The International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) passed a resolution on Nov. 20 to cut Taiwan's total allowable catch quota for Atlantic big-eye tuna by 70 percent.
This setback will not only lead to an enormous loss of potential revenue (as much as NT$10 billion [US$300 million]) and hurt Taiwan's international image, it may also cause a domino effect with other sanctions against Taiwan potentially following.
This is the most severe punitive action taken in the history of the international fishery industry. It is an indication that the international community can no longer tolerate overfishing, illegal fishing under a flag of convenience and boosting catch by "fish laundering" by Taiwanese tuna fishing boats, or the nation's inability to manage its fishing industry.
Over the past 50 years, Taiwan's fish production grew from a total output of 120,000 tonnes in 1952 to 1,400,000 tonnes in 2002, with the production value increasing from NT$50 million to NT$100 billion. Taiwan has been ranked the world's 20th-largest fishing nation, as well as one of the six major deep-sea fishing nations. Also, its tuna and squid fisheries are ranked second and third in the world.
However, Taiwan's fishermen's associations have only made limited efforts toward marine conservation. As a result, a small section of the nation's fishing industry has rejected all restraint, engaging in overfishing and other illegal activities.
They acted in a manner that increasingly ignored conservation in both offshore and ocean-going fisheries, and Taiwan's fisheries administration became a system similar to "social relief," in which fishermen and their representatives would get whatever they asked for.
While other countries were striving to reduce illegal fishing, Taiwan was slow to respond and even appeared unwilling to act.
The Ministry of Interior spent a decade drawing up a "coastal management law," but, after the first reading in the Legislative Yuan, the bill was put aside because a few lawmakers misled fishermen into opposing it.
But the important and sensitive issue of demarcating "protected areas" is intended to foster more fishery resources and create sustainable economies for fishing villages, and is regarded by the international community as an important means of creating sustainable fisheries.
A good example is Malaysia's Fisheries Act, which stipulates that "marine parks" are to be established in important coral reef areas. In addition to enabling ecological observation, such a law serves an important purpose, cultivating fishery resources and establishing protected areas where fish can breed.
In other words, the core value of Taiwan's "new fishery" should be to ensure "resource conservation" and "sustainable management" instead of looting marine resources or doing things that threaten the nation with anarchy.
For example, building Ilan's Wushih Harbor resulted in a considerable shrinkage of nearby Toucheng Beach, and the land reclaimed in this development remains vacant. Has this been a gain or a loss? What is the actual operational efficiency of Taiwan's 200 fishing ports, and which have caused a severe impact on the environment?
The prosperity of many fishing villages is on the wane, but this situation has received little public attention. This summer, Taiwanese fishing vessels operating near the disputed waters of the Diaoyutais were chased away by Japanese patrol ships and inspected by Japanese coast guard vessels, causing Coast Guard Administration to dispatch vessels to the disputed waters to "protect" Taiwanese fishermen.
This happened on several occasions. China's research vessel interrupted Taiwanese ships operating in eastern and southern waters and rudely conducted a survey of Taiwan's continental shelf resources without giving a clear reason. Japan's and China's vessels were bigger and better equipped than Taiwan's.
If Taiwan's maritime affairs sink further into oblivion and the nation's ability to administer fishery resources continues to deteriorate, the government will lose the ability to command budget resources, ensure the strength of its fleet and protect its maritime territories, which are 10 times larger than Taiwan's land area.
Faced with the harsh sanction imposed by the international community as well as environmental pollution, destruction of ecological niches, depletion of fishing resources and shortages of fishing labor in Taiwan's coastal waters, it is unavoidable that Taiwan's fishing industry will sink quickly. Therefore, the core idea of creating a ministry governing maritime affairs has becomes important.
More than a decade ago when the Canadian government was integrating agencies, it combined its maritime affairs and natural resources agencies. But, this combination did not last because of the two agencies' divergent ideologies -- with the former striving for environmental protection, while the latter focused on the exploration and utilization of natural resources.
In 1995, the Canadian government again reorganized its maritime, fishery and coast guard agencies under a new conceptual framework of "ecological resources conservation" and "maritime environmental protection."
It established the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans, a model which was also used by South Korea's Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries and Indonesia's Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, and is a new model for maritime management around the world.
Given the predicament faced by the fishing industry and the recent passage of the amendment of the Standard Organic Law of Central Government Agencies (行政院組織基準法修正案) to expand Cabinet-level agencies into 15 ministries, I believe that it is time for the government to integrate the fishery and maritime affairs agencies to revitalize the industry.
It should push for a mechanism modeled on that of Canada, South Korea and Indonesia to integrate the coast guard, fishery and maritime affairs departments of various agencies, bringing together decision-making, research and development, and executive powers into a streamlined and efficient agency.
It's time for Taiwan to establish a ministry of marine affairs and fisheries.
Chiau Wen-yan is a professor in the Institute of Marine Resource Management at National Taiwan Ocean University.
TRANSLATED BY LIN YA-TI
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS