5.1: The Ecological Relationship between the Fishing Communities and their Marine Resources.
Human beings, like every other biological species, exist by
making use of resources which are available to them. In the case
of the coastal communities, the sea presents a potential food
resource in the form of fish and to a lesser extent sea weeds.
All over the world coastal communities use fish as a food resources.
As in the case of the present study, some communities relied historically
entirely on fishing and others on a combination of fishing and
food from the land. The circumstances which the coastal communities
found themselves in governed the way people made use of their
natural resources, in other words, the habitat controlled the
ecology of humans living on the edge of land and sea. The nature
of this relationship can vary over time and in different locations,
as is clear from the previous chapter.
Trends in growth or decline of fishing communities are usually
a reflection of the relationship between the community and its
marine resources. In order that fishing communities can continue
to exist, the relationship between the exploitation rate of the
fishermen and the production of fish by the marine habitat needs
to be balanced. However, the nature of this relationship is always
primarily influenced by the physical environment and its marine
resources.
A significant contrast exists between the physical environment
of the fishing communities in the two European countries of this
study. The Irish communities live on a coastline which is rocky
and often precipitous, much of it dangerous to shipping, but under
broken by occasional natural harbours or mooring places. This
coast has not significantly changed shape in the recent past.
On the other hand the coastline of the three study areas in The
Netherlands has changed shape radically within the last millennium,
and in two cases even within the last century. Traditionally,
in Ireland as well as The Netherlands, many of the fishermen used
boats which could be pulled up on the shore, as harbour facilities
did not exist close to where they lived. The curraghs in Ireland
and the Dutch bomschuiten and smaller beach sailing boats in Katwijk
enabled people to fish even though they had no harbours. One difference
between the two countries is however, that the curraghs were much
smaller than the Dutch beach boats and could be taken out by hand.
The question could be asked why the Irish fishermen did not fish
from their beaches with bigger boats like the Katwijk fishermen
did. It would have given them much greater fishing capacity than
the small curraghs gave them.
The difference in geology of the two coastlines was one reason
for this, as the beaches in Ireland which were used to take out
the curraghs are often bordered by rocky shores and the old sailing
vessels would have been at great risk of hitting these rocks if
they were blown even slightly off course. In addition, curraghs
could even be launched and hauled out from smooth rocky plateaus
and slipways, where there was no sandy beach whatsoever.
The physical situation along the Dutch coast is very different.
The beach on which Katwijk is located is 120 km long and all of
it smooth sand (Section 2.5.1), so if a sailing boat was blown
slightly off course it did not matter. In terms of the weather,
these sailing boats could withstand being beached in the surf
and lasted a decade or more being used like this. The Atlantic
swells which hit the west coast of Ireland can be very high and
wreck a boat quite easily, including on a sandy beach.
The flat bottomed Dutch sailing boats were especially adapted
to local circumstances, which are shallow and sandy. The large
swells which can develop on the Atlantic tend not to occur on
the North Sea, which is in comparison more sheltered. The Irish
traditional sailing boats, such as the hookers and the puchauns,
did not have the flat bottom and side boards of the Dutch vessels
because they could have a keel as they sailed in deeper waters
than the those near the Dutch coast. Their bows were also better
suited to deal with the large Atlantic swells. The waters near
Urk and Goeree were also very shallow compared to the Irish west
coast, however the relatively large tidal range in western Ireland
resulted in many of the harbours and piers being also intertidal,
although just offshore the sea gets deeper more rapidly than off
the Dutch shore . So in both countries many of the traditional
fishing boats were small, to be able to use these small harbours
and piers.
The building of harbours in The Netherlands and deepening of navigation
channels and extending piers in Ireland have made a big impact
on fishery development in recent years. These facilities are indispensable
for larger fishing vessels which have the capacity and the range
to compete with other powerful fishing fleets.
Another factor which lies at the basis of any fishery is the presence
of fish stocks which can support this fishery. Enough fish need
to be within reach of the fishermen on a regular basis so that
it is a dependable resource. From the qualitative interviews it
is clear that fish stocks were abundant off the shores of both
Ireland and The Netherlands in the past. This seems to be due
to a large area of sea which is relatively shallow just offshore
from both countries' coasts. The continental shelf west of Ireland
is very productive and the North Sea is, if anything, even more
productive. The main reasons for this is that a combination of
sun light penetration to the bottom and relatively warm water
from the Gulf Stream and the presence of nutrients allows biological
production, in the form of phytoplankton, zooplankton and fish,
to flourish in the shallow water column. In a global context these
areas are amongst the most productive in the world (Tont &
Delistraty 1977). Northwestern Europe is located in temperate
latitudes and thus is within the range of species which are more
abundant in cold water, such as halibut, cod and ling, as well
as those that are more abundant in warmer waters such as sole,
red gurnard and bass. With fish stocks so close at hand it is
clear why fishing communities developed.
However, some respondents did mention that fish stocks traditionally
varied but that usually the fish population would increase again
after a slump or another species would appear in its place. This
experience of the resilience of fish stocks is demonstrated by
the answers to question 118 and 119 of the questionnaire, for
which all the Dingle respondents and and all but one of the Goeree
respondents answered that there was full confidence in fish stocks
in the past. In fact for question 116, out of 31 respondents,
21 from Dingle and 25 from Goeree were positive about catches
of fish in the future. Fishermen have great confidence in the
capability of the sea to produce fish because it has done so since
time immemorial.
The historical social and political situations in the study
areas have had a big impact on the way fishing communities have
interacted with their marine resources. In the case of both Ireland
and The Netherlands fishing has at different times been inhibited
as well as promoted by social and political means. British encouragement
of fisheries in England, Scotland and Wales has on a number of
occasions led to Irish fisheries being inhibited by taxes, market
control and fisheries management and social measures (Section
4.1). In The Netherlands vested interests within the country influenced
law making concerning fish landing rights, so that it was not
until the liberalisation of the fisheries law occurred in 1857
that certain beach fishing villages, such as Katwijk, were allowed
to land and sell properly gutted and salted herring. This had
a great effect on fisheries in Katwijk and was the start of its
famous herring fisheries.
In all six fishing communities of this study fishermen were the
poorer members of the community. In all cases this was because
they owned little or no land. So it is clear that land ownership
was experienced as being more desirable and economically dependable
than being a fisherman. In one of the communities people were
reported to have switched to fishing and turned away from agriculture.
This was in Goeree during the agricultural crisis in the late
1800's in The Netherlands. However, their first choice had been
to be in agriculture and fishing was their second choice when
agriculture declined.
The respondents to the questionnaires stated more often that the
reason they were in fishing was because of traditional reasons
and because they like it, rather than for economic reasons. The
answers to question 12 of the questionnaire showed that out of
31, 27 in Dingle and 30 in Goeree fished because it was their
tradition to do so or they liked the sea and fishing. In other
words, even currently, few said that they fished for economic
reasons.
This relationship with agriculture is very interesting, as already
discussed in Section 1.2 of Chapter 1. Agriculture has obviously
been experienced as superior in terms of nutritional and economic
dependability by all six fishing communities, but the resource
which the fish represent still beckons enticingly and a limited
number of fishermen can make a living from it for shorter or longer
periods of time. In the case of Urk, the island was so small that
essentially no land was available. The community on this island
has always been primarily a fishing one. In the case of Inishbofin,
once land ownership was attainable for the islanders subsequent
to the landlord system, those who did not emigrate preferred to
work on the land. The Inishmore islanders were often fisherman/farmers,
but here, as in Dingle, Katwijk and Goeree, the fishermen were
seen as poor. At the present time, many Irish respondents claimed
that Ireland, in its negotiations on entry into the EU, gave away
fishing rights in favour of concessions for agricultural. Therefore,
within fishing communities, centuries of experience has shown
that agriculture is more important than fishing if land is available.
Markets and the capital it generates for investment in fishing
enterprises has also dictated how a fishing community can make
use of its marine resources. Most of the periodic cycles of success
in the fishing industry, prior to the 1960's, experienced by the
Irish study sites were caused by markets and the availability
of capital. So also in the Dutch study areas, where the liberalisation
of fisheries laws in 1857 made a greater market available to such
fishing communities as Katwijk. Goeree had a market for fresh
fish and shrimps in Rotterdam which generated their income. But
as they did not need to fish far offshore, their small sailing
boats were adequate. However in Katwijk the herring fishery off
the English coast did need greater investment and a number of
shipowners build up herring businesses, starting off with the
bomschuiten from the beach. The fishermen themselves did not have
the capital to buy and operate such large boats which could go
for long trips far offshore. However, these Dutch shipowner invested
in this business, which already existed and operated from those
fishing centres which had been allowed to land high grade salted
herring for the export market. These fisheries were also run by
shipowners who were amongst the vested interests which backed
the Dutch fisheries laws prior to 1857 in order to control competition.
So both in Ireland and in The Netherlands, social control on fishing
communities had a great effect on the relationship which they
had with their marine resources. Hence when describing and striving
to understand this ecological relationship, human social organisation
is very important. When ecological relationships are discussed
pertaining to other animal species besides ourselves, social organisation
is a very important part of that, particularly with regard to
intraspecific competition for, and partitioning of, resources.
As shown above, laws control competition between fishing communities.
In the case of the Irish study areas it was to control competition
between the Irish and British fishing industry, in the case of
Katwijk between it and other herring fishing fleets in The Netherlands
and in the case of Urk between the eel trawlers and the sport
fishermen on the IJsselmeer. So these important influences on
human fishing communities are also very much part of their ecology,
although social and political factors in human society are sometimes
not perceived as intrinsic parts of human ecology.
When we examine the situation on the west coast of Ireland where,
after the 1920's, the fishing industry collapsed, while some few
miles out to sea trawlers were engaged in a very important fishery.
The reasons given for this by respondents were a combination of
not having big enough boats or the capital to buy them, that the
western Irish fishing communities did not have the markets to
sell these fish and that they were not aware of the importance
of this fishery or did not see it as an option which was open
to them. That markets existed for these fish is proven by the
fact that these trawlers were fishing there, the Irish fishermen
just did not have access to them.
In the case of the three Dutch fishing communities in this study,
capital was provided by the herring export industry for the bomschuiten
and later the steel loggers which fished for herring from Katwijk.
In Urk and Goeree, where much smaller boats were used until after
the Second World War, the larger beam trawling kotters developed
as a result of good catches of sole and plaice for which there
was a buoyant export market, mainly to southern Europe. No obstacles
were put in the way of this development, in fact the Dutch national
authorities subsidised this fishing industry up to the early 1970's
and The Netherlands' membership of the EU facilitated the export
of fish within the EU.
Another aspect of the social system was deemed to have had a great
effect on the way different fishing communities made use of their
marine resources. This was the social relationships and payment
system of crew on board of the fishing boats.
As is clear from the results presented in Chapter 4, traditionally
the crews of the boats in the Irish and Dutch study areas, were
very often related. Even to the present day, 25 of the Goeree
respondents and 16 of the Dingle respondents started fishing with
a family member (question 16 in questionnaire). Thus the team
work on a fishing boat seemed to be enhanced by close social ties.
Even on the herring boats of Katwijk, which had all hired crews,
the crew members were selected by the skipper from a group of
family relations and close personal acquaintants.
The payment system in all the six study areas depended on a share
of the catch. However, in Katwijk there also was a minimum wage
and therefore the share of the catch was also smaller. In Urk
and Goeree the total share system, without a minimum wage, was
pointed out as one of the main reasons for the success of the
beam trawling industry. Respondents pointed out that men work
harder, are more dedicated and conscientious, in a type of work
where extra effort is often important for the success of the enterprise.
The team work aspect of this system, which is much less hierarchical
than was the situation on the shipowners' herring boats of Katwijk,
seemed to suit the somewhat independent mindedness of the fishermen,
both in Ireland and The Netherlands. However, the high level of
catches was also an important reason why the share system worked
so well in the Dutch beam trawl fishery as crew members earned
a lot of money. The fact that in Katwijk the total share system
was not traditional was the reason given by many respondents for
the lack of development of its beam trawl fishery.
The share system also operated in Ireland, including in the traditional
fisheries. The opinion of Irish respondents was that the share
system was a very fair system and that therefore the crew worked
well. Part of the old system in Ireland was also that each crew
member brought his own net or spillet line (longline) to the boat,
and therefore contributed to the fishing gear. The nets in particular
were expensive and so investment and risk were distributed amongst
the crew members.
Another factor of the social organisation in western Europe
which has had a big impact on the relationship of fishing communities
with their marine resources is the influence of the European Community
and its Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). Respondents both in Ireland
and The Netherlands had strong feelings on the effect of the EU
on western European sea fisheries. For this reason questions 86
to 102 of the questionnaire were dedicated to the respondent's
experience as regards the influence of the EU's CFP.
The markets for fish were generally seen to have benefited from
the EU. In particular the auction centre and fish processors on
Urk were said to have been able to sell to Italy and other European
countries through membership of the EU. In Ireland fish sales,
to Spain in particular, have benefited the fishing industry since
membership of the EU. However, as was always the case, transport
costs from Ireland are said to impact significantly on profitability
of the Irish fishing industry. However, the point has been made
before, that fishing fleets from all over Europe fished off the
Irish coasts and they also had to transport their catch to the
European market. Possibly their much larger fishing vessels had
the advantage of economy of size and greater range compared to
the Irish fleet.
However, even in Ireland, marketing, with the EU still importing
fish products, has been significantly improved over the situation
which pertained before the Second World War, when markets were
controlled by certain interests for the benefit of some and not
others. Respondents felt that the market was more open, even though
some cheaper imports from eastern Europe were seen as threatening
fish prices in The Netherlands.
The experience of the fish catch quota system in Ireland and The
Netherlands gave rise to a lot of discussion. For boats over 10
m, which fish for the main commercial fish species with beam or
otter board trawlers, quota are currently the main constraint
which controls their relationship with their marine resources.
After its introduction, the quota system in The Netherlands went
through a phase when infringements were allowed to continue. This
meant that effectively everyone could catch as much they could
and auction centres cooperated with this situation. This was stopped
through pressure from the EU and resulted in the resignation of
a Dutch minister of fisheries. After this time the quota system
was very strictly enforced in The Netherlands, many thought it
was much to strict, as described in Section 4.2.2. Presently enforcement
is less strict, although most Dutch respondents were of the opinion
that fisheries in The Netherlands were better enforced than in
any other EU member state. During the latter half of the 1980's
and the early 1990's, The Netherlands had enough national quotum
for plaice and sole, so the beam trawling industry was not restricted
in its catches. However, in recent years the quota for these economically
important fish species has been dramatically reduced in the North
Sea. This has resulted in fears amongst the beam trawl fishermen
that their boats, which have high overheads with engines of between
1500 and 2000 horse power and some even more, will become economically
unviable. The cost of renting or buying quota have also risen
sharply so that only those who already have enough quotum can
afford to buy or rent more.
The main concern amongst Dutch fishermen is that the levels of
the national quota are not predictable, being determined by politicians
and administrators on the advice of fisheries biologists. They
feel disempowered in their own industry and vulnerable to the
political whim of authorities far removed from their own communities
and commercial fishing. The impression of 20 of the 31 respondents
of the questionnaire in Goeree was that the national government
and EU authorities were either ignorant or did not care about
fisheries, and another five found their management policy much
to changeable. They feel they should be consulted as part of the
fisheries management policy formulation, but authorities ignore
them. One example of this, which was quoted by many respondents,
was that the Dutch national fishermen's organisation suggested
on at least two different occasions during the 1970's and 80's
that the Dutch government impose a horse power limit on the beam
trawl kotters. The first suggested limit was less than 1000 hp
and the second less than 1500 hp. The government rejected this
as they said that they did not want to restrict a growing industry.
But then a 2000 hp limit was imposed after all, and in such a
way that many fishermen who put in orders for boats before the
deadline are still able to fish with 3000 and 4000 hp boats for
a number of years. Even the 2000 hp limit 28 of the 31 Goeree
questionnaire respondents found to high, as well as respondents
in Katwijk and Urk.
