally, rely on fish for 30% or more of their animal protein needs (Ref. 80 of (98M7)).
Protein-consumption in industrial countries is nearly twice the amount necessary to sustain a healthy diet, and fish accounts for only 8% of total protein consumption on average (98W1).
Globally, fish and other sea-products account for 16% of animal-protein consumption and 5.6% of total protein intake by humans (Ref. 9 of (94W2)). Worldwide, people eat more fish than beef and chicken combined (93K1).
Yielding 16 kg./ capita (live weight) for a world population of 4.76 billion people, fisheries supply 23% of all animal protein consumed in 1983 (85B1).
Fish consumption represents about 15% of all animal protein consumed by the world's population (FAO statement of 5/19/98).
The Marine Catch (fish) Contribution to Animal Protein Consumption (in about 1988) based on UNFAO data given below (93W1), (94W1)
|
North America |
6.6% |
|
Western Europe |
9.7% |
|
Africa |
21.1% |
|
Latin America and Cent. America |
8.2% |
|
Far East |
27.8% |
|
Near East |
7.8% |
|
Asian Cent. Planned Economies |
21.7% |
|
World as a whole |
16.0% |
In Africa, fish provide 21% of total animal protein; 28% in Asia (96A2).
In Sierra Leone, fish make up 50% or more of the consumption of animal protein, and 25% of total protein consumption (Ref. 88 of (94W2)).
In the Philippines, fish make up 50% or more of the consumption of animal protein, and 25% of total protein consumption (Ref. 88 of (94W2)).
Aquatic proteins - mostly fish but also crustaceans, mollusks, etc., make up 1/4 of all animal products for direct human consumption (Ref. 1 of (88B2)). The 20 million tonnes of fish/ year that are turned into fish-meal and oil primarily as ingredients for livestock feed and aquaculture are not included in this 25% figure (88B2).
The 60 million-tonne global marine-animal catch (1975) is roughly equivalent to 12 million tonnes of protein (81C1). About 36 grams/ day/ person (13.1 kg./ person/ year) is an adequate diet of protein. (US average = 65 grams/ person/ day. (23.7 kg./ person/ year)). Thus the present fisheries catch would supply 28% of the required protein intake for 4 billion people (81C1). Fish account for more than 40% of animal protein supply for 2 billion people in the developing world, and 24% for the world as a whole (89L1).
Fisheries provide 10% of protein available to the present world population (and a much higher percentage in many poor countries), but only a small part of total food energy. These proportions are likely to decrease (Roger Revelle, "The Resources Available for Agriculture", "Scientific American, 235 (Sept. 1976) pp.165-178).
Part [C3] ~ Seafood Consumption ~ Indirect Fish Consumption ~
One-third of the world's marine fish catches are ground up and fed to farm-raised fish, pigs, and poultry, squandering a precious food resource for humans and disregarding the serious over-fishing crisis in our oceans. Lead author Dr. Jacqueline Alder, senior author Dr. Daniel Pauly, and colleagues urge that other foods be used to feed farmed animals so that these "forage fish" can be brought to market for larger-scale human consumption. "Forage fish" include anchovies, sardines, menhaden, and other small- to medium-sized fish species that are the primary food for ocean-dwelling marine mammals, seabirds (especially puffins and gulls) and several large fishes (08A1).
Currently, catches of forage fish are predominantly used in animal feed, but these species are highly nutritious and well-suited for direct human consumption. "We need to stop using so many small ocean fish to feed farmed fish and other animals," Alder said. "These small, tasty fish could instead feed people. Society should demand that we stop wasting these fish on farmed fish, pigs, and poultry." Although feeds derived from soy and other land-based crops are available and are used, fishmeal and fish oil have skyrocketed in popularity because forage fish are easy to catch in large numbers, and hence, relatively inexpensive (08A1).
Forage fish account for 37% (31.5 million tonnes) of all fish taken from the world's oceans each year, and 90% of that catch is processed into fishmeal and fish oil. In 2002, 46% of fishmeal and fish oil was used as feed for aquaculture (fish-farming), 24% for pig feed, and 22% for poultry feed. Pigs and poultry around the world consume more than double the seafood eaten by Japanese consumers and six times the amount consumed by the U.S. market. The most intensive commercial use of these fish is for farmed-animal feed, but there is also a growing demand for human fish oil supplements. In some areas of the world (especially developing countries) almost all small fish used as farm feed are, or once were, eaten by people. These include the Peruvian and European anchovy, capelin, Japanese pilchard, round sardinella, and European anchovy. The use of forage fish for animal husbandry competes directly with human consumption in some areas of the world. Excessive removal of forage fish could also hurt populations of seabirds and marine mammals that rely upon them as food (08A1).
About 1/3 of the world's fish harvest goes for non-food uses (animal feed, fish-meal, oils etc.), leaving 82 million tons for direct human consumption (98M1).
