The recent hikes in oil prices have meant that many fishermen are finding the money they get for their catch will not cover costs. Some can not see the point in even taking their boats out and are demanding more subsidies on the fuel they use.
Over the past 50 years the nation’s marine resources have been depleted by over 80 percent. In the Taiwan Strait, fish stocks are now only 10 percent of what they once were. This huge change in our marine ecology has meant that fishermen cannot afford to throw back fish that are considered too young.
The government is thinking about how to make the fishing industry sustainable and every year the Council of Agriculture’s Fisheries Agency spends huge amounts of money on measures designed to reduce the size of the fishing fleet in an attempt to reduce the number of fish being caught. These efforts, however, are being frustrated by advances in fishing technology which ensure that fishing vessels return to port loaded with a full catch.
The press coverage every year at the start of the tuna season down in Pingtung, when the first fish of the year comes in, is full of comments about how humans have conquered the oceans and how honorable this is (or should that be ignorant?)
Any government policy made on fishing nowadays needs to take into account the protection of fish stocks and the government should not allow votes to dictate policy direction.
The majority of fishing vessels use diesel, which the government subsidizes by 14 percent. This subsidy, together with an additional subsidy for gasoline and commodity and business tax exemptions, means that fishermen pay considerably lower than the market price for fuel.
The government also offers incentives for fishermen willing to accept a self-imposed fishing moratorium — in other words, not taking their boats out to sea. Fishing vessels based in Taiwanese ports or harbors that go out to sea for more than 90 days in a year and which also dock in the port for the same amount of time, can apply to the local fishery association for a moratorium subsidy, the actual amount of which will depend on the size of the vessel.
However, if we are to promote a sustainable fishing industry in Taiwan, the government should not be increasing fuel subsidies for fishing vessels. Instead, it should be relaxing the criteria for qualifying for volunteer fishing moratorium subsidies to encourage fishermen to stay in port.
Many fishing vessels are still having to go out fishing in order to accumulate their 90 or more days’ fishing so that they can qualify for the subsidies. Why not change the annual requirement to 120 days in port and 60 days fishing? That would reduce the size of the annual catch for the majority of fishermen, while ensuring that they could still receive the government subsidy. Such a policy would be a win-win situation.
We are going to face even greater challenges in the way we exploit our marine resources. In addition to the problem of over-fishing, which we currently need to address, there are other pressing issues which are cause for concern:Rises in ocean temperature which cause fish to move territory or even go extinct and the acidification of ocean waters are all contributing to the further depletion of our marine resources.
A country like Taiwan that depends on its thriving fishing industry cannot just sit idly by as it goes down — with all hands on deck.
Nien Ching-ko is a commentator writing on ecological issues.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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