The fish stocks assessment work done by the Dutch fisheries research
institute was also strongly criticised by some fishermen as not
employing the correct methods to catch fish, as discussed in Section
4.2. 15 of the 31 respondents in Goeree thought that the stock
assessment results were based on guesswork or influenced by political
considerations and a further three thought that the biologists
had a fair idea of fish stocks but should consult with the fishermen
more.
Respondents gave the impression that generally in Ireland CFP
quota are not as strictly enforced as in The Netherlands. However,
respondents in Inishmore and Dingle, where fishermen with trawlers
are based, did report boardings and fish catch logbooks being
checked by fisheries personnel. Quota and/or fishing vessel tonnage
are also very expensive in Ireland and young fishermen would find
it very difficult to start a fishing enterprise unless his family
already owned fishing rights for some commercial fish species.
However, unlike The Netherlands, fish auctions are not compulsory
in Ireland. In Dingle, 24 of the 31 questionnaire respondents
said that a fish auction was needed in Dingle. Most respondents
in Dingle thought that fishery controls were not the same in all
EU countries (question 102: 24 out of 31), which opinion was shared
by most Goeree respondents (26 out of 31). Fishermen in both the
Irish and Dutch fishing communities emphasised that regulations
should be enforced equally in all EU member states. That fishery
regulations were needed, everyone agreed (31 out of 31 on question
107 for Dingle as well as Goeree), but the point was emphasised
that the rules would only be properly adhered to and work if they
were applied equally to everyone, because if they are not, all
fishermen are forced into a position of trying to catch as much
as they can, because if they don't someone else will.
A difference existed between the attitude of fishermen in the
Irish study areas and the Dutch study areas about EU fishing fleets
fishing in other EU member states' waters. In Ireland the admission
of Spanish boats in particular is seen as an unfair incursion
into waters which really belong to Ireland. This is seen as being
the pay-off for the concessions from the EU which Irish agriculture
received. The Irish fishermen feel abandoned by the authorities
in Dublin and think that the reason for this is that more political
power could be gained from looking after farmers in Ireland rather
than fishermen because there are many more farmers and agriculture
constitutes a much bigger part of the national economy. Other
non-fishermen who were interviewed for background information
were inclined to agree with the view that the Irish authorities,
from the time of the foundation of the Irish State, followed the
previous British authorities' tradition in neglecting the Irish
fishing industry. The point was made time and time again that
Ireland has 16% of the EU's waters within its 200 mile limit,
but only approximately 5% of the EU's fish catch, as already mentioned
in Section 4.1.3. In addition to Ireland's preoccupation with
agriculture to the detriment of its fisheries, another reason
for Ireland's low national fish quota was said to be that Ireland's
underdeveloped fishery, at the time of joining the EU, was taken
as a base line when quota were fixed. No appreciation appears
to have existed of the development potential of the Irish fishing
industry.
The Spanish were accused of infringing EU fishery regulations,
in particular mesh size limits, by the Irish fishermen. The antipathy
towards the Spanish in particular was demonstrated by many small
Canadian flags which were displayed in the bars on Inishmore,
because the Canadian navy had just taken measures against the
Spanish fleet fishing off its Atlantic shores, at the time the
interviews were conducted on Inishmore.
The attitude of the Dutch fishermen, while the same with respect
to Spanish boats being allowed into the North Sea, is different
because the Dutch national flatfish quota are quite big and they
benefit from fishing rights in English waters. In fact some claimed
that The Netherlands does not have enough home waters to support
its own fleet. The relatively specialised beam trawl fishery is
a particularly Dutch specialisation, the English fleets do not
fish this way, so the Dutch fishermen do not see themselves as
competing directly with the English fishermen.
Another aspect of the EU's Common Fisheries Policy is the decommissioning
of boats in The Netherlands, which in the opinion of some respondents
had the opposite effect of what it was designed to do. Many respondents
mentioned that it had the effect of getting rid of the older boats
only to induce fishermen into buying new boats. In the case of
some fish licenses, a fisherman has to use them in order not to
lose them so he is forced back into fishing. In addition if a
fisherman sells his boat or received money from decommissioning,
then he has to buy into another business within three years, which
in his case has to be a fishing boat as that is the business he
knows about, or else the revenue commissioners claim more than
half of the money. Respondents also claimed that decommissioned
boats were sold to other countries, so continued fishing anyway.
Respondents reported similar tax restrictions in Ireland. In Goeree,
15 out 31 said that decommissioning had modernised the fleet and
forced the horse power race ahead, and another five respondents
said decommissioning had had no effect. It would appear that this
fisheries management measure seems at the very least to have had
unintentioned side effects. Decommissioning is not such an issue
in Dingle as few fishermen availed of it. Despite the fleet being
very old, the Dingle fishermen did not want to lose even more
fishing boat tonnage, as their fleet is small enough as it is.
Also in contrast with the Dutch beam trawl fishermen, no Dingle
fisherman has bought a new boat in recent times, but tend to buy
second hand trawlers, very often from The Netherlands or France.
They do not have the capital to invest in new boats like some
Dutch fishermen and therefore see no advantage in decommissioning.
The general opinion of fishermen which were interviewed in Ireland
and in The Netherlands was that the EU did have good aspects,
particularly with respect to markets, but that two main problem
areas exist. One is consistency in fishery management measures
and determining the level of national quota from one year to the
next. The other is consistency in enforcement of fishery regulation
equally in all EU member states. The general inconsistency of
EU policy towards fisheries has had an unsettling effect on the
relationship between fishing communities and their marine resources
and fishermen have found economic planning of their fishing activities
very difficult.
5.2: Decision making processes amongst fishermen in Dingle and Goeree.
5.2.1: Traditional decision taking.
Traditionally the decision to carry out a certain type of fishing
activity was dependent firstly on the fish stocks being there,
secondly on the type of fishing gear and boats which were available
to the fisherman and thirdly on the need or market for the type
of fish. Traditionally on Inishmore people fished until they had
caught enough fish to satisfy their own need and for which they
had the time to clean and cure. They were also farmers and needed
time for this activity as well. This type of exploitation of fish
stocks was quite low level, especially considering the type of
boats and fishing gear which were still in use well into this
century. These boats were quite adequate to satisfy this type
of demand for fish. However, when the market for salted mackerel
and herring opened up, money could be earned and the market was
big enough and dependable enough that fishermen could fish all
year round and be assured of an income. The necessary capital
to buy bigger boats with greater catch capacity was also made
available. The greater capacity was essential as the trade in
salted fish depended on much larger volumes than had been the
trend in fishing on Inishmore up to then. The concentration on
an export market meant that earning money was the reason for fishing,
rather than catching one's own food and bartering fish for turf
as well as earning the cash one needed for the rent and buying
clothes. The new market oriented fishery needed more fish and
larger boats were needed to supply these, which had to be invested
in. This in turn meant the local economy became more money oriented.
Despite the increased fishing pressure, it was not the fish stocks
which caused the demise of this fishery, but the markets. The
decisions which most fishermen took when the salted fish markets
fell away was to leave their nobbies and zulus tied up at the
pier. They did not go west of the Aran Islands and join the bigger
European trawlers out there which were fishing for hake and other
species. Some fishermen did fish there, but as crew on English
and Welsh trawlers. In addition to the reasons given by respondents,
there are other reasons reported from Donegal in the north west
of Ireland, which suggest that when the high earnings of the salted
fish boom came to an end, the fishermen preferred to emigrate
or turn to agriculture rather than accept the lower earnings of
the white fish fishery, which was in progress off the coast (Taylor
1980). Yet a lot of money was earned with the salted fish industry
previous to this. Many Inishmore and Inishbofin fishermen also
took the decision to emigrate. If these decisions had not been
taken, the fishing industry in the west of Ireland may have been
very different from what it is today.
Fishing went back to smaller boats and more or less what it was
before the Congested Districts Board helped develop the salted
fish trade. As time went by, fishing did develop to some extent.
Lobster and later crayfish become more important, but these were
primarily fished for with small boats. One important factor in
the decision taking process on Inishbofin was the Cleggan disaster.
The loss of life during this October night in 1927 decided many
fishermen to stop fishing and many a young islander turned to
farming or emigrated. The people of Inishbofin were never unfamiliar
with drowning tragedies, but this event caused a great psychological
shock on the island, which is still remembered. The risk which
the fishermen were taking compared to the advantage they were
getting out of it was simply to much. Agriculture and emigration
promised greater rewards with much less risk. Accidents on Inishmore
also occurred, including more than a dozen people being swept
from the rocks while fishing by a completely unexpected and very
large, possibly tidal, wave. However, the role of fishing continued
much stronger in this island than on Inishbofin north of it, even
though both islands have been traditionally very important fishing
centres. One aspect which both islands have in common is that
they were also important as a fishing base for fleets from, not
only other parts of Ireland, but also from other countries. Population
trends were very similar on these two islands (Figs. 2.2 and 2.4),
both experiencing an increase after the drop during the famine
and then quite serious emigration. However, Inishbofin is smaller
and has less people than Inishmore and maybe this had an influence
on the difference in development of the trawler fishery in these
two islands. Yet Inishbofin was the base at one stage for around
10,000 fishermen, who fished on the ground around it and used
the Harbour for shelter. Inishmore seems to have fallen back on
old, tried and trusted fishing methods after the markets for fish
weakened. On Inishbofin people fell back on the more sure and
safe farming.
Dingle is on the main land of Ireland and has a large harbour.
Hence fishermen had greater opportunities for selling fish, as
Dingle was an important local trading centre. The fishermen around
the peninsula fished in very similar ways to those in Inishmore
and Inishbofin, but in Dingle itself bigger boats could be used
and selling the fish which these boats could catch was easier.
Fishermen from around the peninsula, and even the Blasket Islands,
did sell fish in Dingle too, but they had to transport it there
first. If they had had a bigger boat they would have sailed to
Dingle and used it as a base. Again we see that fulltime fishermen
need bigger boats to catch more fish to satisfy a money driven
economy. The decision to make the initial investment in a bigger
boat carries risks with it so if there are complicating factors,
such as not having a proper harbour or also having the option
to work on the land, then the economic advantages of fishing should
outweigh the risks. A good example of this is Brandon village,
which has a pier, but no protected harbour. This was, and is now,
a small boat fishery. But during the CDB salted fish boom, it
was a hive of activity with a half a dozen operators salting and
barrelling fish, and virtually every man out fishing for mackerel
and herring. Much money was made then. Nobbies and zulus were
used there, although these could only approach the pier at high
water and were kept at moorings off the end of the pier , which
is fully exposed to the north. Because this fishery was economically
attractive and the larger boats could be taken to Dingle and into
the shelter of estuaries, the larger boats survived. But the inevitable
happened and a storm blew up when the boats were at their moorings
and most were wrecked. All during the salted fish period, smaller
wooden boats and naomhógs were also used to supply mackerel
and herring, but these were out of the water during the storm
and survived. Therefore a fisherman in Brandon has to weigh up
the advantages of the higher earnings of a larger boat against
the risk of damage in an unprotected harbour. Some Brandon fishermen
did take bigger boats but then moved to Dingle with its protected
harbour. One 79 year old respondent still fished for lobsters
from Brandon, but used a small rowing boat which he pulled it
out of the water every day. Halfdeckers used for lobster potting
and salmon driftnetting are used during the summer around the
Dingle peninsula, including Brandon, but most are brought to Dingle
during the winter. Of the questionnaire's respondents in Dingle
whose fathers fished, seven fished on larger sailing and steam
trawler, five fished on halfdeckers and six fished from naomhógs
(question 17.1).
In Katwijk the choices open to fishermen were curtailed by laws
previous to 1857, and, in addition to having no harbour, fishing
took place from the beach for fresh fish and low grade salted
fish. The advantage of the beach was that there were no rock outcrops,
much larger boats were used from the Dutch beaches than was the
case in western Ireland. Once herring fishing was allowed and
the shipowners invested in larger vessels, the fishermen did not
have many choices. Poverty precluded them from investing in boats
themselves and if they did, they could only buy small boats. This
was also the case in Ireland, but the larger sailing trawlers
in Dingle were owned by families who also fished on the boats
themselves. The shipowners of Katwijk were business men who employed
crew and felt themselves above the fishermen in terms of socially
standing. One respondent from Katwijk remarked that the shipowner
and the protestant minister had an arrangement, which was that
the shipowner would keep the people poor if the minister kept
them ignorant. In this situation it is clear that the choices
open to the fishing community were curtailed by poverty. This
situation was also the case in Ireland, however here the markets,
and therefore the entire fishing industry, were being depressed
by competitors. In Katwijk it was only one section of the fishing
industry which was poor. The owners of the large sailing trawlers
in Dingle, while usually economically better off than the smaller
fishermen living in "the colony", still were socially
closer to them as they were active fishermen themselves. In Katwijk
fishermen did come together and financed boats themselves, as
mentioned previously, but these ventures were generally not successful.
The fact that they bought secondhand boats from the shipowners,
which were not competitive, and the fact that they did not have
the share system of crew payment, are said to be some of the reasons
for the lack of success. In Katwijk, skippers did earn a reasonable
salary and did not have the financial risk of owning a boat, so
there were some advantages to this system.
Decisions on Urk taken by fishermen up to 1932 were similar to
those of fishermen all around the then Zuiderzee. They could either
fish on the Zuiderzee, which many did, the Waddenzee north of
it, which some did but not many, or go onto the North Sea, which
they did particularly when fish stock in the Zuiderzee declined.
However, when fish stocks increased again in the Zuiderzee, the
Urk fishermen decided to come back again. As mentioned previously,
nearly all the fishermen used similar flat bottomed sailing boats,
which all had approximately the same fishing capacity. Some draught
netting from the shores of Urk was carried out, but this was on
a small scale. The Urk fishermen were fulltime, they could not
be farmers on Urk because the land was not there. Choices between
the Zuiderzee and the North Sea were made on the basis of fish
stocks, with the preference appearing to have been for the Zuiderzee.
After the Afsluitdijk was closed in 1932, Urk fishermen stayed
fishermen and some continued to fish on the new IJsselmeer, predominantly
for eel, and the others went to the North Sea. The small sailing
boats were more suited for sheltered waters because of their size.
No major disaster was recalled by respondents which influenced
fishermen's decisions, but sailing boats and the steel loggers
were lost on the North Sea in accidents. A comment of Katwijk
respondents was that when Urk fishermen first went to the North
Sea they tended to head for the coast if a storm started, which
the Katwijker knew from their longer experience on the North Sea,
was the wrong thing to do as one gets caught on a lee shore in
shallow water with many sand banks. They claimed that a number
of Urk boats foundered because they did not head into the open
water and ride out the storm. One option which was open to all
fishing communities in The Netherlands, including Urk, and which
many took, was to give up fishing altogether and work in industry
in the large centres of population or in agriculture. The Urk
community seems to have opted for fishing much more than other
traditional fishing communities around the IJsselmeer. The income
from fishing was reported by respondents to be enough to keep
bread on the table and raise a family, but very little money was
left over at the end of the year. Fishermen bought engines for
their sailing boats and borrowed money for this investment, which
often was not paid off for a long time. Fishermen did tend to
own their own boats on Urk. Many Urk fishermen did take the decision
to stay on the North Sea and to buy bigger boats. They moved first
to otter board trawling and then to beam trawling. The accidents
which happened during the beam trawling with boats being turned
over when beam trawl got stuck on the bottom, as mentioned previously,
happened also to Urk fishermen. But the returns from sole and
plaice fishing with the beam trawl were so good that, instead
of turning to another type of fishing or leaving fishing altogether,
the Urk fishing community decided to stick it out and contributed
to solving the technical problems which dogged beam trawling on
its outset. Again it was the return from the fishing method which
made the investment and risk worthwhile, as is demonstrated by
the present flatfish auction and processing industry in Urk, which
is the biggest in turnover in Europe. Some respondents did say
that this success did cost fishermen's lives, as did respondents
in Goeree, but that it was due to the persistent nature of the
Urk people that they succeeded. An argument which could be levelled
against this is that the monetary return from beam trawling was
the main factor which influenced decisions making on Urk, but
the catches of sole and plaice were also open to Katwijk fishermen
and they did not develop into beam trawling to the extent the
Urk fishing community did. So other factors do seem to influence
decision making and one of these could be that on Urk fishermen
traditionally owned their own boat and so they were used to this,
as well as running their own fishing enterprise. The decision
of the Urk fishermen to move to the North Sea, after the Afsluitdijk
was finished and also after trawling for eel was banned on the
IJsselmeer, seems to have resulted in their current success. Many
other fishing communities which were located all around the IJsselmeer
did not make this decision and turned to the land for a living.