Of the total marine catch, over 33% (31 million tons in 1995) goes for animal feed and other non-food uses. 17% of this portion is fed to pond- and pen-raised fish (Ref. 19 of (98W1)). Freshwater capture fisheries and aquaculture produce primarily for human consumption. In 1995, 82 million tons (74.5 million tonnes) of fishery products went directly to human consumption (Ref. 20 of (98W1)).
Expected consumption of fishmeal in 2010: 48% by poultry, 23% by fish, 17% by pigs, 6% by ruminants, 5% by others and 1% by others (97W1).
Part [C4] ~ Seafood Consumption ~ Aquatic Food-Chain Consumption ~
Japanese research claimed that whales, dolphins and porpoises consume 500 million tonnes of food a year - 3-6 times the quantity harvested for human consumption. Japanese and Norwegian studies show Minke whales in the northwestern Pacific and northeastern Atlantic fed on Pacific saury, sardine, herring and capelin (99D2). The research was rebutted by Australia and independent marine biologists who say there is little direct competition for food resources between whales and commercial fisheries. Baleen whales, except Bryde's whale, spend winter months in the tropics but travel to the Antarctic to feed for the bulk of their annual energy intake. Bryde's whale, which is a tropical resident, feeds mainly on krill. Partial recovery of some whale populations over the last 3 decades cannot nearly explain the decline in fisheries worldwide. Barbara Whitman, a marine biologist, said the Japanese figures could be misleading because it was 500 million tonnes of sea food, including plankton and krill, and not 500 million tonnes of fish which was said to be consumed by the mammals (99D2).
Minke whales along the Norwegian coast and in the Barents Sea eat about 1.8 tonnes of biomass/year. Its 1996 menu: 600,000 tonnes of krill, 630,000 tonnes of herring, 140,000 tonnes of capelin, 255,000 tonnes of cod, 130,000 tonnes of haddock and 55,000 tonnes of other species such as saithe and sand eels. In other words, harp seals and Minke whales together consume about the same amount of biomass as the Norwegian fishermen land, i.e. about 3 million tonnes (98U7).
Studies by Norwegian Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture show that seals eat considerable amounts of fish and fish-feed. For instance, the Eastern ice field population of harp seal consumes 1.1-1.7 million tonnes of biomass annually, consisting of 390,000-550,000 tonnes of marine crawfish, 260,000-410,000 tonnes of capelin, 190,000-430,000 tonnes of polar cod, 70,000-205,000 tonnes of herring and 30,000-150,000 tonnes of cod. This consumption is based on the stock size 600,000 - not the most recent 1.5-2 million harp seals (98U7).
The 2.2 million harp seal population of Barents Sea consume as much as 3.3-3.5 million tonnes of biomass/year. The Barents Sea harp seal population's annual diet has been estimated as follows (in tonnes): crustaceans 1,223,800, capelin 807,800, polar cod 605,300, herring 212,400, cod 100,500 and "other fish" 404,200. A very low capelin population impacts upon these figures - harp seal consumption increases slightly: polar cod 876,000, codfish (cod, saithe and haddock) 359,700, herring 392,500, crustaceans 1,204,400 and "other fish" 618,800 (recent research by Norwegian Inst. of Fisheries and Aquaculture) (99H1).
In the USA, NMFS data shows that seals and sea lions on the west coast consume 285,000 tonnes of fish/ year-vs. 217,000 tonnes in 1993. In 2004 their consumption is expected to reach 396,000 tonnes, i.e. about the same amount as caught by fishermen (Aftenposten, 6/4/98, quoting Pacific Fishing Magazine) (98U7).
The Japanese Institute of Cetacean Research (ICR) estimated total food
consumption of cetaceans worldwide as 280-500 million tons - 3-6 times the
amount taken in marine-capture fisheries [1]. The underlying scientific
basis of these claims has been challenged by Environment Australia by CSIRO
Marine Research [4]. Below are some of the arguments regarding the ICR
contention. (00J1) (Reference citations are given below the arguments.)
(1) Before industrialized fishing began, the marine environment would have
been in some sort of steady state (fluctuating environmental factors
permitting). Therefore, in the past, when whale populations were far larger,
there was obviously enough fish and plankton to sustain them, and enough
left over to support the huge global fish stocks that have been exploited by
modern day fisheries. The partial recovery of some whale populations over
the past 30 years cannot nearly explain the decline in fisheries
worldwide." (00J1)
(2) Fisheries rely on relatively few species. Of the 20,000 known species of
fish, 9,000 are routinely fished, 22 species are taken in amounts of 100,000
tonnes/ annum while five groups make up 50% of global fisheries. Fisheries
discard an estimated 27 million tonnes of fish annually in addition to the
landed catch. (00J1)
Comments: These facts are probably meant to imply that,
statistically, the overlap between the marine species consumed by whales and
by humans is likely to be small.
(3) The wide scale industrialization of the whaling fleet and the move
towards factory ships after 1926, as opposed to land stations, significantly
increased killing and processing efficiency. Currently it is accepted that
many whale populations were reduced to less than 10% of their original size.
