Research Brief - Compliance and Enforcement in Fisheries Management

• Author: Elissa Parker
• Position: Vice President - Research and Policy Studies
• Pages: 59-59

SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2010 ❧ Page 59

Copyright © 2010, Environmental Law Institute®, Washington, D.C. www.eli.org.

Reprinted by permission from The Environmental Forum®, Sept./Oct. 2010

ELI Report

how f‌isheries enforcement

has worked in the past and

how it can be improved.

To understand the enforce-

ment dynamic, Read’s team

looked at the historical

practice documented in

enforcement records as well

as f‌ishers’ and enforcement

of‌f‌icers’ perceptions of

the system. ey analyzed

a database of over 8,000

enforcement actions that

closed between 2001 and

2006, and they surveyed

1,295 f‌ishermen and dozens

of enforcement staf‌f, scien-

tists, and regulators from

three representative f‌isheries

in the Northeast, Pacif‌ic,

and Gulf of Mexico.

Read wanted to know

how the Coast Guard actu-

ally enforces at sea. e

Coast Guard reports high

rates of compliance that

often exceed 97 percent

— far higher rates, in fact,

than those estimated by the

f‌ishers in our survey. e

team’s 2009 paper “Reas-

sessing the Value of U.S.

Coast Guard At-Sea Fishery

Enforcement” concludes

that the Coast Guard’s in-

f‌lated compliance rate is a

function of f‌ishers’ ability

to predict when they will be

boarded and inspected, the

inherent dif‌f‌iculty of enforc-

ing — often under extreme

weather conditions — com-

plicated regulations that

vary from f‌ishery to f‌ishery,

and the Coast Guard’s other

responsibilities such as vessel

safety and rescue and drug

interdiction.

is conclusion, com-

bined with the cost of

enforcement (Read and his

co-authors found that the

Coast Guard spends ap-

proximately $8.4 million

per penalized violation!), led

naturally to the question of

how to improve at-sea en-

forcement. Read wondered

whether f‌isheries observers

— impartial on-board wit-

nesses who collect data for

use in stock assessment —

could help improve detec-

tion of violations and create

the necessary deterrence.

In a study published last

year, “Fisheries Observers as

Enforcement Assets: Lessons

from the North Pacif‌ic,”

Read found that North

Pacif‌ic observers, who are

required by law to report

any violations that they

witness, report signif‌icantly

more violations than their

colleagues in other regions.

Moreover, these observ-

ers detect violation types,

such as illegal discard and

retention, that otherwise

are rarely identif‌ied by tra-

ditional dockside or at-sea

enforcement resources. Read

concluded that the enforce-

ment benef‌its of mandatory

observer reporting may

outweigh any potential

compromise to the quality

of stock assessment data col-

lected (a common argument

used to support the observ-

ers’ non-enforcement role).

e challenges of fairly

and ef‌fectively enforcing

f‌isheries regulation are not

lost on anyone. And survey

respondents, for example,

proposed a variety of solu-

tions. One f‌isherman sug-

gested that education is

critical and “passing more

unenforceable rules and

regulations just makes a

dangerous pursuit more

dif‌f‌icult.” An enforcement

of‌f‌icial volunteered, on the

other hand, that “if f‌isher-

men were really serious

about protecting their liveli-

hoods they would push for

criminal sanctions. After all,

isn’t what is really going on

theft of the resource, [i.e.,]

a small percentage of f‌isher-

men taking what doesn’t

belong to them?”

Recognizing that an im-

proved relationship between

the f‌ishing community and

enforcers is vital, NOAA

has begun developing

new national and regional

enforcement priorities. At

NOAA’s request, Read and

his colleagues participated

in an August dialogue that

brought together f‌ishermen,

enforcement of‌f‌icials, and

NGOs.

“NOAA’s commit-

ment to addressing f‌isheries

enforcement challenges

in commendable,” Read

observes, “but much work

remains to ensure that the

enforcement system protects

honest f‌ishermen and the

sustainability of living ma-

rine resources.”

Since the 1980s, ELI has

been studying and publish-

ing reports on environmen-

tal compliance and enforce-

ment — and teaching it at

the federal, local, and state

levels in the U.S. and other

countries. Now, our Ocean

Program has turned to the

unique set of issues related

to f‌isheries.

Fisheries compliance is

essential if we are to main-

tain or restore the health of

marine f‌ish stocks such as

bluef‌in tuna and Atlantic

cod. As f‌ish stocks decline

and regulations increasingly

restrict allowable catch, f‌ish-

ers and f‌ishing communities

face extraordinary economic

pressures that can lead to

illegal activity. With f‌ishers

struggling and NOAA and

the Coast Guard enforcing

ever-tightening regula-

tions, conf‌lict between the

agencies and the regulated

community has exploded.

Clearly, we need to reexam-

ine f‌isheries enforcement

and compliance — both

dockside and at sea — to

assure sustainable f‌ish stocks

while also protecting liveli-

hoods and communities.

In collaboration with

economists at the University

of Maryland, ELI Staf‌f At-

torney Read Porter and his

team recently completed a

two-year study that looks at

Research Brief

Compliance and Enforcement

in Fisheries Management

Elissa Parker

Vice President

Research and Policy Studies