Goeree had similar traditional sailing boats to Urk and they also
owned most of them themselves. Investments in steel loggers were
also made, which was financed with earnings particularly from
the shrimp fishery as well as other species. The decisions which
were open to the Goeree fishermen did include work on the land
as a labourer, as the sea clay in Goeree is quite fertile. Yet
the fishing communities of Goeree and Goeree/Havenhoofd in particular
and of Ouddorp and Stellendam stayed very loyal to fishing. Economic
reasons did of course influence decision making, as is shown by
the origin of Stellendam, which were dyke workers until the dykes
were finished and then they turned to fishing, and also during
the crisis in agriculture in the 1800's, when many also turned
to fishing. Of the questionnaire respondents in Goeree, 27 had
fathers who fished and all but two of these fished in the old
wooden sailing boats. So, as in Urk, all fishermen traditionally
had approximately the same catching power. Like on Urk, once engines
could be mounted in boats these were purchased whenever the fishermen
felt they could make this investment. One respondent said that
the introduction of engines made a big difference to every fisherman,
because hauling sails was heavy physical work. When considering
decision making in Urk and Goeree, it should be remembered that
at one time literally hundreds of boats and crews fished from
these communities. Now the boats are much bigger but there are
fewer of them and much less people actively fish. So in both cases,
many fishermen have decided to turn to land based occupations
over the last 50 years. Technology has forced this change in work
pattern, but both fishing communities are still in existence and
the active fishermen of today did take the decision to be involved
in fishing.
5.2.2: Effect of European Union membership on decisions taking.
As discussed in Section 5.1, the Common Fisheries Policy of the
EU has had a great influence on its fishing communities. The CFP
has attempted to share out EU fishing waters amongst its various
fishing fleets. With the upsurge in technology, fishing capacity
has increased enormously. However, this technology requires investment
and this did not happen to the same extent in all fishing fleets.
Those of the Irish study sites had much less access to capital
than those of the Dutch study sites for instance. So access to
fish stocks had to be regulated on an EU wide scale in order that
fishing communities and their marine resources would be preserved
and not simply out fished by the most technologically advances
fleets. The quota system, as well as limited access to other nations'
waters, are part of the CFP. Both these measures have had a great
effect on fishermen in the Irish and Dutch study areas. The beam
trawl fishermen in The Netherlands can fish in English waters
and have access to a wider European market for its fish. However
at present they are not sure which decisions to make for the future
of their fishing enterprises because quota could be changed and
restrict their catches, thus putting limits on their investment
options. Their decision taking process is further complicated
by fish prices which can and often do vary. As explained previously,
the fishermen feel that they were forced into a horse power race
by national and EU fisheries policies, and now that they have
relatively strong engines, which have high running costs, policies
threaten their economic survival. The plaice and sole quota cuts
of January 1995 and 1996 have led to predictions of between one
quarter and half of the Dutch beam trawlers getting into financial
difficulty (Salsa & Davits 1996). The high cost of EU quota
also limits those who can consider getting involved in fishing.
The class of Dutch kotter of less than 300 hp, called the Eurokotter,
also arose as a result of EU fishery measures. These smaller kotters
have less overheads and can therefore survive with less quota
than the kotter of 1500 and 2000 hp. However, a percentage decrease
in national plaice and sole quotum, as happened in 1995 and 1996
also affect their viability. In this context, decision making
for Dutch fishermen is strongly dependent on EU fisheries policy.
In Ireland the EU also plays a big role. Markets for most Irish
fish species have opened up in Europe, particularly in Spain as
mentioned previously. Those fishermen who do not fish for species
which have a quotum are not as affected by EU policy as those
that do. As in the Dutch fishing communities, the value of quota
and/or fishing vessel tonnage has effectively limited starting
or expanding a fishing enterprise to those who have fishing rights
already. More experienced men who want to fish but do not have
quota or fish species licenses in the family have to limit themselves
to non quotum species or small boats. In addition most fishermen
worry about the effect the foreign fleets will have on the fish
stocks off the Irish coast. This has also created uncertainty
in the Irish fishing communities and affected fishermen's decision
making process.
As already discussed, respondents in Ireland and The Netherlands
said that EU and national fisheries has forced them into greater
fishing effort which they feel has been detrimental to fish stocks.
However, they see that the current fisheries policies have rewarded
those that concentrated on catching as much they could rather
than those who took a more moderate approach to fishing. Initially
quota were set on the basis of catches during a three year period,
so those who caught more, received more quotum, and as a result
those who earned more, earned more money to buy more fishing rights
on top of what they had already. So fishermen in Ireland and The
Netherlands see that the safest strategy to follow is to catch
as much as you can when you can because of uncertainty of EU and
national fisheries policy. They do not think that this is a good
policy themselves and in essence agree with quota and fishery
policies, but because of the uncertain future see this as the
only decision they can take.
5.2.3: Decision taking as interpreted from the questionnaire
results.
The questionnaires which were carried out in Dingle and Goeree
were divided into three basic groups of questions, with the first
group being divided into three further subgroups. As explained
in Chapter 3, the rationale of these divisions is that a number
of components combine to result in the decisions which fishermen
have made and which determined their fishing activities. The groups
of respondents, described in Sections 4.4 and 4.5, will now be
discussed in relation to each other and the underlying trends
of the data within the different groups of questions will now
be examined.
The groups of Dingle respondents of the questionnaires are interpreted
on the type of marine exploitation activity which they were engaged
in at the time of the interview. These are listed for the 31 respondents
from Dingle in Table 4.1.
The predisposing system variables describe the background of the
respondents and a Princals analysis of 26 of these resulted in
the identification of nine groups of Dingle respondents. In terms
if the fishermen's fishing activities, those who were using similar
methods were more or less found in the same groups, such as groups
II, III in which most respondents fished for lobsters, and groups
V, VII and VIII in which most trawled (Fig. 4.3A, Table 4.2).
This is not surprising as the trawler men tend to live close to
Dingle where their boats are based in the harbour. The fishermen
around the peninsula do not have good harbours and therefore have
smaller boats which are mainly used for lobster fishing. So those
also group together on the basis of their domicile. However, the
lobster fishermen are divided into those with and without families
which are involved in fishing, and the trawler men are divided
into those with fewer years of fishing experience and the more
experienced fishermen. Processors/shipowners and an angling boat
operators who live in Dingle are included in groups I and IX,
and two angling operators who live outside Dingle are in group
III (Fig. 4.3A, Table 4.2).
When the predisposing attitude variables are examined, fewer groups
are encountered (Fig. 4.5A, Table 4.3). All the trawler men are
included in group V and the lobster men in groups III and IV.
This would indicate that attitude and the type of involvement
in the fishing industry were more closely related than background
characteristics are with fishing method, although domicile is
a factor. The division in the lobster fishermen can be explained
by a difference in the assessment of fish stocks and knowledge
of number of fish stocks (Table 4.3, Section 4.4.3). The angling
boats and a non-owner processor are separate from the lobster
and trawler men, again indicating variation based on methods of
marine resource usage.
The predisposing enabling variables showed the same number of
groups as the attitude variables (Fig. 4.6A, Table 4.4). The lobster
men are more combined than with the attitude variables, but some
of the trawler men have moved to different groups. One reasons
for this may be that quota don't play a part in the lobster fishermen's
activities, although some do have opinions about them, having
been involved with them before. The engine horse powers which
are used by the trawler men also vary more than those used by
the lobster men, for whom engine power is not as directly related
to their method of fishing. The fish processors had financial
interests in the trawlers so they grouped with them, while the
sea trip and angling operators were scattered more amongst the
groups as their boats and the factors which enable them to carry
out their fishing tend to be intermediate between the lobster
boats and the trawlers. Again as with the attitude variables,
the factors which enable fishermen to operate and the manner of
marine resource exploitation are understandably closely related.
The intervening variables produced one more group than the attitude
and enabling variables. Six groups could be identified and these
were once more along the lines of the various ways of marine resource
exploitation (Fig.4.7A, Table 4.5). However, slightly more mixing
of fishing methods and activities occurred than in the previous
cases. This may indicate that although experience of intervening
factors, such as fishery regulation, EU and national policy and
local traditions, were related with the activities of the individual
member of a fishing community, that attitudes and enabling factors
differed more from one type of exploitation to the next.
The dependent variables which recorded the various aspects of
the marine exploitation activities of the respondents once more
divided the Dingle respondents in five groups, and these were,
as in the case of the attitude and enabling variables, along the
lines of the method of marine exploitation. All of the lobster
fishermen were in one group, none were in any other groups (Fig.
4.8, Table 4.6). The trawler men were primarily in two groups,
groups III and IV. The maritourism operators and the processors
made up the rest. It is not surprising that the dependent variables
are closely related to the role of the respondent in the fishing
industry, as they detail the fishing activity of the respondents.
As with the Dingle respondents of the questionnaires, the Goeree
questionnaires respondents are interpreted on the type of marine
exploitation activity which they were engaged in at the time of
the interview. These are listed in Table 4.9 for the 31 respondents
from Goeree.
The predisposing system variables gave rise to six groups of respondents
from Goeree (Fig. 4.11A, Table 4.10). As in the Dingle data, domicile
was an important factor, but this was not as related to the type
fishing which the respondent carried out as in the Dingle peninsula
data. The only group which contained one type of fishing activity
only was group III with two angling skippers, both of whom lived
in Hellevoetsluis. The two cockle skippers also grouped together
in group IV but shared this group with Eurokotter as well as larger
beam trawlermen. One cockle skipper lived on Goeree in Ouddorp,
but the other lived in the north west of The Netherlands in Hippolytushoef.
In contrast to the predisposing system variables, there were only
four groups produced by the Princals analysis of the predisposing
attitude variables, which were predominantly based on the different
fishing methods used by the respondents. Groups III and IV represented
the larger beam trawlers and the Eurokotter men respectively.
While the other smaller groups contained the angling skippers,
the cockle men, the fisheries teacher and two Eurokotters and
a larger kotter. This indicates that, as in Ireland, attitudes
and method of marine resource exploitation are closely related.
The predisposing enabling variables are divided in eight groups
which means that the larger beam trawlers and the Eurokotters
are not limited to one group. The larger beam trawlers with 2000
hp or more were divided into groups I and VIII (Fig. 4.15A, Table
4.12), while those with 1700 and 1800 hp were divided over other
groups together with the Eurokotters, which were also in different
groups. It must be remembered that the eight groups result from
an analysis using four variables and that the analysis of the
full 12 enabling variables gave one big group of 22 respondents,
with the other nine respondents removed from this group (Fig.
4.14A). This would indicate that in terms of enabling variables
that most of the respondents are in fact quite similar.
The analysis of the intervening variables gave rise to six groups
of respondents. These groups, when interpreted on the basis of
their fishing methods, show that the larger and smaller Eurokotter
beam trawlers are distributed over all the groups, but that the
cockle fishermen and the angling skippers are not in the large
groups but in the smaller fringe groups and in one case on his
own (Fig. 4.16A, Table 4.13). The intervening variables therefore
appear to not be as related with the different types of beam trawlers
as they seemed to be with the various fishing methods of the Dingle
respondents. This may be due to the fact that both the smaller
Eurokotters and the large kotters are beam trawlers, whose main
quarry are plaice and sole. This would confirm that the trawlers
in Dingle differ more in fish species, boats, need for fishing
rights and fishery regulations from the lobster fishery around
the peninsula, than the kotters with 300 hp do from those with
1500 hp and over in Goeree.
The analysis of the dependent variables from the Goeree questionnaires
also involved two analyses. The analysis of the 28 dependent variables
again produced one major group, with the cockle fishermen and
angling skippers more distal on the plot (Fig. 4.17). Again this
would appear to indicate that the dependent variables amongst
the Goeree respondents are more similar amongst both classes of
beam trawlers than the trawlers and lobster fishing in Dingle.
When a further analysis was done, the large groups divided into
two (Fig. 4.8A, Table 4.14).
these are groups II and III, which contain a mix of Eurokotters
and large kotters. The cockle fishermen and angling skippers are
still distal on the plot.
The general trend appears to be that the Dingle respondents
are more diverse than the Goeree respondents in their marine resource
usage and therefore the attitude, enabling, intervening and dependent
variables are also more diverse. The predisposing system variables
are also related to marine resource usage because domicile is
related to the type of coast line, which dictates which type of
boat one can use. In the Goeree data, the variability which is
most closely related to the types of fishing methods, particularly
the Eurokotters and the larger kotters, appears to be in the attitudes
variables. The predisposing system, or background, variables of
the Goeree data were reasonably diverse, but as the two types
of beam trawling both operate from the Delta harbour in Stellendam,
domicile was not as closely related to exploitation method as
in Dingle, with its dispersed fishing bases.
The reason why fishing methods are more diverse in Dingle is that
the marine habitat and shore line are also more diverse in the
Dingle peninsula than in Goeree. The shores of Goeree do not have
the subtidal rocks which are the habitat of lobsters. The relatively
shallow depth, extensive areas of smooth sea floor suitable for
beam trawling and the productive marine ecosystem of the North
Sea have allowed Dutch beam trawling to become specialised and
efficient in one basic method. In Dingle however, parttime fishing
and the lobster fishery has added diversity to fishing activities.
Human ecology is based on the environment and directed by human
culture and society. This means in the case of the present study
that, fishing decisions taken by fishermen are first of all made
possible by the marine resources which are available to them and
secondly by the economic circumstances of the industry and its
markets. Lobster fishing in Dingle and beam trawling for sole
in Goeree are being practised because there is a market for these
high priced species. From the Dingle as well as Goeree data it
would appear that once a decision has been made and a fisherman
is involved in a certain type of marine resource exploitation,
particularly his attitude, as well as other factors, are strongly
related to his particular type of activity.
Habitat provides the choices, markets make the decisions and the
fishermen execute and support them.
5.3: The role of Traditional Knowledge in Sustainable Natural Resource Utilisation amongst Fishermen in Dingle and Goeree.
The traditionality and sustainability data from the Dingle and Goeree questionnaires will first be discussed as this focusses more on current marine resource utilisation practices, after which the traditional fishery knowledge which was recorded by the qualitative interviews will be discussed and its role in future fishery management assessed.
5.3.1: Role of traditionality in sustainable fishing practices
as shown by questionnaire results.
When the seven groups in fig. 4.10A and Table 4.8 are interpreted
on the basis of the current activity of the Dingle respondents
listed in Table 4.1, it is clear that group I are all lobster
fishermen and group VI is dominated by those involved in trawling
in one form or another, but this group also includes one lobster
fisherman. For the rest, most groups are a mix of the various
types of marine resources utilisation activities carried out in
Dingle. This would indicate that when the variables are grouped
on the basis of traditionality and sustainability, that they are
not as closely related to the fishing method as when the variables
are grouped on the basis of the predisposing, intervening and
dependent classification. In the case of the Goeree questionnaire
data, three groups are entirely made up of one type of fishing
method, groups III, IV and VIII, the first two of which contain
larger kotters and the last Eurokotters (Fig. 4.20A, Table 4.16).
Group VII is comprised of two angling skippers and a cockle skipper,
and therefore does not contain any beam trawlers. The other groups
contain a mix of marine exploitation methods.
Thus, surprisingly there seems to be a somewhat closer relationship
between the variation in the traditionality and sustainability
variables and the different marine resource exploitation techniques
in Goeree than in Dingle, while the opposite was the case when
the variables were grouped on the basis of the predisposing, intervening
and dependent classification. In order to examine the variation
in the traditionality and sustainability variables, crosstabulation
of the percentage occurrence of individual traditionality and
sustainability variables are examined.