At least 1.5 million were killed in the 50 years following 1925 after
industrialization of the whaling fleet (00J1).
(4) Target fish of commercial fisheries do not coincide with those taken by
whales. Baleen whales that migrate to the southern ocean in the austral
summer depend, for example, largely upon krill for food for a significant
part of the year, although some fish are also taken. Over the rest of the
year, feeding is greatly reduced in many species (00J1).
(5) Toothed whales prey upon cephalopods to a large extent, and in the case
of many whales, such as sperm whales, the major prey groups are considerably
spatially separated from targets of commercial fisheries [4]. In the ICR
report, total food consumed by sperm whales alone is given as 254 million
tonnes (upper limit). Sperm whales feed largely upon cephalopods. So there
is no overlap between sperm whale diet and commercial fisheries
(00J1).
(6) The greatest predators on fish populations in the majority of ecosystem
examples studied, by an order of magnitude, are other predatory fish [4,13].
It has been stated [4]~that a qualitative overlap in dietary items between
large baleen whales in the Southern Pacific (and predatory fish?) is not
supported by evidence. Accordingly, total consumption by sperm whales should
be removed from this total, together with the total for baleen whales in the
Southern Hemisphere. If this is done, then the ICR's 500 million tonne
figure must be reduced by 360 million tonnes. Hence, a new upper bound limit
for fish consumption by whales can be set at 140 million tonnes/ year where
there is a potential for dietary overlap. Undoubtedly, this figure would
fall even further if similar considerations were made for other whales, and
dietary overlap with fisheries could be defined for them. Baleen whales
feeding in Northern Hemisphere waters also consume substantial quantities of
planktonic prey, not just fish species. If the lower bound of 280 million
tonnes is treated similarly then the adjusted figure for fish consumption by
whales becomes 120 million tonnes/ year (00J1).
(7) In any case, ICR's figure of 500 million tonnes is likely to represent
an extreme upper bound [4]~because its calculation depends upon an assumed
food intake by whales amounting to 3.5% of body weight/ day. In fact, it is
likely that the true figure, as an annual average, is 1.2%-1.6%
(00J1).
References cited in Ref. (00J1):
[1]~Tamura, T; and Ohsumi, S, "Estimation of total food consumption by
cetaceans in the world's ocean", The Institute of Cetacean Research,
Tokyo, Japan, 16pp (1999).
[4]~J. W. Young, (1999) Potential for impact of large whales on commercial
fishing in the South Pacific Ocean. Report prepared for Environment
Australia, CSIRO Marine Research, Australia, 33pp.
[5]~P. Johnston, Santillo, D; Stringer, R; Ashton, J; McKay, B; Verbeek, M;
Jackson, E; Landman J; van den Broek, J; Samsom, D; Simmonds, M; (1998).
Greenpeace Report on the World's Oceans, Greenpeace International, Amsterdam
ISBN 90-73361-45-1. 154pp.
[6]~P.B. Best, "Increase rates in severely depleted stocks of baleen
whales", ICES Journal of Marine Science. 50 (1993)
pp.169-186.
[8]~T. D. Smith, "Interactions between marine mammals and fisheries: An
unresolved problem for fisheries research". In: A. S. Blix, L. Walloe,
O. Ulltang, [eds]~Whales, Seals, Fish and Man, Elsevier Science (1995)
pp.527-37.
[13]~M. Earle, "Ecological interactions between cetaceans and
fisheries" in Simmonds, MP; Hutchinson, JD [eds.]~ The Conservation of
Whales and Dolphins, Johns Wiley and Sons, UK. (1996) pp. 167-204.
Part [C5] ~ Seafood Consumption ~ National Consumption Data ~
The US only eats 15-16 pounds of seafood products/ person/ year, which is low (compare to most of the world). Asians consume 100-150 pounds (02U4)."
The US only eats 15-16 pounds of seafood products/ person/ year, which is very low (compare to most of the world). Asians consume 100-150 pounds of seafood products per capita/ year." (Online Mariner.com (7/22/02)).
