Industrial Fishing

INDUSTRIAL FISHING is the operation of fishing vessels on bulk catching of shoal fish for the fish meal or oil reduction plant. It is undertaken off the coasts of many nations on fish stocks that are of little or no use for human consumption. Peru and South Africa spring readily to mind here as do Norway and Iceland in more recent times.

Now efforts are being made to try and promote this type of fishery from Great Britain. In the main the instigations are coming from scientists or economists, mostly in Government service and who see the growth of an important industrial fishery in Britain as a valuable asset to our economic structure in that we might well be able to reduce our imports of fish meal, which are stated to be worth about £30 million per annum.

This is a good idea in theory and would no doubt be of great benefit to the economy in addition to providing an alternative source of fishing to a section of the fishing community. But the whole idea of an industrial fishery could well work out something quite different in practice and much more thought should be given to the whole idea before a large-scale industrial fishery is begun.

Let us take the facts as they come. Firstly, unlike many of the overseas nations Britain does not have any huge resources of unwanted fish in her coastal waters. Resources, that is, of such an extent as to sustain a continuous exploitation. Apart from the localised and erratic sprat fisheries, about the only shoal fishing left is the herring fishery which is much too valuable an asset to be destroyed in this manner.

An industrial fishery would, therefore, have to be based on the stocks of fish in the far offshore waters where scientists have indicated there are huge stocks of unwanted fish such as the blue whiting and Norway Pout and where foreign vessels have been working for quite some time. This area, to the north of Britain, would seem to be the favourite for a British industrial fishery.

So let us look at this fishing and ask ourselves some simple questions. Who would be the men to fish these stocks; what boats would they use; and where would they dispose of their catches? It would have to be the coastal fishermen who would be persuaded to pursue such a fishery. They are the most adaptable to different types of fishing and many are already experienced in ihe local industrial fisheries around the coasts.

Apart from a handful of boats, however, these fishermen would be unable to work such an offshore fishery. Not counting the long steaming distance and the problems of weather, most vessels would probably find their carrying capacity insufficient to justify such operations. It just would not be economical unless the prices paid were really high. And all the boats would have to be converted to suit them to this type of fishing with the additional safety requirements for industrial bulk fishing.

Most of the fishmeal plants would be too small to accommodate such an influx of raw product and those that were would probably be too far away to make it worthwhile. So a new plant would presumably have to be built, or an existing one expanded. Whatever, the case considerable sums of money would be required both at sea and ashore to set up an efficient industrial fishery, quite a lot no doubt from the tax-payer’s pocket.

But there are greater considerations that should be taken into account when this subject is being discussed, apart from the financial side. For instance, how long would an industrial fishery last on these stocks? How long would it be before the boats found the area barren and were forced to look to other grounds or stocks? To be economically feasible alternative stocks would have to be found which could be used to provide a continuity of supply to the reduction plant.

Would these boats then begin to pursue our coastal stocks, including the valuable herring? We all know what the Norwegians and Icelanders did to their herring stocks through industrial fishing. Already Government officials and private business interests have tried to persuade British fishermen to do this. They have and will continue to receive a short and sharp reply. For upon these stocks are to a great extent the livelihood of countless, fishermen. They are not prepared to endanger their own future to satisfy the whims of others whose well-being is totally independent from fishing. If the Government want to spend money on fishing, they say, spend it on some means of conservation of these stocks, not on extermination.

Yet another consideration must be borne in mind. If our coastal stocks are thus exploited, what would be the effect on our other stocks at present fished for human consumption? Have the scientists determined fully what inter-dependence there is between the unwanted stocks and those presently fished for the market and whether there would be any depletion of one if the other were taken away? In other words, before any large-scale industrial fishing is begun the fishermen would want conclusive evidence from the scientists not only of the extent of those stocks available but also of the probable effects of their exploitation on other fisheries.

A few years ago fishermen might well have been persuaded into such operations. Today, however, there is a new class of fisherman emerging, more intelligent and more interested in his job than ever before. He will not be lead by the hand any more but is surely becoming more capable of leading the way himself.

Last year Ireland opened a marvellous new fish meal plant at Mornington on the east coast. This move is regarded as a tragic blunder as the company running it must by now be realising. Its establishment was the result of a very go-ahead firm and a very keen, yet somewhat inexperienced Irish Fisheries Board, combining to bring greater prosperity both to the nation and the fishermen. The siting of the plant on the Irish Sea was the blunder. Apart from a few local boats the plant has done little good to the majority of fishermen working in the Irish Sea. And there just isn’t the amount of fish required available there to supply such a capacity. And Ireland has no boats of sufficient size to allow them to proceed to the North Scottish grounds for these huge stocks that the scientists say are there. The astonishing thing about this venture is that very few fishermen in the Irish Sea were consulted prior to its establishment. Had they been consulted they would have certainly given it a ‘thumbs-down’ sign.

A very similar situation is developing in Britain with government officials and private business interests seeing the economic benefits to be derived from an industrial fishery. But before any moves are made we consider it imperative that all the side-effects of such a fishery are thoroughly considered and the maximum advice sought from the men who have to catch the fish. It is easy to juggle with figures on paper. It is another thing to go out day-after-day looking for and catching the fish. The practical aspects of this type of fishing must be thoroughly taken into account before any moves are made to establish a large-scale industrial fishery.

The majority of fishermen in Britain are against industrial fishing. It is a messy, soul-destroying job which would have to pay remarkably well to compare with fishing for the consumer market. It is more dangerous and as such would be considered last of all. Then there is the fact that those boats employed in such a role would be taken off other fishing for the food market, possibly creating local shortages and resulting in increased imports of fish.

No. The idea of an industrial fishery in Britain might sound good in theory and look good on paper. But when the practical aspects are considered, then we consider it better to leave well alone. There are enough problems facing the fishermen and the industry as it is.

Source: Peter Brady
Commercial Fishing
March 1970