When three categories of numbers of fishing ancestors (ancs1710) were compared with whether the respondents thought that the future of fishing is better served with a policy of catching more fish and increasing overheads to achieve this, or to catch less fish but also have less overheads (choice58), it clear that amongst the Dingle respondents those who chose for more fish and overheads tended to have fewer fishing ancestors (Table 5.1).
Table 5.1: Proportions of Dingle respondents on opinion on future fishing strategy and three categories of ancestors who fished.
| Numbers of | Future catches and overheads | Total | ||
| ancestors | more | less | ||
| 0 | 0.22 | 0.2 | 0.21 | |
| 1.0-2.0 | 0.33 | 0.15 | 0.21 | |
| 3.0-4.0 | 0.45 | 0.65 | 0.58 | |
| n=9 | n=20 | n=29 | ||
| chisq. p=.007 | chisq. p=.27 | |||
In Goeree the variable choice58 was not included in the multivariate analyses as it has a low level of variability but it is nevertheless a sustainability variable, and when it was compared to the number of fishing ancestors of respondents it was found that those who preferred to reduce overheads and catch less fish had the same distribution as regards numbers of fishing ancestors as the sample as a whole. There was a slightly higher proportion amongst those who preferred to depend on greater catches and higher overheads who had one or two fishing ancestors, and a slightly lesser percentage than the sample as a whole who preferred this strategy with three and four fishing ancestors (Chi sq. p=0.18) (Table 5.2).
Table 5.2: Proportions of Goeree respondents on opinion on future fishing strategy and three categories of ancestors who fished.
| Fishing | Future catches and overheads | Total | ||
| ancestors | more | less | ||
| 0 | 0.14 | 0.13 | 0.13 | |
| 1.0-2.0 | 0.43 | 0.33 | 0.35 | |
| 3.0-4.0 | 0.43 | 0.54 | 0.52 | |
| n=7 | n=24 | n=31 | ||
| chisq. p=.18 | chisq. p=.9 |
Presuming that catching less fish with lower overhead costs is
a more sustainable strategy, it would appear that in Dingle the
more traditional fishermen also have more sustainable attitudes
although this trend is not a strong one. Such a trend is even
weaker in the Goeree data but what indications there are, point
in the same direction. One argument which was made by fishermen
using powerful beam trawling kotters in Urk and Goeree was that
more powerful fishing boats with high overheads are actually safer
for fish stocks, because as the stocks decline these boats will
become uneconomic quicker than the smaller boats with lower overheads.
So with smaller boats the fish stocks could be reduced to a greater
degree because the respondents argued that they stay economically
viable longer with lower landings. However, the Agricultural Economic
Institute in The Hague projected that the reductions in plaice
and sole quota would threaten the economic viability of a greater
percentage of the Eurokotters than it would of the bigger beam
trawlers (Salsa & Davits 1996), which would counter the previous
argument.
To further examine the trend in opinions on sustainability and
traditionality, the numbers of fishing ancestors were compared
with the view of the respondents on the choices their grandsons
would have as regards fishing methods (grdson43). This variable
was taken as an indication of how sustainable the respondents
thought he was utilising his marine resources. In the Dingle data
those who thought that their grandson would have the choice to
fish in the same way as they were fishing now, had more or less
the same proportions in terms of the categories of ancestors as
the sample as a whole. But a greater percentage of those with
most fishing ancestors did not think that their grandson would
be able to fish like they could than in the sample as a whole.
Those who were not sure were over represented amongst respondents
who had one or two fishing ancestors and slightly under represented
amongst those with 3 or 4 fishing ancestors (Table 5.3).
Table 5.3: Proportions of Dingle respondents on opinions on whether grandson will have the choice to fish using present-day methods and three categories of numbers of fishing ancestors.
| Fishing | Fishing choices open to grandson | Total | ||
| ancestors | yes | maybe | no | |
| 0 | 0.2 | 0.22 | 0.25 | 0.23 |
| 1.0-2.0 | 0.2 | 0.33 | 0.08 | 0.19 |
| 3.0-4.0 | 0.6 | 0.45 | 0.67 | 0.58 |
| n=10 | n=9 | n=12 | 31 | |
| chisq. p=.197 | chisq. p=.17 | chisq. p=.0002 |
In Goeree the data followed the same trend and was in fact stronger, as those who had three or four ancestors who fished and thought that their grandson would have a full choice were under represented, and those who thought their grandson would not were over represented compared to the sample as a whole (Table 5.4).
Table 5.4: Proportions of Goeree respondents on opinion on whether grandson will have the choice to fish using present-day methods and three categories of numbers of fishing ancestors.
| Fishing | Fishing choices open to grandson | Total | ||
| ancestors | yes | maybe | no | |
| 0 | 0.08 | 0.24 | 0.1 | 0.13 |
| 1.0-2.0 | 0.46 | 0.38 | 0.2 | 0.35 |
| 3.0-4.0 | 0.46 | 0.38 | 0.7 | 0.52 |
| n=13 | n=8 | n=10 | n=31 | |
| chisq. p=.048 | chisq. p=.001 | chisq. p=.001 |
Those who were not sure had a greater percentage amongst those
with no fishing ancestors and less percentage amongst those with
most fishing ancestors.
From these trends it would appear that, the more traditional the
background of the fishermen, the less he is of the opinion that
current fishing methods are sustainable, both in Dingle and Goeree.
When the number respondents with low, medium and high categories
of horse power (highhp) and low, medium and high categories of
years of fishing experience (toyr2413) were compared, those with
the least fishing experience in the Goeree data had significantly
less horse power engines (Chi sq. p<.0001), those with medium
years of experience had the same horse power distribution as in
the respondents as a whole and the more experienced fishermen
had significantly the higher horse power engines (Chi sq. p<.0001)
(Table 5..5).
Table 5.5: Proportions of Goeree respondents in three categories of years of experience in fishing and engine horse power.
| Horse power | Years of fishing experience | Total | ||
| 3-19 yrs | 20-36 yrs | 37-54 yrs | ||
| 150-1499 hp | 0.83 | 0.46 | 0.25 | 0.45 |
| 1500-1999 hp | 0.17 | 0.27 | 0.33 | 0.275 |
| 2000-3601 hp | 0 | 0.27 | 0.42 | 0.275 |
| n=6 | n=11 | n=12 | n=29 | |
| chisq. p<.0001 | chisq. p=.98 | chisq. p=.0001 |
In Dingle the trends were more mixed, with the less experienced fishermen having more medium sized and bigger boats, those with between ten and 30 years of experience having more smaller boats and the more experienced fishermen having more small as well as big boats, but fewer medium sized boats (Table 5.6).
Table 5.6: Proportions of Dingle respondents in three categories of years of experience in fishing and engine horse power.
| Horse power | Years of fishing experience | Total | ||
| 1-14 yrs | 15-30 yrs | 30-59 yrs | ||
| 0-49 | 0.14 | 0.46 | 0.43 | 0.37 |
| 50-490 | 0.43 | 0.39 | 0.14 | 0.33 |
| 500-1201 | 0.43 | 0.15 | 0.43 | 0.3 |
| n=7 | n=13 | n=7 | n=27 | |
| chisq. p=.0001 | chisq. p=.005 | chisq. p=.0002 |
This may be explained by the more experienced trawlermen having
bigger boats, as is the case of Goeree, and also that many more
experienced fishermen fish for lobsters, which is not a factor
in Goeree. The trend amongst the less experienced fishermen in
Dingle and Goeree are opposite, with those in Dingle tending to
have a considerable number of the larger boats in the fleet, while
in Goeree they primarily have the smaller boats and none had kotters
over 2000 hp.
When the relationship between years of experience of the respondents
and their view of the sustainability of their fishing practices,
as indicated by whether they think their grandson will have the
choice to fish using present day methods, was investigated, a
very clear trend was seen in the Dingle data. The less experienced
fishermen had a significantly bleaker view of the future than
those with most years of fishing experience, 71% of whom thought
their grandson would be able to fish as they are (Table 5.7).
Table 5.7: Proportions of Dingle respondents in three categories of years of experience in fishing and whether grandson will have the choice to fish using present-day methods.
| Granson's | Years of fishing experience | Total | ||
| choice | 1-14 yrs | 15-30 yrs | 30-59 yrs | |
| yes | 0.14 | 0.31 | 0.71 | 0.37 |
| maybe | 0.29 | 0.31 | 0.29 | 0.3 |
| no | 0.57 | 0.38 | 0 | 0.33 |
| n=7 | n=16 | n=7 | n=30 | |
| chisq. p<.0001 | chisq. p=.4 | chisq. p<.0001 |
In the Goeree data, the percentage of middle aged and older fishermen were more or less as in the sample, but like in Dingle, the less experienced fishermen were significantly more hesitant about the future (Chi sq. p<.0001) (Table 5.8).
Table 5.8: Proportions of Goeree respondents in three categories of years of experience in fishing and opinion on whether grandson will have choice to fish using present-day methods.
| Granson's | Years of fishing experience | Total | ||
| choice | 3-19 yrs | 20-36 yrs | 37-54 yrs | |
| yes | 0.29 | 0.5 | 0.42 | 0.42 |
| maybe | 0.14 | 0.25 | 0.33 | 0.26 |
| no | 0.57 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.32 |
| n=7 | n=12 | n=12 | n=31 | |
| chisq. p<.0001 | chisq. p=.21 | chisq. p=.18 |
The engine horse power and view of their grandson's future showed
conflicting trends in Dingle (Table 5.9) and Goeree (Table 5.10)
amongst those who did not think that their grandson would have
the choices which they have, in that in Dingle proportionally
more respondents with higher horse powers were negative, while
in Goeree more with lower powered engines thought this. Those
who were positive were proportionally higher in the middle engine
power category both in Dingle and in Goeree. Those who were not
sure tended to have lower powered engines in Dingle while the
low and the higher powered engines in Goeree were not sure.
Table 5.9: Proportions of Dingle respondents on whether grandson will choice to fish using present-day methods and three categories of engine horse power.
| Horse power | Grandson's future options | Total | ||
| yes | maybe | no | ||
| 0-49 | 0.33 | 0.63 | 0.18 | 0.36 |
| 50-490 | 0.45 | 0.25 | 0.27 | 0.32 |
| 500-1201 | 0.22 | 0.12 | 0.55 | 0.32 |
| n=9 | n=8 | n=11 | n=28 | |
| chisq. p=.013 | chisq. p<.0001 | chisq. p<.0001 |
Table 5.10: Proportions of Goeree respondents on whether grandson will choice to fish using present-day methods and three categories of engine horse power.
| Horse power | Fishing choices open to grandson | Total | ||
| yes | maybe | no | ||
| 150-1499 | 0.27 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.44 |
| 1500-1999 | 0.46 | 0 | 0.3 | 0.28 |
| 2000-3601 | 0.27 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.28 |
| n=11 | n=8 | n=10 | n=29 | |
| chisq. p=.0001 | chisq. p<.0001 | chisq. p=.00016 |
The relationship between years of fishing experience and numbers
of fishing ancestors was examined and the fishermen with fewer
years of experience had proportionally less zero and more one
and two fishing ancestors and medium numbers of years of fishing
experience in Dingle had proportionally more zero and less three
and four fishing ancestors than in the sample as a whole. Those
respondents with most years of experience had significantly more
ancestors who had fished (Fig. 5.11).
Table 5.11: Proportions of Dingle respondents in three categories of years of fishing experience and numbers of fishing ancestors.
| Fishing | Years of fishing experience | Total | ||
| ancestors | 1-14 yrs | 15-29 yrs | 30-58 yrs | |
| 0 | 0.14 | 0.38 | 0 | 0.23 |
| 1.0-2.0 | 0.29 | 0.12 | 0.14 | 0.17 |
| 3.0-4.0 | 0.57 | 0.5 | 0.86 | 0.6 |
| n=7 | n=16 | n=7 | n=30 | |
| chisq. p=.002 | chisq. p=.002 | chisq. p<.0001 |
In Goeree the less experienced fishermen had proportionally more fishing ancestors and so had the most experienced fishermen than the sample as a whole, but those with medium years of experience tended to have less ancestors who fished (Fig. 5.12).
Table 5.12: Proportions of Goeree respondents in three categories of years of fishing experience and numbers of fishing ancestors.
| Fishing | Years of fishing experience | Total | ||
| ancestors | 3-19 yrs | 20-36 yrs | 37-54 yrs | |
| 0 | 0 | 0.36 | 0 | 0.13 |
| 1.0-2.0 | 0.29 | 0.28 | 0.46 | 0.35 |
| 3.0-4.0 | 0.71 | 0.36 | 0.54 | 0.52 |
| n=7 | n=11 | n=13 | n=31 | |
| chisq. p<.0001 | chisq. p<.0001 | chisq. p=.0003 |
To sum up the six relationships presented and discussed above,
those with a more traditional family background in fishing were
more inclined to adopt more sustainable fishing practices and
they also indicated that they thought that present day fishing
practices were not sustainable. Those with more personal experience
of fishing, i.e.: greater number of years of fishing experience,
were more convinced that their grandson would be able to fish
as fishermen are doing presently. As described above, the relationship
of years of fishing experience and numbers of fishing ancestors
was not the same for Dingle and Goeree, yet the relationship between
family tradition and fishing strategy, and family tradition and
view of the future were probably the same in Dingle as in Goeree,
as was the view of the future of the less experienced fishermen.
The greater confidence of the older fishermen may be due to the
fact that their grandsons will be fishing before the grandsons
of the younger fishermen will. However, it is taken that the older
fishermen had more confidence in present fishing methods. A point
which a number of the respondents in the qualitative interviews
made was that the sea always recovers, even after fish stock have
been bad over a period of time. It may be their longterm experience
which gives the older fishermen more confidence. The categories
of engine horse power showed that in Goeree the younger fishermen
tended to have smaller boats, while in Dingle some young fishermen
had bigger boats as well as the older fishermen. Interestingly
it was those with the middle ranges of engine horse power, both
in Dingle and Goeree, which were most positive about their grandsons
chances of having the same choices to fish as available presently.
The actual range of engine horse power in Dingle and Goeree are
different, due to otter board trawling being practised in Dingle
and beam trawling in Goeree. The biggest boats in Dingle would
be included in the lowest category in Goeree, but the relative
comparison within the two fishing communities still holds. It
may be that those with the smaller boats are worried of losing
the competition with other boats in Goeree, while it was the bigger
boats in Dingle which fear that their way of fishing is to powerful
and not sustainable. In fact both the bigger and the smaller boats
in Goeree were not sure about their grandsons' prospects.
From the analyses of the quantitative data it is clear that traditionality
does have an influence on how sustainable present fishing practices
are perceived by the fishing community.
5.3.2: Traditional fishery knowledge as recorded by the qualitative
interviews.
The fishing communities have over generations build up a store
of knowledge about the nature of the marine environment from which
they gain their livelihood.
Respondents in Ireland as well as The Netherlands stressed that
fish stocks have declined and reappeared repeatedly. The fact
that a fish population is not present anymore does not mean that
it will not reappear again at a later date, or that other fish
stocks will not take its place. This is one reason why fishermen
tended to be reluctant to abandon particular types of boats or
fishing gear, as is being done through decommissioning, because
the fish stocks are likely to reappear again.
The decrease of fish stocks and the increased fishing pressure
are blamed by fishermen on technological advances in fishing methods.
Many respondents reported having to go further and deeper to catch
fish, which used to be abundant close to shore. The less efficient
traditional fishing gear used to catch as much as the technologically
advanced gear does now. A further affect of this is that much
fewer fishermen can gain employment from fishing now because technology
and mechanisation has led to fewer larger fishing boats.
On Inishmore, seabream used to be a very sought after species,
but these are very scarce now. Respondents remembered that they
used not speak while fishing for them because they believed the
noise would scare them away. Apart from increased fishing pressure,
the increased noise levels due to boat engines is also thought
to have reduced seabream populations around the Aran Islands.