US Seafood consumption increased 3.6% with Americans consuming 4.2 billion pounds of domestic and imported seafood in 1999, or 15.3 pounds/ person, the Commerce Department's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced 8/3/2000. (
Continued below)Officials from NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service said that the per-capita seafood consumption level of 15.3 pounds/ person represents an increase of 0.4 pound/ person from 1998. Of the 15.3 pounds of seafood consumed per person, 10.4 pounds were fresh or frozen fish or shellfish, 4.6 pounds were canned seafood, and 0.3 pounds of seafood was cured. Compared to 1998 figures, that represents a 0.2 pound increase in both the fresh/ frozen and canned products. Consumption of shrimp (all preparation) achieved a record 3.0 pounds/ person
(Kate Naughten, NOAA Fisheries 301-713-2370 kate.naughten@noaa.gov, George Wilcox, NOAA 202-482-0869 george.t.wilcox@noaa.gov 8/3/00, "Americans ate more Seafood in 1999.").Total US supply of edible fishery products on a round weight basis was down 1.3% in 1999. While US landings for human consumption declined by 4.8%, imported fish and shellfish increased 9.0% in 1999, comprising 66% of the seafood consumed in the US. US exports increased by 11.3%. Inventories of frozen seafood in cold storage dropped slightly, declining 4.9% from the 1998 level
(Kate Naughten, NOAA Fisheries 301-713-2370 kate.naughten@noaa.gov, George Wilcox, NOAA 202-482-0869 george.t.wilcox@noaa.gov 8/3/00, "Americans Ate more seafood in 1999."). Below are some data.US Annual Per-Capita Consumption of Canned Fishery Products, 1995-99 (Consumption is in pounds/ capita/ year.)
|
Year |
Salmon |
Sardines |
Tuna |
Shellfish |
Other |
Total |
|
1995 |
0.5 |
0.2 |
3.4 |
0.3 |
0.3 |
4.7 |
|
1996 |
0.5 |
0.2 |
3.2 |
0.3 |
0.3 |
4.5 |
|
1997 |
0.4 |
0.2 |
3.1 |
0.3 |
0.4 |
4.4 |
|
1998 |
0.3 |
0.2 |
3.4 |
0.3 |
0.2 |
4.4 |
|
1999 |
0.3 |
0.2 |
3.4 |
0.4 |
0.3 |
4.6 |
US Annual Per-Capita Consumption of Certain Fishery Items, 1995-99 (Consumption is in pounds/ capita/ year)
|
Year |
Fillets + |
Sticks + |
Shrimp (all |
|
1995 |
2.9 |
1.2 |
2.5 |
|
1996 |
3.0 |
1.0 |
2.5 |
|
1997 |
3.0 |
1.0 |
2.7 |
|
1998 |
3.2 |
0.9 |
2.8 |
|
1999 |
3.2 |
1.0 |
*3.0 |
Record-Breaking Numbers Reveal
Consumers' Insatiable Appetite for Popular Seafood: Public Citizen Releases
Third Report on Farm-Raised Shrimp, Focuses on Import and Consumption
Patterns.
A record-setting billion pounds of shrimp was imported for seafood
lovers in the US in 2003. The report, Shrimp Stockpile: Importing America's
Favorite Seafood, is the third in a series that documents the dangers of
shrimp aquaculture. It is available at
http://www.citizen.org/documents/ShrimpImportsWeb.pdf. Today, in the US,
shrimp is the No. 1 seafood choice, and nearly 90% of it is imported. More
than 80% of the shrimp imported from foreign markets is farm-raised. While
consumers' hunger for shrimp grows, so do company profits, especially for
large restaurant chains like Red Lobster and Long John Silver's. In 2003, US
consumers ate $3.8 billion worth of imported shrimp. Among the larger
companies, such as privately held Red Chamber, shrimp sales account for more
than $100 million annually (Cain
Burdeau Associated Press (January 7, 2005) p.E03).
Americans ate a record 16.3 pounds of fish and shellfish per person in 2003, vs. 15.6 pounds in 2002. According to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries), of the total 16.3 pounds consumed, a record 11.4 pounds were fresh and frozen finfish and shellfish. Among the 4.7 billion pounds of seafood consumed last year in the US was 4.6 pounds per person in canned fish, up 0.3 pounds from 2002, and a record four pounds of shrimp consumed per person, also up 0.3 pounds from 2002. The canned fish increase came primarily from a 0.3-pound increase in per-capita canned tuna consumption. This extends the continued upward trend of seafood consumption in the US in recent years. Seafood consumption was 14.9 pounds/ capita in about 1999 (04N1).