An important traditional marine resource, particularly in the
Irish fishing communities which have rocky marine substrate close
to them, was sea weed. A variety of marine algae were used for
fertilising the soil, extraction of iodine, foods and food additives
and herbal cures and remedies. A specialised body of knowledge
on the suitability of particular species for various purposes
existed, and to some extent still exists, in the west of Ireland
coastal communities. Current markets for sea weeds and their products
are limited, but an Irish state controlled company, Arramara Teo.,
is attempting to develop this industry. An important part of sea
weed exploitation by the marine communities was that access to
patches of beach and certain areas of rocky shore line were allocated
to certain families. It was cause for serious disagreement if
one were to gather weed from someone else's area. In other words
it was not a "commonage" and any future resurgence of
sea weed gathering would need to be regulated in a similar way
to avoid over-exploitation of weed beds. Territoriality was also
part of lobster fishing on Inishbofin. One village did not fish
near another one, but kept to its own part of the coast. However,
if fishing effort decreased in one area then others did spread
out from their own area and gradually fished more in the neighbouring
area. But should more fishermen take up fishing again, then they
expect that visitors will withdraw to closer to their own home
base. Territoriality was found to be strongest for species which
are resident of a particular location for at least part of a season,
such as lobsters and seaweed. Many fish species range over larger
distance and territoriality is less important with them. Even
though, the fishermen from the famous fishing community of Galway
city, the Claddagh, did view Galway Bay as their territory and
requests were made to the British navy to put a gunboat on Galway
Bay because these fishermen used to intimidate fishermen from
other fishing communities, including the Aran Islands. The Claddagh
fishermen apparently also showed an amount of proprietorial behaviour
when using Inishbofin as their base for operations, locals remember
stories of scuffles amongst to up to 10,000 fishermen who used
to be based there during the season.
Seals used to be hunted and their flesh and oil used. The flesh
was salted and likened to pork by those who ate it. The oil was
used for lamps and was also said to have been very good for treatment
of cuts and wounds in humans and farm animals. At the moment seals
are a protected species in Ireland as well as The Netherlands
and cannot legally be shot. Many fishermen in the three Irish
study areas complained strongly that the seal population had increased
manifold and that coastal fish stocks, in particular pollack,
were seriously affected by their predation.
Prior to the time that they were made a protected species, there
was a bounty on the killing of seals, as hunting them for use
had become less popular with the increased prosperity of the communities.
Fishery biologists, while not in possession of data to confirm
the fishermen's claims, have no evidence which counters these
claims. Fishermen now advise a scientific survey of seal populations,
followed by controlled and regulated culling to bring their populations
to more acceptable levels. Their belief is that if this is not
done, illegal shooting will result, which is not their preferred
option.
Basking shark were also periodically harpooned off Inishmore.
Their liver contains oil which was also said to heal cuts and
burn wounds in particular.
Because finfish are mobile, no instances of finfish stock enhancement
was recorded. However, lobsters move about less and some fishermen
used to release small ones in areas closer to home. Some respondents
also said that female egg-bearing, or berried, lobsters used to
be returned as well as small ones. These practices are now part
of the "V" notching programme carried out by the lobster
cooperatives, in conjunction with the Irish Sea Fisheries Board
and the EU's PESCA Programme, around the Irish coast.
A number of fishermen and other respondents associated with the
marine environment are of the impression that spring tides have
been getting higher in recent years and that storms have also
got more frequent and severe. However, these observations were
not supported by data available to the Irish Meteorological Service
or by Department of the Marine personnel.
Much traditional knowledge is associated with fishing gear,
as this was the tool with which the fish were actually caught
and was therefore of prime importance.
Floating or sinking gillnets were traditionally used to catch
fish. These nets were made from cotton and other natural fibres
and had to be treated with "bark" to avoid rotting.
Nets were expensive and therefore were well looked after, losing
his nets could spells disaster for a fisherman. It was also seen
as public disgrace if one were to leave a section of net in the
sea in all three Irish fishing communities of this study. This
meant that very little net was lost at sea and thus could go on
killing fish without being emptied are checked, as is the case
with the present nets. The fact that these nets were made from
natural fibre, rather than translucent nylon, made them easier
to see in the water, so more fish could avoid them. The fish quality
from gillnets tended to be better in the past as well, because
the nets were lifted more often and the fish were therefore fresher
than is the case presently. The frequent lifting of the traditional
nets was also done to avoid damage to them. Nets are in relative
terms cheaper now and people can afford to damage them more than
they used. One advantage of nets being cheaper is that when it
is dangerous to stay with nets because of storm, as was the case
with the Cleggan disaster in Inishbofin and surrounding area,
or when the nets are so full of fish that it would sink the boat,
fishermen would now be more inclined to cut a section off or to
abandon it altogether, thus possibly saving their lives.
The Dutch herring driftnet, or the "vleet", were also
made from natural fibre and were made from a particular mesh size.
Dutch respondents were of the opinion that this was a good way
to fish for herring because the smaller fish were not caught and
killed, because they could swim through the meshes. In this way
gillnets are very size selective in the fish they catch. In the
case of spawning herring, gillnets do not disturb the spawn on
the bottom of the sea. Many of the Katwijk respondents blamed
the switch to otter board trawling for herring for the decline
of the North Sea herring fishery. They blamed this method for
killing small fish even when they were not wanted and raking up
the bottom in the spawning regions, thus disturbing the herring
spawn. They also said that even when gillnets were set in big
shoals of herring, not all herring in one shoal would ever get
caught by a gillnet, so leaving some to propagate the species.
They claimed it is possible to encircle an entire shoal with a
trawl, particularly when pair trawling. Purse sein nets were also
seen as to efficient a way to catch herring, which are a shoaling
fish so occur in dense aggregations which can be caught in its
entirety by purse seine nets.
The method which respondents in Ireland as well as The Netherlands
said produced the best quality and size of fish was the longline,
also known as "spillet" or "spiller" in Ireland
and "beug" in The Netherlands. This method is traditional
in both countries and consists of many baited hooks on a long
line. This means that the bait and hook size determines the size
of fish which you will catch. Longlines for cod, haddock, hake,
ling and ray will have bigger hooks than longlines for flatfish.
Once again, traditionally one used to retrieve a longline as regularly
as possible, during the same day or the following day. This ensured
that fish were quite often still alive when taken on board. In
fact some traditional Dutch boats had a tank with water on deck
in which the fish could be transported alive to the shore. This
compares with trawlnets in which the fish are usually pressed
together during trawling for a period of time before the trawl
is lifted and the fish taken out. Gillnets are somewhat better,
but these do cause damage to the gills and general exterior of
the fish and are also more likely to kill the fish. Another advantage
for many fishing communities was that the capital outlay needed
for a longline was less than the nets, so this gave poorer people
also a chance to partake in fishing. The longline is also suitable
to use over rocky bottom, where trawl and gillnets may get caught.
To fish with a longline on a commercial basis does need a relatively
high abundance of fish, as it does not cover a lot of ground,
like the various trawling methods do. It is also useful for shoaling
fish. The longline was suggested as the ideal method for a sustainable
fishery in the ideal situation of abundant fish stocks by a number
of the older fishermen in Ireland and The Netherlands. One drawback
which fishermen in Katwijk remembered was that baiting the numerous
hooks and retrieving the line were arduous tasks, especially in
colder latitudes such as off Iceland. However, automatic hook
baiting mechanisms and fish removers are available. This method
does not mix with trawling, as the trawl goes over the longline
and rips it away.
The traditional lobster and crayfish pots had big enough mesh
size or gaps in the pot to allow smaller lobsters to escape. In
the past lobsters were so numerous that the smaller ones were
not wanted in a pot anyway, because they only took up room and
stopped bigger ones coming in. Currently some undersized lobster
cannot escape from a pot, some respondents suggested that it would
be better if there was a gap left specifically to allow small
lobster to escape. The opening of pots used also to be simple
round holes, through which, if the pot was left for a longer time
in the sea, lobsters could climb back out when they started walking
around in the pot after they finished eating the bait. The older
pots used therefore be lifted several times in one day. The current
pots have a flap in the opening which does not allow the lobster
to escape, so that pots can be left for days and the lobsters
will still be in them. This means that one fisherman can fish
many more pots than he can service in one day, so resulting in
increased fishing pressure. Traditionally each lobster fisherman
could only fish with what he could service in one day. Irish lobster
fishermen suggested that the Canadian system, of a toggle which
gradually dissolves in the sea and releases a flap to let lobsters
out after a while, should be used, as lobster pots are lost from
time to time and they, like lost gillnet, continue to fish and
kill lobsters who can't escape. Crayfish used also be fished for
with lobster pots and good catches were taken. However, at times
many crayfish were present and few would enter pots, possibly
because they were not feeding. A new method, using nylon tangle
nets, was then introduced. The crayfish migrate over relatively
long distances, walking along in numbers. The tanglenet could
entrap many of these and it has been blamed in all three Irish
fishing communities of this study for the virtual disappearance
of crayfish from inshore areas. Some also commented that tanglenets
damaged crayfish much more than the pots, killing some immediately
and causing others to die at a later stage due to being damaged
while they were being held for transport and marketing, increasing
wastage of crayfish. This change from a traditional method to
a modern method is a strong example of a move away from sustainable
exploitation when traditional practices were abandoned.
A traditional type of netting which many ancestors of the Goeree
respondents practices is a type of stationary trawl net called
the "ankerkuil", or anchor net. As mentioned previously,
this net was the same shape as a trawl bag and was attached to
a frame which was let over board from boats which were anchored
in the tidal flows. The sea arms of the southwest of The Netherlands,
including the Grevelingen and the Haringvliet, allowed this type
of fishing because of the strong and extensive tidal rips which
occurred in them previously to the dams being build. Fish moving
in and out of these sea arms and estuaries swam into these nets
and collected in the codend. This method needs very little energy
as the boat is anchored during fishing and any type of boat can
carry it out, in fact one of the cockleboats fishes in this way
in the Schelde estuary during the closed season for cockles. In
a sense the ankerkuil was a forerunner of trawl nets, as it also
depends on the flow water through the net to catch the fish.
A traditional draught netting method from Scandinavia was used
to a small degree in Ireland and The Netherlands. This is Norwegian
seining or "snurrevaad", in which the net is laid out
on the sea bottom and drawn back to the boat by winching in the
cables. It is a method which works well on sandy bottom for flatfish,
particularly plaice. As the net is set in one place and drawn
in and then set in another place, not as much bottom area is fished
as with the trawling methods. The fish are not dragged over the
bottom for as far and as fast as with trawlnets, so are in better
condition as well. In term of economic viability, most fishermen
use types of trawl nets rather than the snurrevaad, but this method
needs much less energy than trawling does.
On the IJsselmeer the Vollendam fishermen used to put poles out
from the sides of the boat to keep the mouth of the trawlnet they
were towing open. Some fishermen from Urk had seen this and adapted
it by having a boat attached to each side of the net, so giving
rise to pair trawling which they used in the southwest of The
Netherlands for herring. Two boats can pull a trawl net faster
than one, so increasing the probability of catching fish. However,
two boats doubles the overheads.
The beam trawl fishery has a long history. In the 16th century
a net connected to a weighted wooden beam was dragged over the
bottom in a North Sea fishery. These were then called "schopnetten"
and used to catch flatfish as they do now. A slump in the fishery
occurred then and these early beam trawls got the blame because
people thought that the bottom was to much disturbed. As a result
this fishery was banned. The next time it was used was on the
IJsselmeer for eel, and, as discussed earlier, it was very successful
and fishermen were of the opinion that the harrowing action of
the beam trawl brought food organisms to the surface and attracted
eels, even increasing their growth rate. The saying used to be:
"where people fish, you catch fish". The experience
of the beam trawl fishermen on the North Sea was reported to be
the same, in this case with sole and plaice, and the landings
of these species since this method developed in the 1960's does
not contradict this theory. This is a traditional method which
has been controversial since its early days and continues to be
so today, yet recent evidence points in a positive direction.
One proviso raised by fishermen is that currently with very strong
engines, very many chains can be attached to the beam trawl so
that it flushes out even those sole buried deeply in the sand.
While the raking action of the beam trawls are seen as beneficial,
fishermen think that the beam trawl should not be allowed to increase
in weight any further and that trawling areas should not be trawled
to often to allow time for the fish to come back. During background
interviews some biologists expressed concerns about the possible
change caused by this raking action to the benthic fauna. While
productivity of opportunistic species could increase, biodiversity
may decrease in a benthic habitat in which disturbance is a frequent
factor. The fishermen are generally also in favour of keeping
the standard width of the beam trawl as it is at 12 m. While most
positive comments came from beam trawl fishermen, those who were
involved in other types of fishing were critical of beam trawling,
particularly the heavy weights and chains which are being used
now.
In the past in The Netherlands 50 hp was a good boat engine, many
did not even have this. As recently as after the Second World
War 300 hp was considered a strong engine. Now 2000 hp is the
limit and some are still allowed to fish with up to 3500 hp for
another number of years before they too have to scale down to
2000 hp. As mentioned before, the Dutch fishermen's organisation
suggested several times that horse power limits be introduced.
However, this did not happen and the horse power race ensued.
In the past, boats in the fishing communities all had more or
less the same catching power. Now there is greater variation in
boat size and so also in catching power. Gillnets take much less
power than trawling, as they only need the power to travel to
the fishing grounds. A similar level of power is needed for longlining,
but for towing a trawl much more power is needed. Comparatively
within the development of trawling huge increases of power have
occurred. The size of midwater trawls has increased by a massive
25 times from the size of the trawls in 1965. So traditionally
the fishing capacity of individual boats was many times smaller.
While boats do have to be of a certain size to be economic, respondents
felt that boats could be smaller, because overheads would also
be less and as long as everyone had smaller boats and the markets
would adapt to this new situation.
A further results of an increase in power and boat size is that
fishing is now carried out in stronger wind forces, so more fishing
occurs during winds when traditionally all boats would be in the
harbour. Respondents fishing with the beam trawlers of 1500 to
2000 hp reported fishing in force seven and eight, the Eurokotters
usually don't go out in anything over a force six. The fishermen
in Ireland tended not to fish in as strong a winds, as the west
coast of Ireland is more exposed and the boats are not as strong
as those in The Netherlands. They said that because of weather
circumstances they usually fished about 180 days per year.
In The Netherlands there has been a trend recently for fishermen
with larger beam trawler to change over to the smaller 300 hp
Eurokotters to fish closer inshore inside the 12 mile limit. This
has been brought about by fishery regulations, but it is not clear
whether this is more sustainable in terms of exploitation rate
of the fish stocks and energy use. This regulation was brought
in to reduce the horse power in the Dutch fishing fleet, but the
number of Eurokotters has increased considerably and the beam
trawls they fish with, although narrower than the full size ones,
have been made quite heavy so what they lose in width, they gain
in the depth they penetrate the sea floor. In Ireland no foreign
boats are allowed inside the baseline which runs from headland
to headland. This has produced fisheries quite close to shore
which are solely fished and controlled by Ireland. One of these
is an autumn herring fishery off the south coast. This situation
has also focussed attention back on inshore fisheries.
A number of traditional fishing regulations were also mentioned
by the respondents as having been beneficial to the fisheries.
In a number of bays around Ireland the then British government
introduced zones where trawling was forbidden. Specific areas
remembered by respondents were the Gregory Sound south of Inishmore,
which could not be trawled for three months of the year, as was
the case in Smerwick Harbour on the Dingle peninsula. Just north
of Smerwick Harbour, in Brandon Bay no trawling was allowed at
any time during the year. These areas were much used by longliners
previous to the 1900's whose gear therefore ran no risk of being
dragged away by the trawls. Respondents on Inishmore also said
that the Gregory Sound was always known as a very productive nursery
area for young fish. In fact it was a good area for fish of all
ages, as this was a favoured trawling ground during the time of
year when it was allowed. It also has a sandy bottom facilitating
trawling. The respondents were not sure whether these fishery
regulations are still in operation, some background respondents
thought that they had been revoked. Many respondents, including
some who were trawlermen, thought it would be a good idea if areas
such as Galway Bay, Brandon Bay, Smerwick Harbour and the inner
regions of Dingle Bay were to be designated fishery nursery areas,
where no trawling would be allowed and only lobster fishing carried
out. The plaice box close to Denmark was instituted as such a
nursery area for plaice. There were mixed reactions about this
by the beam trawler fishermen, some claiming that plaice stocks
did not increase in this area, supporting their argument that
beam trawling harrows the sea bottom and brings food items up
for the fish to feed on. Others said that the plaice box it was
a good idea. Many claimed that there are already numerous areas
in the North Sea which are not trawled, because of rough ground
and also because of oil rigs and pipelines which can foul nets.
In the past the Dutch fishing communities had made an arrangement
amongst themselves that, in winter during the flatfish spawning
season, one community at a time would cease fishing for two weeks.
This was the practice for many years. It was designed to allow
the fish to spawn. The fish are in bad condition during this time
because all their energy has gone into spawning and the fish prices
are depressed also because they are sluggish then and easy to
catch, increasing landings and reducing demand. It also gave fishermen
a chance to carry out yearly maintenance on their boats. This
arrangement does rely on every community cooperating with it,
because if one does not then the others won't either.
The sea days, which most Dutch respondents were very much in favour
of, were in operation during the Second World War because fuel
was scarce. The experience of the fishermen was that earnings
were very good as fish prices were good, kept up by a limited
supply. As mentioned in the results section, during two seasons
in 1990 and 1991 seadays were also operated when earnings were
also very good due to strong fish prices. In Ireland sea days
were not popular because respondents were afraid that they would
lose even more fishing days than they did already due to bad weather.
Culture and social mechanisms develop in a community the same
way as knowledge does. In fact social conventions are learned
behaviour and therefore knowledge. Some traditional social conventions
were recorded.
An overriding tendency amongst the Irish as well as Dutch respondents
was that fishermen wanted to catch fish and the more the better.
To hold back when they knew they could catch more always went
against the grain, as throwing fish back did in the case of fish
which are over quotum. The way fishermen traditionally limited
their catch was by staying on shore. However, the quota system
works differently and does not match the basic nature of fishermen.
As mentioned before, a fisherman prefers to be top of the list
for the weeks landings and get a lower price, than be in the middle
but actually earn more. Many respondents admitted that they had
to fish to suit markets trends more, but still preferred to fish
as much as they could when they could. This was part of the reason
why most Dutch respondents preferred to only have sea days to
limit catches and no quota. As the quota system stands, a combination
of a basic quotum in combination with a certain number of sea
days calculated on the basis of the quotum and horse power limits
all together constitute catch regulation in The Netherlands. In
Ireland the Irish herring fishery is regulated by weekly quota
for those who have a herring license. The quota can vary from
week to week depending on trends in catches. The quota system
for other species imposed via the EU did not appear to be as rigidly
enforced as it is in The Netherlands. A major concern of the Irish
fishermen was that the the EU quota system was not equally enforced
in all regions and on all nationalities. Many see it as a system
which could work if it was enforced equally everywhere.
A factor common to both Irish and Dutch fishing communities was
that fishing on Sunday was, particularly traditionally, not done.
This effectively meant that the fishing grounds got a rest for
between one and a half and two and a half days per week. In the
case of the IJsselmeer eel trawlers from Urk, more eels were caught
on Monday and Tuesday after the weekend's rest anyway. When the
Katwijk herring fishers were on the fishing grounds they did work
on Sundays and some trawlers who fish for eight to ten days from
Dingle also fish on Sunday, but traditionally this was avoided
if possible.
A cultural difference which a Goeree respondent mentioned between
Dutch and Belgian fishermen, was that the money which the Dutch
fishermen made from their fishing business they invested back
into their boat, while the Belgians hung it on their wives in
the form of jewellery. The respondent claimed this did have an
impact on investment and the development of fishing in these two
countries. The Dutch respondents, although quite rich in terms
of capital assets, tended to live in relatively moderately priced
houses, or even the old small house which they started married
life in.
A difference between Ireland and The Netherlands is that the Dutch
boats are much cleaner and look better kept than the Irish boats.
Crew members only entered the bridge of their boat on stockinged
feet, as did the author when interviewing Dutch skippers on the
bridge. It would be seen as a public disgrace if a Dutch fishing
boat showed rust streaks. Respondents remarked that if you saw
these on a boat, then the skipper was sure not to be the owner.
Some respondents saw this level of care for their boats as one
of the contributory reasons for the success the beam trawl fishery.
The Irish boats are generally much older compared to the Dutch
boats, but also don't look as well kept. In fact one gets the
impression that they are allowed to look relatively rundown so
as not to attract attention and envy. One respondent in Dingle
had, together with his crew, taken advantage of stormy weather
and painted his trawler, which was still not as sprightly as the
Dutch boats, but better than most of the Dingle boats. During
the interview some other fishermen passed by and made some remarks
about the painted boat, to which the respondent reacted by downgrading
the quality of the paint job and saying that it was only one quick
coat of paint and that they had nothing else to do anyway because
of the storm. The fact that it may good for the maintenance of
the boat or made it look better was not given as a reason. To
avoid being the odd-man-out was therefore the aim in both Goeree
and Dingle but in Dingle, to appear to prosperous and organised,
was not as acceptable as it was in Goeree. One reason for this
may be that during the landlord system, if one were to improve
one's cottage or land holding the rent would be raised, because
then the value of the property was deemed to be higher and from
the appearance of the holding it looked like the tenant could
afford the raise. The reaction to this was to avoid any sign of
prosperity, this is a tendency which is still present in the west
of Ireland culture.
The traditional payment system for crew members was the share
system. This suits the variation which can occur in fish catches.
As discussed above, the part regular payment/part share system
which operated on the shipowners boats in Katwijk declined and
all but disappeared with the advent of social security payments
and union pressure for better basic pay. This system worked in
the past because the herring fishery stayed good and the fishermen
did not earn much and had few options to earn more elsewhere.
However, it is of interest that the more traditional share system
was said to be partly responsible for the success of the Dutch
beam trawl fishery. In Ireland, from very earliest times the catch
was divided out amongst the crew and the share system is still
in operation. Fishermen say that it would be a retrograde step
if crew members were forced to enter into an employment arrangement
with the skippers. Irish crew and skippers saw the share system
as the fairest possible system for this type of work and the Dutch
respondents valued the team spirit which it brought about.
In traditional fishing communities, as in most non-city communities,
most people knew what the other person was doing, and in the case
of fishermen, what the other was catching and how and where. This
brought a considerable amount of social control with it. In The
Netherlands local fish producers groups have been set up to control
the management of fish quota. These are called Biesheuvel groups.
These organise such matters as the renting and sale of quota.
Because these groups are local and administered by the fishermen
themselves, they feel more in charge of their own affairs, and
maybe more importantly, they known what other fishermen are doing
and see that fairness is done. The social control within local
communities is considerable, working directly between fishermen,
but also indirectly via their wives and the rest of the shore
community. Another aspect of this community is that reporting
someone for a fishing infringement, particularly if they are from
their own community, is something which tends to be avoided. This
is the reason why fishermen in Ireland and The Netherlands wanted
equal enforcement of fishing regulations throughout, because if
the rules are not enforced, they will prefer to join in the infringements
rather than inform on the offender, particularly if the system
is seen as not treating all equally. So a combination of local
control of fishing rights exchange and adjustment or sea day allocation,
within an overall framework which is controlled from the outside
in a strictly equitable manner, would seem to be the most favoured
combination. As mentioned before, traditionally most boats in
the fishing communities were more or less the same, whether this
can be so again is questionable, but all are exploiting a common
resource, so similar exploitation capacity will probably lead
to greater perception of fairness and all round acceptance of
regulations.
Demand and market for fish were different in the past. On Inishmore
and Inishbofin fishing was carried out until one had enough for
one's own consumption and some to sell for cash. Once these needs
were satisfied, which usually happened as the fish stocks were
good, fishing was stopped. Compare this with present day markets
which at times suffer from gluts and cause fish catches to be
dumped at sea. In particular the dumping of fish with which there
is nothing wrong, except that they are the wrong size for the
market demand of that week, is very wasteful. This type of waste
used not to occur. Individual catches were smaller so if a catch
was dumped it was not as much as the large catches which are caught
now.
On the other hand, markets are better for fish than they used
to be and this has brought more dependability with it and, in
the case of the Dutch flatfish market, prosperity. The lack of
development in the western Irish fishing communities was blamed
by respondents partly on the lack of markets. The CDB salted fish
boom foundered the moment the market collapsed and was not replaced.
Without a market the fisherman is out of a job. The principle
involved in the old Inishmore way of fishing is that fishing effort
and catches was matched more or less perfectly with demand and
the fishermen knew that if they left fish stocks in the sea that
they would be there when they would need them later. In fact on
the west coast of Ireland, this became less and less the case
with large foreign fishing boats impinging on local social control
and catching the fish which the Irish fishing communities had
left in the sea. A temperate approach towards catching fish did
not pay off in more recent years, as it appears not have since
the advent of the quota system in Ireland and The Netherlands,
as discussed earlier.
In order to work towards sustainable development of marine resources,
the old traditional situation that fish which a fisherman left
in the sea would be there for him to catch at a later date, should
be aimed towards by means of equitable fishery regulation common
to all EU member states. And, in the opinion of respondents in
Ireland and The Netherlands, the best way to control the type
and quantity of fish that fishermen catch is to control the fish
markets rather than the fishermen.
6.1: Marine Resources.
Natural processes produced natural resources and in order that
their usage is sustainable, the production capacity of the natural
process needs to be maintained. Fig. 6.1 shows in diagrammatic
form the difference between a hunting type of marine resource
exploitation and culturing marine resources, as discussed in Chapter
1. The subject of this study is not the culturing type of use
of marine resources, but hunting of marine resources which is
still the most usual way in which coastal communities make use
of them. Fig. 6.1 therefore focusses on fishing and shows factors
which were identified in this study as important influences on
the relationship of fishing communities and their marine resources.
The cognitive model shown in Fig. 6.1 was constructed on the basis
of the knowledge and experience gathered in the qualitative interviews,
the quantitative questionnaires and background information. It
attempts to clarify the processes which, over time, have influenced
the usage of marine resources by humans so that, having learned
from the past, this model can make a meaningful contribution to
future fisheries policy making.
Here follows a summary of the traditional fishery knowledge and
experience recorded by this study, discussed in a wider context
and structured under the headings of the five main factors which
were reported to influence the ecological balance between fishermen
and their marine resources shown in Fig. 6.1.
6.2: Biological Production and Geographical area.
Biological production is the basis of the Irish and Dutch fishing
communities' marine resources. Shallow areas, such as the North
Sea and the Continental shelf, provide abundant marine bioproduction
in many areas of the world. Most areas of concentrated fishing
activity are based on similar marine habitats. Examples are the
Grand Banks off Canada (MacDonald 1984), coastal areas off Peru
(Tont & Delistraty 1977), West Africa (Acheampong 1996) and
Oceania (Ruddle 1988). Bioproduction should be in balance with
the amount of biomass which people take from the sea to have sustainable
fisheries, but unfortunately this is not the case in many instances
(Meltzer 1994). The Dutch beam trawl fishery landings have risen,
but one needs to keep in mind that fishing effort has also risen.
In the case of the North Sea the sole production seems to have
kept up with the fishing effort indicating that since the 1960's
sole production could also have risen. Nevertheless older respondents
did make the point that they used to catch similar amounts of
fish with smaller and much lesser powered boats both in the Irish
and Dutch study areas. The effect of fishing effort on fish landings
and the conclusions which can be safely drawn from them is a complex
matter and much discussion has taken place on "Catch Per
Unit Effort", i.e.: CPUE, and the relationship between it
and the production of fish in fisheries (Gordon 1954, Munro 1981,
Opsomer & Conrad 1994, Squires 1994). However, as reported
earlier, much confidence existed in the productivity of the sea
and that fish population who were "fished out" have
the capacity to "bounce back". Periods of abundance
and decline were seen as a normal pattern of fish populations
by respondents in the present study, and this has also been reported
in many other fisheries (Wilson et al. 1994), in particular relatively
short lived fecund species such as herring (Rogers & Tedebrand
1993) and sardines and anchovy (Krebs 1994). In fact many fishermen
see recovery of fish stocks happen automatically because if fish
stocks are low, fishermen stop fishing because it is not worth
their while, which then allows the fish populations to recover.
That fish stock can be reduced to a level that fishermen cannot
afford to fish them any longer, yet that fish species or stocks
are not completely fished out, has been reported from other areas
of the world, such as Malaysia (Anderson 1987) and Canada (Warriner
1988). Fluctuations in fisheries has been a characteristic of
both the fisheries in the Irish and Dutch study areas and are
also reported from other regions, such as Northern Canada (Berkes
1977).
However, the question does remain that if the stock density falls
to such a low level that reproduction ceases, then a species population
could die out. Whether this is likely to happen depends on the
ecology and biology of the individual species. Larger, longer
lived species of which, in relative terms, there are fewer individuals
can be more prone to collapse due to low population levels, as
they would reach the "minimum viable population" level
more quickly (Krebs 1994). However small short lived fish with
high reproductive capacity, such as herring, sardines and anchovy,
are less likely to reach the minimum viable population level as
they are difficult to completely eliminate and have the ability
to regenerate large population numbers quickly.
One aspect to the bioproductivity of the sea in recent years is
pollution and degradation of the marine environment. Generally
runoff from land or spillages of oil and chemicals at sea have
caused significant impact on the marine environment (Levin et
al. 1988), and major spillages from oil tankers, such as the Torrey
Canyon in the English Channel, the Tsesis in the Baltic and the
Exxon Valdez in Alaska are seen as great environmental disasters
(Nelson-Smith 1970, Johansson et al. 1980, Kineman et al. 1980,
Gill 1994). Respondents in Goeree were worried about pollution
and reported that they took barrels they found floating in the
North Sea on board and brought them ashore to stop chemicals contaminating
the sea. However, respondents also claimed that the area around
a wreck which had carried chemicals, and the region around a boat
which dumped waste chemicals, were some of the best places to
fish. On checking these assertions it was discovered that in the
region of oil spills, phytoplankton was found to increased some
days and weeks after the spill (Johansson et al. 1980). This was
also found after the Bravo oil rig blow-out in the North Sea (Länergren
1978). An increase in certain types of phytoplankton was also
noted after the Torrey Canyon spillage (Nelson-Smith 1970). In
all these case primary production had increased. The most likely
explanation for this could be that the zooplankton was killed
by the oil and the phytoplankton increased because they were not
being grazed.
However, a number of studies, quoted by Johansson et al. (1980),
found that in low concentrations hydrocarbons actually stimulated
growth. Some planktonic organisms also increased in numbers after
the Amoco Cadiz spill off Brittany and the Florida spill off Massachusetts
(Ford 1988). There are two possible effects which can cause these
phenomena. The first is the upset of the ecological balance caused
by killing part of an ecological community, gives the more pollution
resistant organisms a chance to grow. Similarly if predators are
killed by the oil, their prey population will increase in the
short and medium term.
There is also an effect called hormesis, which describes the
stimulation of growth of organisms which are exposed to low levels
of what in higher doses would be toxic, such as nuclear radiation.
Opinions on radiation hormesis are divided (Nussbaum & Kohnlein
1995), however, the increased production with low hydrocarbon
levels, as quoted by Johansson (1980), could in theory be a hormetic
effect. What needs to be remembered however, is that oils and
hydrocarbons, because of their chemical composition, are digested
by bacteria and enter the food chain, thus are a form of organic
enrichment taking part in the growth cycle (Howarth 1988, Gill
1994). These observations and results do shed an interesting light
on the experience of the fishermen in the North Sea, which could
otherwise have been dismissed as mistaken observations or coincidence.
In ecological terms, disturbing impact on a habitat can cause
shock waves to travel through an entire ecological system, and
can cause high population densities of certain types of opportunistic
and resistant species to occur, but the danger is that biodiversity
will be affected. What is gained in biomass could be lost in biodiversity
and this can be detrimental in the long term. However if the biomass
is gained in the form of a commercial fish species, then the fishermen
will not complain for as long as that species thrives. Agriculture
has been increasing biomass of fewer species since its inception
and this is completely accepted because it supports our human
population, but the sea is still seen as a "wild" environment
and this type of specialisation may not be acceptable for the
marine habitat.
To have a distinct geographical fishing area has been an important
aspect of the relationship of fishing communities and the sea.