American consumption of fish products (04N1)
|
Year |
Fresh/ frozen |
Canned |
Cured |
Total |
|
1998 |
10.2 |
4.4 |
0.3 |
14.9 |
|
2002 |
11.0 |
4.3 |
0.3 |
15.6 |
|
2003 |
11.4 |
4.6 |
0.3 |
16.3 |
US seafood consumption
has been steady over the past decade at around 16 pounds per person per year. In 2002, imports accounted for roughly 45% of seafood consumed in the US. Seafood imports included shrimp (946 million pounds), Atlantic salmon (413 million pounds), and tilapia (148 million pounds). Most of the imported salmon and tilapia and approximately half the shrimp were farm-raised, representing over 1 billion pounds of aquaculture products with a value of $2.7 billion. To put these imports in perspective, the US poultry industry, the world's largest poultry exporter, shipped 5.4 billion pounds of poultry products, valued at $1.6 billion in 2002. (David J. Harvey, "US Seafood Market Shifts to Aquaculture," Amber Waves (4/04)).Britons currently consume in excess of 270,000 tonnes of cod every year. Wild cod stocks are dwindling (
Helen Britton,"Cod farming aims to save favorite fish", BBC News (6/9/04)).In 1993, Americans ate 10 pounds of seafood, vs. 15 pounds in 2003 (
Jim Tunstall, "Farmers Go Fish (US)", Tampa Bay Online (11/17/03)).Africa: Africa's fish consumption is relatively low (6.8 kg./ capita in 1999). It is not clear how per-capita fish supply in Africa could be maintained even at its present low level. Assuming that exports and imports remain at the levels of 1999, fish supply would have to expand by 46% over the period to 2015, and by 92% to 2030, simply to maintain present per-capita supplies. It is not obvious where the fish will come from. Local wild stocks are close to being fully exploited, both in inland and marine waters (
03W2).Average American's consumption rate of edible fish (lb./ person/
year) (85G1), NOAA data, Wall St. Journal (6/27/89)):
US Seafood sales (Wall Street Journal, 4/13/95)
(Source: Packaged Facts)
Year - - - - - -| 1988| 1990|
1992| 1994
Sales($billions)| 7.9 | 8.2 | 8.4 | 8.6
T
otal US supply of edible fishery products on a round weight basis was down 1.3% in 1999. While US landings for human consumption declined by 4.8%, imported fish and shellfish increased 9.0% in 1999, comprising 66% of the seafood consumed in the US. US exports increased by 11.3%. Inventories of frozen seafood in cold storage dropped slightly, declining 4.9% from the 1998 level (00W1).US salmon consumption: 0.44 lb./ capita in 1988; 1.41 lb. in 1995 (97F3).
Seafood consumption in 1998 in the US increased 3.7% over 1997, with Americans consuming 2.0 million tons of domestic and imported seafood in 1998 - 14.9 pounds/ person, the Commerce Department's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) announced 7/14/99. The per-capita consumption level of 14.9 pounds/ person represents an increase of 0.3 pound from 1997. Of the 14.9 pounds/ person, 10.2 pounds were fresh or frozen fish or shellfish, 4.4 pounds were canned seafood, and 0.3 pounds of seafood was cured. Compared to 1997 figures, that represents a 0.3 pound increase in the fresh/ frozen products. Consumption of shrimp (all preparation) achieved a record 2.8 pounds/ person. Farm-raised catfish consumption reached 1.0 pound/ person for the first time. Total US supply of edible fishery products on a round-weight basis was up 11.2% in 1998. While US landings for human consumption declined by 1.0%, imported fish and shellfish increased 7.7% in 1998, comprising 63% of the seafood consumed in the US. US exports declined by 14.3% (99N1).
US Consumption of Canned Fishery Products, 1994-99 (pounds/ capita/ year)
(99N1)
* Record
*# In NOAA Fisheries' calculation of per-capita consumption, the total US
supply of imports and landings is converted to edible weight and decreases
in supply such as exports and inventories are subtracted out. The remaining
total is divided by a population value to estimate per-capita consumption
(
US Seafood consumption increased 3.6% with Americans consuming 4.2 billion pounds of domestic and imported seafood in 1999, or 15.3 pounds/ person, the Commerce Department's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced 8/3/00. Officials from NOAA's NMFS said that the per-capita consumption level of 15.3 pounds/ person represents an increase of 0.4 pound/ person from 1998. Of the 15.3 pounds of seafood consumed per person, 10.4 pounds were fresh or frozen fish or shellfish, 4.6 pounds were canned seafood, and 0.3 pounds of seafood was cured. Compared to 1998 figures, that represents a 0.2-pound increase in both the fresh/frozen and canned products. Consumption of shrimp (all preparation) achieved a record 3.0 pounds/ person (
00W1).Go to
Top of this Chapter-Economic Data and IssuesSECTION (9-D) ~ Fishing Industry Subsidies ~ [D1]~
Global, [D2]~Canada, [D3]~Europe, [D4]~Taiwan, [D5]~US, [D6]~Former USSR, ~Part [D1] ~ Fishing Industry Subsidies ~ Global ~
Global subsidies for the fishing total about $20 billion/ year (for boat-building, boat fuel, boat-buybacks, etc.) (
08R2).Wealthy nations subsidize their commercial fishermen -- $30 billion/ year. The largest subsidies are the following (in millions of US dollars/ year): EU 7.0, Japan 5.0, India 4.5, China 2.7, Brazil 2.0, Russia 1.7, US 1.2 (
09M1).Governments worldwide subsidized the fishing fleet by amounts that the FAO estimates to be greater than the value of the annual catch (Ref. 42 of (98W1)). Developmental organizations promoted modernizations that often supplied equipment that was expensive to run, could not be maintained locally, and that added to the over-capacity problem. In an assessment of its own development program, World Bank analysts concluded that the results have not been satisfactory (Ref. 43 of (98W1)). The outcome has been that marine fishing capacity has roughly doubled, while the marine catch grew by one third (Ref. 44 of (98W1)).
Worldwide, subsidies worth at least $650 billion, equivalent to 9% of all government revenues, support logging, mining, oil drilling, livestock grazing, farming (including irrigation), fishing, energy consumption and driving (94U2).
The US NMFS estimate of global fishing subsidies: $11-16 billion (1995). In addition, governments forgo $3-7 billion in uncollected user-fees from domestic and foreign fishers (98M1).
Data from China, the EU, Japan, Norway, Russia and the US showed that $3.5-4.0 billion was budgeted specifically for fishing subsidies, while an added $3 billion in tax breaks and lending acted as subsidies for fleet capitalization (98M1).
Some 25-33% of global fishing revenues come from subsidies (Ref. 45 of Ref. (98M1)). Only 5% of government subsidies are targeted at solving the problem of over-capacity (98M1). Comments: Without subsidies, the costs of going after that last fish would become prohibitive and this would limit the amount of over-fishing. This is why some people have concluded that fishing subsidies may be the most environmentally destructive natural-resource subsidy of all (See Ref. 46 of (98M1)).
For every dollar earned from fishing (globally) in the late 1980s, governments, taxpayers and fishers spent $1.77 (98M1).
The FAO estimates that the operating cost of the global marine fishing fleet in 1989 was $22 billion in excess of total revenues (93K2).
The FAO estimates that, globally, $124 billion/ year is spent catching $70 billion/ year worth of fish. Government subsidies apparently make up the $54 billion/ year difference (low-interest loans, access fees for foreign fishing grounds, direct subsidies for boats and operations) (Ref. 53 of Ref. (94W1)) (93W1). The FAO estimates that global subsidies to fishing are $54 billion - more than 2/3 of the value ($70 billion/ year) of the annual catch (Refs. 11, 68 and 134 of (94W2)).
Government subsidies for coastal development can lead to direct destruction of coastal wetlands and the fishery breeding grounds they contain (Ref. 143 of (94W3)).
Subsidies to the fisheries sector approach 20-25% of gross revenues globally (Ref. 6 of Ref. (
00N1)).Part [D2] ~ Fishing Industry Subsidies ~ Canada ~
In Atlantic Canada, a nearly $2-billion, 5-year "social-adjustment" program (the "Atlantic Groundfish Strategy") helps fishers stay out of debt (Critics see it as a massive social-welfare program.) (98M1).
Collapse of the cod fishery in Canada's maritime provinces in the early 1990s left 30,000 fishers dependent on government welfare payments and decimated the economies of 700 communities in Newfoundland alone (99M4).
Part [D3] ~ Fishing Industry Subsidies ~ Europe ~
The EU set aside $2.2 billion to fund restructuring and economic transition programs for fishers. But intense pressures from industry officials, politicians and fishers prompted EU ministers to backslide on fleet reductions and to postpone needed reforms (98M1).
Many of the tuna farms operating in the Mediterranean are subsidized by payments under the European Union's Common Fisheries Policy (
02R2).In 1996, the EU paid $229 million (43% of the annual fisheries restructuring budget) for access agreements with Africa, and the fishers themselves paid only a small fraction of the cost (98M1).
The Norwegian sealing industry is not economically viable on its own terms, and is dependent on government subsidy (99H1).
Part [D4] ~ Fishing Industry Subsidies ~ Taiwan ~
Fuel accounts for 60-70% of operating costs for Taiwanese fishing companies. Taiwan's government dispersed $130 million in fuel subsidies in 1991 (Ref. 69 of (94W2)).
Part [D5] ~ Fishing Industry Subsidies ~ United States ~
Commercial fishing organizations and environmentalists agree that the American fish-harvesting industry is going broke nationwide due to over-fishing, loss of fish habitat, over capitalization, and government mismanagement. Government agencies responsible for the industry say they cannot prove it is not already financially insolvent. "Most US fisheries stocks are facing a disaster due to over capitalization of the fishing industry and the mismanagement practices of US Department of Commerce's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and their appointed regional fishery management councils," says Zeke Grader Jr., executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, the largest active trade association of commercial fishermen on the west coast of the US. (
Continued below)The American fishing industry is a $25 billion wholesale business that employs 300,000 people, and had over $3 billion in landing revenues for 1998, according to US Department of Commerce figures. But the Commerce Department is unable to say if the harvesting industry is broke because the Magnuson-Stevens Act provides confidentiality for financial disclosures by vessel operators and processing businesses. By catch, the US is the world's fifth largest fishing nation, harvesting 10 billion pounds annually and is the world's third largest seafood exporter with exports valued at over $2.3 billion for 1998. But that financial picture may not be rosy much longer, Grader warns. "We are very close to total closure in most of our fisheries industries because we have an industry reliant on a national resource going to hell under the management of biologists and bureaucrats operating without a long term business plan. The fish harvesting industry in the US isn't run like a business, and you can't prove the US fish harvesting industry is financially solvent," says Grader. (