Several instances of fishermen perceiving a certain patch of sea
as their area to fish, have been recorded in this study. Such
de facto systems of sea-tenure have also been reported from many
areas of the world, such as Pacific islands (Hviding & Baines
1994, Johannes 1994), Mexico (Miller 1989), Japan (Ruddle &
Achimichi 1989), U.S.A. (Acheson 1987), Canada (Pinkerton 1987),
Papua New Guinea (Carrier 1987), Brazil (Cordell 1989b) and Turkey
(Knudsen 1995). But as there are no boundaries at sea, specific
areas of sea which are primarily used by a certain group of fishermen
are usually close to shore, where land marks can be used to indicate
the boundaries. However, offshore sea areas have traditionally
been seen as belonging to no one. Fishermen have travelled long
distances and fished offshore areas for centuries. This "freedom
of the seas" has been the norm in Northwestern Europe for
many years. Dutch, Spanish and French fishermen have fished off
the coasts of Ireland since the 15th century (Went 1949), however,
even then rents and other moneys were at times paid to local chieftains
and landlords to be allowed to fish and use moorings and the foreshore
(O'Neill 1987). Therefore, although the sea and its fisheries
are generally seen as a common resource, in practice the concept
of ownership rights by persons or communities is widespread all
over the world. The confusion between the sea tenure traditions
and the perception of the fisheries as a common resource is in
no small measure due to the fact that no visible boundaries exist
at sea like they do on land. However, whenever possible, local
communities certainly did lay claim to sea fisheries close to
them. The "tragedy of the commons" as described by Hardin
(1968), has occurred in many fisheries (Copes 1981, Anderson 1987,
van Ginkel 1991, Konstapel & Noort 1995, Stark 1996). In the
case of the Irish and Dutch fishing communities of this study,
respondents did think that fishing effort was to intense for a
sustainable fishery, but lacked the social structure and regulations
to allow them to fish in a more sustainable manner, even though
the Dutch fishermen's organisations did make several suggestions
in this direction. Any ownership system needs social consent or
control, if this does not exist then ownership and its rights
cannot exist. Then the tragedy of the commons develops and the
same people who in a situation of ownership, or sea tenure, would
be quite aware of how to use a natural resource in a sustainable
manner, now act in the only way appropriate in free-for-all situation,
which is that you catch as much as you can because if you don't,
others will. This is a reaction in human ecology which, although
non-sustainable and ultimately destructive, makes sense as it
is adapted to circumstances in which a social systems does not
support a certain degree of ownership rights and their potential
for the future planning, management and predictability.
Judging from traditional use of specific sea areas, the predictability
which some form of fishing rights or sea tenure bring with them,
do appear to be an essential ingredient for sustainable marine
resource exploitation.
6.3: Cultural, Historical and Political Circumstances.
Cultures of fishing communities affect their relationship with
the resource they depend on (Acheson 1981, Frazer 1987). Many
cultural characteristics mentioned by Pollnac (1988) were also
noted in the Irish and Dutch study areas. Amongst these were,
that fishing is very often carried out by men only, as is the
case in Ireland and The Netherlands, but not in all regions of
the world (Pramanik 1994). Crews members are often related, which
was also the case in the present study. There is a tendency towards
egalitarianism amongst the crew and promotion of a conscientious
work practice which was elicited rather than imposed, which is
the case with the share system of payment but was much less the
case with the Katwijk shipowners' boats. Pollnac (1988) also mentioned
the "independent" nature of the fishermen. This was
also noted in Ireland and The Netherlands. A number of Dutch respondents
said that they felt a sense of freedom once they passed the harbour
mouth on Monday mornings and were on the open sea with few if
any boats in sight. One Urk respondent also commented that his
brother, who had sold his boat and quotum, felt like a "knight
without his horse", and others also said that a skipper's
boat, its length and size of the engine, gave social status and
self respect to the skipper and to lesser extent also to the crew.
Skippers in particular, are their own boss and the crew members,
as partners in a share system, also feel a high degree of independence
and self reliance. However, this independence can lead to uncompromising
attitudes and may exacerbate disputes about fishing rights, as
occurred in Ireland (Keary 1994) as well as The Netherlands (van
Ginkel 1991). Another factor which Pollnac (1988) mentions is
"ownership of productive equipment" as part of the cultural
background, which will be discussed in relation to enabling factors
(Fig. 6.1), however the cultural aspect of boat ownership was
also reported to be a very significant factor in the beam trawl
fishery in The Netherlands, as discussed earlier. The cultural
aspects of fishing and its archaeology in Ireland has been described
amongst others by Evans (1957, 1964) and MacCullagh (1992) and
the curragh, or naomhóg in the Dingle peninsula, is still
in use in all three Irish study locations. In terms of current
use of traditional forms of fishing boats and gear, the Dutch
study sites were less traditional than the Irish ones. However,
the Christian cultural background common to the fishermen in Ireland
as well as The Netherlands, meant that traditionally no one fished
on Sunday in either country.
A culture which has a strong belief in the resources of the sea
was also clear from the results of the analysis of the traditionality
and sustainability factors (Section 5.3), which indicated that
those with a longer family tradition in fishing thought that present
fishing methods were non-sustainable, but fishermen with most
fishing experience also had most confidence in future fish stocks.
Overall 20 of the 31 Dingle questionnaire respondents and 25 in
Goeree had a positive view of the future of fishing (question
116). A culture, which was nurtured by the sea's resources, also
developed a great confidence in the sea's productivity. The vast
majority of the respondents in both Dingle (24 out of 31) and
Goeree (27 out of 31) did not want to exchange fishing for any
other work (question 19). This shows a great level of work satisfaction,
also shown in other studies of fishermen (Acheson 1981, Thiessen
& Davis 1988), and a perception of fishing as a way of life.
There is considerable danger involved in fishing, as shown by
this study. Others have pointed to the isolated nature of the
work which exacerbates the element of danger, such as Pollnac
(1988), who quoted Thompson et al. (1983) and Poggie & Gersuny
(1974) as mentioning that fishermen had twenty times the rate
of fatal accidents compared to industry in Britain and twice the
rate for miners in the USA. Yet the satisfaction rating and acceptability
of the conditions of fishing are very high considering the level
of risk. Fishing would therefore appear to be more than a profession
practices by dedicated professionals, but a culture characteristic
of a whole community.
History and political management have had great impact on the Irish and Dutch fishing communities of this study. The British government's disparate management of Britain's and Ireland's fishing industries (de Courcy Ireland 1981) and landlord system (Taylor 1980) has shaped the Irish fishing industry, the effect of which are still with us today (Ruane 1992, O'Grada 1994). The underdeveloped state of Irish fisheries in the early and middle 20th century set the basis on which it joined the rest of the EU's fishing industries. In The Netherlands the liberalisation of the fishing laws in 1857 also had great impact on the development of fishing, in Katwijk in particular. Tariffs and taxes, as well as outright prohibitions on the landing of certain fish products, limited possibilities which might otherwise have been open to fishermen. Of course the famine affected Irish society in general, particularly in the west of Ireland, including the fishing industry, as discussed previously (Woodham-Smith 1968, Póirtéir 1995). Politics, and the history it shapes, has been instrumental in directing the course of human ecology in general and the ecology of fishing communities in particular.
6.4: Unit of Social Cohesion on Local, National and International Level.
Partitioning of a resource which does not have boundaries can
be achieved by coming to agreements within a unit of social cohesion.
The Irish fishing communities of this study divided the shore
and inshore areas and so partitioned the sea weed and lobster
resources. These arrangements arose between groups of local communities,
so units of social cohesion existed on the two islands and the
peninsula. Agreements for finfish involved geographically greater
social unit as these resources range over a greater area. In the
case of Galway Bay this included Inishbofin to the north if it,
as it was also visited by the Claddagh fishermen from Galway city.
Arrangements arose between the fishing communities of Inishmore,
Inishbofin and the Claddagh, whether by coercion or consent, but
the social unit included this whole area. Then as fishermen from
other countries entered Irish waters, the social unit enlarged
even more. Spanish, Dutch and French fishermen came to agreements
with Irish chieftains about landing and mooring rights (Went 1949),
social cooperation existed on an international level as early
as the 15th century and most likely before that. This international
social unit affected the way Irish fishermen could make use of
their resource.
In the case of the Dutch communities, national fishery regulations
had virtual complete control over the manner in which fishermen
in Katwijk used their marine resources. The unit of social control
was very much on a national level. It was also international because
Dutch fishermen travelled to the English coast in search of herring
and had to cooperate with English regulations and agreements.
The Dutch social unit also included Ireland for certain fisheries
as they also fished there.
Currently a most important unit of social cohesion for both the
Irish and Dutch study areas, for most finfish fisheries, is an
international one, i.e.: the European Union. As discussed above,
the apportioning of European waters and their fish stocks has
got to be regulated from Brussels as most European fishing fleets
have historically fished in each other's waters and the rationale
of the EU is to have freedom of movement, opportunity and competition.
Fishery agreements within local social units are also characteristic
of many other fisheries, such as those controlled by villages
on Pacific islands (Ruddle 1988 1994), in Canada (Davis 1984),
in Australia (Davis 1989) and in many other locations around the
globe (Ostrom 1990, Dyer & Goodwin 1994). However, the unit
of social cohesion has increased to virtual global size with fishing
fleets of big, high-technology, boats travelling the oceans (Arnasson
1993, Barcena 1994, Burke et al. 1994, Meltzer 1994). Markets
for fish and fish products are also international, and often assessed
on a world wide basis (The World Bank 1992, Konstabel & Noord
1995). Therefore, currently the unit of social cohesion is on
local fishing communities level because the fishermen share their
resource with each other, as well as on national and international
level because fishermen not only meet boats from other nations
on the fishing grounds, but have to sell their catch at prices
which are influenced by the world market. Agreements and cooperation
have to be reached on all these levels in order to achieve sustainable
marine resource utilisation, just as they were in the local communities.
Traditional local agreement and control played an important role
and a lesson should be learned from this type of social structure.
The tragedy of the commons was not that common, until fishing
grounds were seen and used as a common resource. Social cohesion
is an essential part of fishery systems because boundaries are
very vague at sea and it was the social unit which substituted
agreements and cooperation for boundaries. When the social unit
became bigger and agreements became more difficult to make, the
marine resources became a common resource. This explains why the
respondents in this study, while admitting that they catch as
much fish as they can get away with, are also fully in favour
of regulations.
The factor which was of prime importance to the respondents in
any system of regulations was that the rules would be enforced
equally everywhere. This used to be the situation in the traditional
social unit, because all knew what the other was doing. Equal
enforcement of regulations, leading to equal compliance of regulations,
does come about when they are part of a a social unit which acts
cohesively, and this, in the opinion of many respondents of this
study, is not the case with the EU's Common Fisheries Policy.
The reason why larger social units lack cohesion is because communication
is more difficult. Therefore, it is of particular importance to
concentrate on establishing and maintaining reciprocal communication
channels in order to achieve proper cohesion in a large social
unit.
An important connection which these channels should make is between
fishermen and fisheries research. Many fishermen in Goeree (12
of 31 in the questionnaire) thought that the Dutch fisheries research
institute did not know much about the fish stocks and a further
seven suggested they should consult with fishermen before making
stock assessments. In Dingle the view towards fisheries research
was more positive with only three suggesting that they did not
know much about the fish stocks, but 16 thought that they should
do more research as information on fish stocks was very scarce.
These opinions, and those reported from the qualitative questionnaires,
would suggest that many fishermen see fisheries research as inadequate
and that it takes far reaching decisions which influence fisheries
policy makers on national and EU level without any cognizance
being taken of fishermen's experiences and opinions. The consultation
process between fisheries research and fisheries policy makers
on the one hand, and fishermen on the other was therefore reported
as inadequate. This has also been reported for the Icelandic fisheries
(Pálsson 1996 1997).
6.5: Demand for Marine Resources: Nutrition, Market Demand and Recreation.
A demand for fish is an essential part of a balanced relationship
between a fishing community and its fish stocks. People cannot
afford to catch fish which are not wanted. In many cases fish,
possibly in addition to being marketed, are also needed directly
as food (Berkes 1977, Adimihardja 1992, Acheampong 1996). Fish
and their products represent 20% of the world's human consumption
of animal proteins (Konstapel & Noort 1995) and is the only
animal protein available to the general populace in many developing
regions of the world (McGoodwin 1990). Traditionally in the study
sites of the present study, fish did represent an important food
source for the fisherman's family and Irish parttime fishermen
stopped fishing when enough food was caught. This also happened
in other traditional systems such as the Cree Indians in Northern
Canada (Berkes 1977).
However human ecology has become more and more specialised and
the demand for fish by people who do not fish themselves has meant
that the majority of present day fishermen fish to supply others.
Fish markets control the level of reward fishermen receive and
the reward controls many of the decisions of the fishermen. Traditionally
the immediate need for the family could be controlled by the fisherman,
but markets were invariably controlled by others. But a family
needs more than just fish. So many fishermen who supplied their
own family also had to be farmers. This was the case in the Irish
study areas as it is in fishing communities in other regions of
the world such as Southeast Asia (Kuperan & Abdullagh 1994),
Africa (Odijk & 0osterhoff 1992), Oceania (Ruddle 1988), Turkey
(Knudsen 1995) and Canada (Andersen 1978). In many regions of
the world, fishing and farming seasons and activities are often
closely intertwined and can even depend on each other for raw
materials (Connolly 1995). In western Ireland when the market
for salted fish collapsed in the early 1920's, many fishermen
could fall back on farming because many had retained this possibility
knowing the vagaries of fishing and fish markets. Being small
scale fishermen and therefore having a relatively low investment
in fishing, they could wait until a new market arose and they
were then ready to start fishing again, still on a parttime basis.
Respondents which were fulltime fishermen in Ireland and The Netherlands
tended to have less confidence in market and their prices than
in the fish stocks. The municipal fish auction in Goeree at Stellendam
commissioned a report on the limitations and prospects of their
fish market, knowing it was the basis of their fishing fleet (Zwiers
Partners 1995).
The advise of a number of Irish and Dutch respondents was that
markets could be used to enforce fishing regulations. If there
is no market for undersized fish, then the fishermen avoid catching
them. They claimed that fishermen will catch small fish if there
is a market for them, even though they know it is an unsustainable
practice. They also said that good market information can avoid
waste by directing the fisherman to catch only the type, size
and quality of fish for which there is a market at that precise
time. The Producers' Organisations (POs) do play a role in this
(Nielsen 1994).
Recreation is a use of marine resources which is not on the same
scale as commercial fishing, but is generally a growth industry
and in some locations represents an important source of income.
In Dingle recreation is more important that in the other study
site of this study. This is due to the presence of a bottlenosed
dolphin in the harbour mouth. Many older lobster fishing boats
have converted to taking tourist on trips to see the dolphin.
A cooperative has been formed, a common price set and a queuing
system for the boats implemented. Generally angling is the most
common form of recreation, with SCUBA diving also being important.
Some conflict can arise between angling and commercial fishing,
as in The Netherlands where the commercial fishermen claim that
the anglers catch all the brood stock fish from in and around
the wrecks. These wrecks are seen as brood chambers by the trawlermen.
The trawling eel fishermen on the IJsselmeer blamed the sport
anglers for getting eel trawling banned on the lake. Conflict
between recreational users and commercial fishing interests is
also known in other parts of the world (Bergin & Haward 1994,
Green 1994, Margavio et al. 1994). In Ireland conflict has also
arisen between anglers and the mariculture industry (Phyne 1996).
However, some respondents were positive about tourist angling
as they saw it as a development from longlining, which was their
preferred form of fishing. Others saw angling as one part of an
integrated maritourism industry, with the angling skippers also
providing tourist accommodation, as this is quite lucrative. One
problem which the deep sea angling operators on the Dingle peninsula
mentioned was sea sickness of the anglers. This is a real problem,
particularly because of the big Atlantic swells in this area,
as the author can fully attest. Although few in number, angling
operators were present in all six study areas of the study.
6.6: Enabling Factors: Harbours, Boats, Fishing Gear.