Continued below)The Government Accounting Office (GAO), the investigative arm of Congress, on 4/6/00 released its latest review of the US fishing industry and the economic impact of the Magnuson-Stevens Act as required under the 1996 Regulatory Flexibility Act and National Standard 8. But the GAO did not do a financial analysis of the fish harvesting industry. Commercial fish harvesting is the last wild animal industry in the US. Government, industry, and environmental officials say the over-fishing, habitat destruction, and stock depletion in the US is following a similar pattern of collapse that occurred in the Canadian fish industry in the 1990s. The Marine Fish Conservation Network, a coalition of 90 environmental groups, fishing associations, and marine scientists, issued a wake up call in its March report "Lost at Sea." The report alleges that the NMFS has been approving fishery management plans that do not abide by the conservation measures mandated under the Sustainable Fisheries Act (SFA) of 1996. Since 1994, US taxpayers have paid more than $160 million to mitigate economic and ecological impacts of fishery management failures in New England, Alaska, and the West Coast, the Marine Fish Conservation Network report found. (
Continued below)In October 1999 the National Marine Fisheries Service prepared a report to Congress, "Status of Fisheries of the US." The agency listed 98 species as overfished, 127 species as not overfished, five species considered "approaching an overfished condition." For 674 fish species, 75%, the agency says it does not know whether or not they are overfished. The accuracy of the science NMFS uses to assess whether or not a fish population is "overfished" is questioned by environmentalists and commercial fish officials alike. As an example, they cite the agency's inability to identify a critically threatened fishery in its 1998 "Status of Fisheries of the US" report to Congress. A year later the Department of Commerce declared the Pacific groundfish industry to be a disaster. Yet in the 1998 report to Congress the vast majority of groundfish in the Pacific council's jurisdiction were identified as "not overfished," "not approaching an overfished condition," or "unknown."
(Donald Sutherland, "US Fish Harvesters Up on Financial Rocks Environment News Service: (ENS) (4/25/2000).)The US Deptartment of Commerce announced $5 million in added relief for New England fishermen in early 6/99. The money will be used to compensate inshore vessels that could not fish in closed areas between February and June of 1999. The New England congressional delegation assisted the region's fishermen in getting money in response to demonstrations and hardships engendered by closures. NMFS has not backed down or revised the rule limiting cod catches to 30 pounds/day, which sparked many of the protests (Seafood.com, 6/11/99).
Fishing industry subsidies in 1998 included a $97 million dollar bail-out of two factory trawler companies: Tyson ($5 million) and American Seafoods ($92 million) (Niaz Dorry (niazd@dialb.greenpeace.org) 7/21/99).
Various tax- and financing incentives encouraged US entrepreneurs to expand to take advantage of the expulsion of foreign competitors from the US EEZ (98G2).
Licensing fees for commercial fishing fail to cover the cost of fishery management, even for foreign vessels (Ref. 137 of (94W2)).
In 1996 the US Government pledged $25 million to buy out part of the commercial ground-fish fleet in New England (98M1).
Government policy during the 1970s and 1980s offered tax credits and loan guarantees to expand the US commercial fleet (97C1).
US fishers are exempt from the 20-22 cents/ gallon tax on diesel fuel - a $250 million/ year subsidy (Ref. 69 of (94W2)).
US taxpayers have spent $160 million since 1994 (on federal disaster relief for the fishing industry and fishers) without much benefit. Congress is being asked to appropriate another $421 million in federal disaster relief for the thousands of fishermen affected by the recent crab, salmon and groundfish stock collapses (
00U1).Since 1994, US taxpayers have paid more than $160 million to mitigate economic and ecological impacts of fishery management failures in New England, Alaska, and the West Coast, the MFCN report "Lost at Sea" found (
00S1).The Marine Fish Conservation Network report "Lost at Sea" found that since 1994, US taxpayers have paid over $160 million to mitigate economic and ecological impacts of fishery management failures in New England, Alaska, and the West Coast (
Environmental News Service (4/25/00)).New England fisheries have received over $23 million in federal aid and are under strict quota restrictions for groundfishing and scallop fisheries. Large portions of the Gulf of Maine and the Georges Bank off the Atlantic coast are closed (
00S1).The North Pacific crab industry is seeking $100 million in federal assistance. Standard and Poors reviewing American Seafood Group LLC, one of the largest companies in the North Pacific fisheries, reported the company had absorbed $236 million in debt (
00S1).A report released 6/22/00 by the General Accounting Office (GAO), Congress' non-partisan investigative arm, states that government programs intended to reduce fishing on over-fished or depleted stocks by buying-back fishing effort have been poorly designed and managed and, as a result, have been ineffective. The GAO report found that the effectiveness of buy-back programs in reducing fishing capacity has been severely eroded because fishermen have been allowed to return to the same fishery they were paid to leave, or have been allowed to move to other over-fished fisheries. The GAO said in some instances, fishermen used the money they were paid to remove fishing vessels to buy new boats to fish in the same fishery (
00U2).The US GAO report evaluated the impact of recently completed buy-back programs in three fisheries: New England groundfish, Bering Sea pollock, and Washington State salmon with the purpose of identifying deficiencies in the programs. Buy-backs in these fisheries account for 130 of the $140 million in federal funds authorized since 1995 for these types of programs. Buy-back programs in these areas initially removed from 10-24% of their respective fishing capacity, but, the effect on conservation and over-capitalization of these reductions in fishing capacity have been severely reduced by the return of fishermen to the fishery. The report describes $24.4 million New England buy-back between 1995-98 that removed 79 vessels that accounted for 19% of the groundfish catch in that fishery. Since the buy-back, 62 additional vessels have become active because no steps were taken during the program to prevent previously inactive vessels from engaging in fishing (
00U2).In 1995, the US Congress created a program to buy up commercial fishing permits and vessels in areas where the fish population was in decline from environmental factors and over-fishing. Sounds simple enough: Fewer fishermen catch fewer fish. But when the GAO took a look, it found much of the $140 million used to pay some people not to fish didn't stop other people from catching the same fish. In the New England program, where federal funds bought up fishing permits and ships, the GAO found that the effort stopped 79 vessels from fishing. But 62 previously inactive vessels that already had permits took their place (
00U3).The GAO also found that some fishermen used money from the program to upgrade other ships they already owned so they could land more fish. Others simply took the money and then switched to catching lobster, despite the fact that the lobster fishery is having similar problems (
00U3).In Washington state, where the feds tried to help salmon recover, the GAO found that most of the fishermen who stopped catching salmon would have done so with or without the federal subsidy, because prices for salmon were declining (
00U3).Could Congress have known things would end up this way? Only if it had bothered to check decades of evidence. In 1999, a congressionally mandated study summarized the results of several salmon buy-back programs from the 1970s this way: "The programs had little effect on fishing capacity. Many of the retired vessels were marginal. Because many fishermen held more than one license, funds frequently were used to upgrade other vessels." A 1997 Canadian study found the same thing (
00U3).Congress still hasn't learned. An emergency-spending bill signed into law in early July 2000 contains $50 million for new buy-backs with many of the same problems the GAO study identified. But facts rarely get in the way of senseless subsidies for emotionally gripping victims, be they fishermen or farmers (
00U3).The US fishing industry just reeled in millions of extra federal dollars in an $11.2 billion emergency-spending bill signed earlier this month by President Clinton. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration netted $50 million that will be doled out to fishermen. In 1990, New England fishermen caught $557 million worth of fish. Eight years later, their take was $540 million. Fishermen on the Pacific saw a drop in earnings from $362 million to $284 million during the same time. During that decline in earnings, fishermen haven't lured much federal aid. The recent $50 million package is one of the largest the industry has received. "The fishing industry historically has not gotten a lot for disaster relief," said Eugene Buck, a senior analyst for the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. Buck said when the industry does get federal aid, it usually comes in packages ranging between $5-$10 million. New England groundfishermen are getting $10 million through a government program that will purchase 600 fishing permits that aren't being used. (
Adam Gorlick, "Fishing industry nets $50 million, but will likely be back for more", Associated Press, ?/?/00).Since 1994, the federal government has spent more than $200 million in hardship assistance to these people, with upwards of another $500 million under consideration. Figures on fish landings off the lower 48 states remain near or below levels of 25 years ago. Imports are on the rise. When NMFS moves to curtail harvesting of a particular fish type, the law also requires that NMFS take into account the economic impact of its actions (
Daniel J. Murphy, Investor's Daily (8/15/00)).An analysis by Marine Fish Conservation Network of federal aid programs shows that US taxpayers have paid more than $160 million since 1994 to mitigate the economic and ecological impacts of fishery management failures in New England, Alaska and along the West Coast (
Environmental News Service [ENS] (3/10/00)).In the Pacific Northwest, where nearly all salmon stocks have collapsed or been seriously reduced, the federal government has spent or is planning to spend about $255 million on disaster assistance to fishing communities, vessel buybacks, fishing permit buybacks, and habitat restoration (
ENS (3/10/00)).In 1998, the US government spent $20 million to buy back 9 factory trawlers to reduce pressure on dwindling stocks of Bering Sea pollock (
ENS (3/10/00)).Congress will soon be considering another $421 million in federal disaster relief for thousands of US fishermen hurt by recent crab, salmon and ground-fish stock collapses in New England, Alaska and along the West Coast (
ENS (3/10/00)).In March 2002, the National Marine Fisheries Service spent $10 million buying groundfish permits from New England fisherman, and a similar idea has been discussed for the West Coast (
02D2).Government financial assistance to aquaculture in the US in 1994 was over $60 million (97G1).
Part [D6] ~ Fishing Industry Subsidies ~ USSR (former) ~
Fuel subsidies for the former USSR's fishing industry used to be several $billion/ year (Ref. 69 of (94W2)).
Go to
Top of this Chapter-Economic Data and Issues