As described for the three Irish communities and for Katwijk,
harbours, although not essential, can have a strong influence
on the relationship of fishermen with the sea. Traditionally,
if no harbours was available, boats had to launched from the shore
and this was very common in Ireland, with Dingle being relatively
exceptional, with its fully sheltered harbour and large sailing
trawlers. As the shore is of a different type in The Netherlands,
much bigger boats (Loomeijer 1995, Martens & Westra 1995)
were used than was the case from the Irish beaches. Harbours,
or the lack of them, control boat size and this in turn limits
the type of fishing a person can do, as discussed already in relation
to the Irish curragh or naomhóg. During the 19th century
a number of reports were compiled on the status of harbour and
pier facilities in Ireland, as it was seen as a crucial prerequisite
for the development of local fisheries (Butler 1892 a+b+c, Ruttledge-Fair
1893) and was also a part of the efforts of the Congested Districts
Board (Parsons 1894, Congested Districts Board 1898+1901, Micks
1925). Once a harbour is sheltered from storms, the most important
factor is the depth and whether it has enough water at low tide
to allow boats to float. This is a problem in the new Delta harbour
in Stellendam on Goeree. Constructing harbours and piers and dredging
channels is expensive and previously busy harbours have experienced
economically declined because of channels silting up. The fishermen
of the Goeree fleet wish the state authorities to dredge the channel.
In addition to harbours only permitting a certain type of fishing
due to a limit on boat size, it can also limit fishing effort
by only allowing a certain number of moorings in it, such as the
example of Matinicus harbour in Maine, USA, given by Bowles &
Bowles (1989). However, with the Irish curraghs, many boats can
use one small slipway without any harbour, as they can be taken
out every night and stores on land. But in the case of the curragh,
boat size limits fishing capacity.
One aspect of the construction of harbours and piers is that they
have to be constructed to give as much shelter and need least
amount of dredging as possible and cater for the full tidal range.
Engineers have been criticised in a number of cases by respondents
for not taking note of the fishermen's opinions and build the
pier in the wrong place, or made it the wrong shape. The advice
of some Department of the Marine personnel to engineers building
causeways and piers was to consult local knowledge on the highest
possible tides and the worst possible wave action. Some piers
may look strong and good, but from experience locals may know
that in certain winds and tides it will be dangerous for boats
or the whole pier will be knocked down by the sea. There are several
examples of this in the Irish study areas.
The ownership of boats and fishing gear is also a fundamental
component of the nature of the relationship between fishermen
and their marine resources. As is discussed already, the difference
between non-fishing shipowners and their regular payment system
and skipper-owners and the share system in the Dutch study areas
has been identified by respondents as the biggest single factor
for the difference in the beam trawl fleets of Katwijk on the
one hand, and Urk and Goeree on the other hand. Although ownership
of boats is more likely to be in the hands of non-fishing entrepreneurs
in the case of fisheries dependent on large expensive boats, such
as was the case of the, at that time, comparatively large bomschuiten
in Katwijk, on the whole it appears that owner-operators are more
efficient in many fisheries the world over (Pollnac 1988).
Owner-skippers often operate the share system in which the crew
is perceived as a type of partner, rather than an employee, and
feels he has a vested interest in the boat. The egalitarianism
which results from the share system is recognised in many of the
world's fisheries (Acheson 1981, McGoodwin 1990). Of the 31 Goeree
respondents who answered the questionnaire, 24 said they thought
or hoped that the share system of payment would still be in operation
in 50 years time. In Dingle this was less, with 17 out of 31 being
of the opinion that some form of share system would still be in
operation in 50 years time. However, in Dingle 27 out of 31 were
part or sole owner of a fishing boat, but some of these were lobster
fishermen, seven of which usually fished on their own and therefore
had no strong views on the crew payment system, but the fisherman
still owned his own boat.
Different systems of boat ownership pertain to fisheries, in the
case of the Mississippi shrimp fishery fishermen borrow money,
often with the help of their suppliers, to buy their own boat
(Durrenberger 1994). A similar system was also in operation in
Urk, where suppliers also loaned money to fishermen. In Sweden
boats are owned by between three and six fishermen and the share
of the proceeds coming to the boat are divided on this basis (Byron
1994). In Finland people, including landowners, owned shares in
ships and boats, which their sons or other relations skippered
(Moring 1993). In Canada owner-operated boats are also widespread
(Thiessen & Davis 1988). By having shares in a boat the risks
are divided amongst a few people and this is a feature of many
fisheries around the world (Acheson 1981). However, as mentioned
above, fisheries which involve large expensive boats do tend to
have non-fishing shipowners who are entrepreneurs/businessmen
because of the large capital outlay involved (Pollnac 1988). This
lack of capital certainly was a decisive factor in the non-involvement
of Irish fishermen in the west of Ireland offshore fishery since
the 1800's and this continues to play a role to the present day.
When a choice of investment strategies was open to one fisherman,
several secondhand boats were acquired, rather than one big new
boat. The respondent's stated reasons for this were a combination
of spreading his risk between several boats and having sons who
all wanted to be skipper and were disinclined to accept each other's
authority when working together on one boat. This competitive
aspect of sibling fishermen was also reported in the fishing community
of Urk, where a father treated his sons, who also had a boat each,
very differently depending on how much they had caught that week.
Another respondent, however, was skipper and had three brothers
as crew members. It is likely that this second family simply did
not have the resources to buy more boats, but their family relationships
may also have been different. Family relatives amongst crews is
a common feature in fishing the world over (Acheson 1981, Pollnac
1988, McGoodwin 1990, Dyrvik 1993). As discussed above, buying
boats was also influenced by government policy on taxation and
fisheries. Fishermen in Ireland as well as The Netherlands claimed
that their choice of strategy was limited by national and international
regulations.
The ownership and availability of fishing gear has many parallels
with boat ownership, but because items of fishing gear are usually
less expensive, the crew who may not own a share in the boat,
may own some of the fishing gear. This was part of the traditional
system in the Irish study areas and was reported as giving a crew
member the right to a portion of the catch. Fishing gear is generally
more susceptible to wear and tear than a boat, and the risk of
loss is greater. With multiple ownership of gear this risk is
spread out more, as well as the work involved in maintenance of
the gear (O'Dowd 1994). This traditional principle also operates
to a certain extent in the present day Dutch fishing fleets through
the share system. The crew are seen as a team in whose interest
it is to maintain the boat in good repair so it can optimise its
fishing capacity. Some of the electronic equipment on Dutch boats
is hired, and the rental costs, as the fuel costs, are often subtracted
from the gross earnings before the crew get their share, so all
crew members rent this equipment rather than the owner of the
boat. This is seen as part of the partnership team effort. In
other fisheries crew members owning fishing gear, such as nets,
also occurs. In the nileperch fishery of Lake Victoria certain
crew members are "net-owners" but not part or sole boat
owners, who usually also fish as crew member along with crew who
may not own a net or share of the boat (Odijk & Oosterhoff
1992). In some fisheries in Turkey the boat and nets are shared
by the crew (Berkes 1986), as boat and fishing gear is amongst
Melanesians in the Torres Straits north of Australia (Nietschmann
1989).
As with boats, ownership of fishing gear is essential for the
exploitation of marine resources. Because of the habitat which
fishermen have to deal with, their boats and gear are crucial
to their efforts. One can turn the soil and propagate plants with
a pointed stick by expending a lot of energy, but in order to
make fishing worthwhile and safe, robust gear and boats are needed,
particularly on shores where the sea can unleash considerable
force such as in the west of Ireland and The Netherlands.
In the following list of recommendations an attempt was made to rank them in a general order of importance. However, this order should not be taken as definitive, as it is very difficult to exactly determine the relative importance of factors affecting the relationship of fishing communities with their marine resources, as the relative role of these factors not only differs between various geographical locations, but also changes over time in any one location.
Personal safety.
- Aim to reduce average age of Irish fishing vessels.
- Reduce the isolation aspect of the work by increasing number
of rescue helicopters and their range.
- Consult fishermen on safety equipment.
Markets.
- Organisation of marketing: optimisation of relationship between
supply and demand R&D on fish product diversification full
information supplied to fishermen as they fish.
- Check on market cartels and monopolies.
- Public auction in Dingle.
Fish stocks management.
- Realisation that fish stocks around Ireland and in the North
Sea have significantly declined since 1950's.
- Realisation of seas' strong recuperative powers.
- Realisation that fishing has a limit which is lower than the
food productive capacity of culturing organisms.
- Legislation formulation for fish nursery sanctuaries, e.g. in
bays, only in cooperation and consultation with fishermen.
- Limitation on fishing for flatfish during spawning period, timing
of which may have to be adjusted from year to year.
- Aim towards making longlining commercially viable with increased
populations of shoaling fish.
- Recognise sustainability aspects of traditional fishing practices.
- Lobster pots with escape slot for undersized lobsters and slow
release toggle on escape hatch for large lobsters.
- Make "V" Notching Programme obligatory in all EU lobster
fisheries and make resources available for its equitable enforcement.
- Limit number of lobster pots per fisherman at commercially viable
level.
- Ban tanglenets for crayfish.
- Include edible crabs in lobster conservation programme.
- Effective population assessment of seals in relevant areas in
order to enable fully informed management decisions to be taken.
- All conservation measures in full consultation with fishermen.
Social cohesion.
- Full communications and cooperation within relevant social unit
will reinstitute the principle of sea tenure and the predictability
arising from it.
- Reciprocal communications between social unit, fisheries research
and policy makers.
Fisheries regulation.
- Equal enforcement of regulations in all EU regions.
- Make consistency in management policy a primary aim, to permit
reliable economic planning.
- Measures designed to reward moderation in fishing effort.
- Aim towards balanced fishing capacities between EU Member States'
fishing fleets.
- For Dutch beam trawl fishery, aim towards a set number of sea
days for catch regulation, in combination with a strict engine
horse power limit and cognizant of investment made in quota thus
far.
- More equitable mesh size measuring method in Dutch beam trawl
fishery.
- Measures to facilitate newcomers to start fishing enterprises,
in combination with standard fishery skipper's and mate's qualifications.
- Upgrading of national authorities' priority for fishing industries.
Investment control.
- Adapt financial management to conditions pertaining in fisheries,
cognizant of manner of traditional financing by suppliers and
family.
Harbours and facilities.
- Development and maintenance of harbour facilities: quays and
piers, sufficient all-tide harbour and shipping channel depths,
fish handling equipment, clean ice supplies.
- Ensure equity in facilities amongst fishing centres.
Fishing strategy.
- Retain potential for diversification as part of rationalisation
of fisheries.
Fishing gear development.
- Development of fishing gear aimed at sustainable practices in
full consultation with fishermen.
- Measures to maximise the frequent lifting and minimise wasteful
effects of loss of gillnets, possibly by means of slow biodegrading
nylons.
Energy conservation.
- Aim towards limit of 1500 horse power of engine for all medium
distance vessels in EU.
- Effective testing of horse power as developed by propeller thrust.
Crew payment system.
- Continue share payment system where wanted.
- Ensure proper insurance arrangements are taken by crew.
- Recognition of the need for crew members to retire from active
fishing at a much younger age than 65, and measures taken to enable
them to bridge this financial gap by saving schemes, work in other
sections of the fishing industry or other measures.
Sea weed harvesting.
- Institute tenure system of sea weed harvesting plots along coast
line.
- R&D on product development cognizant of sea weed's many
traditional uses.
- Monopolies in the sea weed market must be avoided.
Mariculture.
- If the sea is to produce food resources in a way similar to
agriculture, the practical problems which currently beset mariculture
need to be focussed on and solved.
Maritourism.
- Integrate water sports with accommodation needs.
- Integrate maritourism needs with those of other marine resource
users.
- With particular respect to boat activities, the problem of seasickness
needs to be managed in a more structured manner, as it represents
a significant inhibiting effect on the development of this industry
on exposed coasts.
Acheampong, A. 1996. A vital food source in West Africa, ACP-EU
Courier. (156), p. 5-7.
Acheson, J. M. 1981. Anthropology of fishing. Annual Review
of Anthropology, 10 , p. 275-316.
Acheson, J. M. 1987. The lobster fiefs revisited: Economic and
ecological effects of territoriality in Maine lobster fishing.
In: J. M. Acheson, & B.J. McCay (ed), The question of the
commons: The culture and ecology of communal resources. Tucson,
The University of Arizona Press, p. 37-65.
Adimihardja, K. 1992. Rice and fish: The dual function of rice
fields among the Kasepuhan people in West Java, Indonesia. International
Symposium on Indigenous knowledge and Sustainable Development.
September 20-26, 1992, International Institute of Rural reconstruction
(IIRR), Silang, Cavite, Philipinnes, 13 p.
Adolf, S. 1995. Vis is emotie. NRC Handelsblad, 22 April
1995, p. 4
Alcorn, J. B. 1995. Ethnobotanical knowledge systems - A resource
for meeting rural development goals. In: D.M. Warren, L.J. Slikkerveer
& D. Brokensha (ed), The Cultural Dimension of Development.
Indigenous Knowledge Systems. London, Intermediate Technology
Publications Ltd., p. 1-12.
Andersen, R. 1978. The need for human sciences research in Atlantic
coast fisheries. J. Fish. Res. Board Can., 35 ,
p. 1031-1049.
Anderson, E.N. Jr. 1987. A Malaysian tragedy of the commons. In:
J.M. Acheson & B.J. McCay (ed), The question of the commons:
The culture and ecology of communal resources. Tucson, The
University of Arizona Press, p. 327-343.
Andrews, W. 1861. On the cod and ling fisheries of Ireland. Royal
Dublin Society.
ANWB 1985. ANWB Atlas voor Nederland. Ede, Zomer &
Keuning Boelen B.V., 208 p.
Arnason, R. 1993. Ocean fisheries management: recent international
developments. Marine Policy, 17 (5), p. 334-339.
Barcena, A. 1994. Marine agenda of UNCED. Role of the Earth Council.
Marine policy, 18 (2), p. 99-103.
Bergin, A. & Haward, M. 1994. The last jewel of a disintegrating
crown: The case of the Japan's distant water tuna fisheries. Ocean
Development and International Law, 25 (2), p. 187-215.
Berkes, F. 1977. Fishery resource use in a subarctic Indian community.
Human Ecology, 5 (4), p. 289-307.
Berkes, F. 1986. Local level management and the commons problem:
A comparative study of Turkish coastal fisheries. Marine Policy,
10 , p. 215-229.
Berkes, F. (ed) 1989. Common property resources: Ecology and
community-based sustainable resources. London, Belhaven Press,
302 p.
Boddeke, R. & Hagel, P. 199x. Eutrophication, fisheries, and
productivity of the North Sea continental zone. Condition of
the World's Aquatic Habitats. Proceedings of the World Fisheries
Congress, Theme 1. N.B. Armantrout (ed), Oxford & IBH
Publishing Co. PVT. LTD., p. 290-315.
Bowles, F. P. & Bowles, M. C. 1989. Holding the line: Property
rights in the lobster and herring fisheries of Matinicus Island,
Maine. In: J. Cordell, (ed), A Sea of Small Boats. Cambridge,
Massachusetts, Cultural Survival, Inc., p. 228-257.
Bronowski, J. 1981. The Ascent of Man. London, Futura,
287 p.
Burke, T.W., Freeburg, M. & Miles, E.L. 1994. United Nations
resolutions on driftnet fishing: An unsustainable precedent for
high seas and coastal fisheries management. Ocean Development
and International Law, 25 (2), p. 127-186.
Butler, J.E. 1892a. Confidential Inspector's Report on District
of Dingle. Congested Districts Board for Ireland, No.72.
Butler, J.E. 1892b. Confidential Inspector's Report of District
of Brandon. Congested Districts Board for Ireland, No.71.
Butler, J.E. 1892c. Confidential Inspectors Report for District
of Castlegregory. Congested Districts Board for Ireland, No.70.
Byron, R. 1994. The maritime household in Northern Europe. Comparative
Studies in Society and History, 36 (2), p. 271-292.
Carrier, J.G. 1987. Marine tenure and conservation in Papua New
Guinea: Problems in interpretation. In: J.M. Acheson, & B.J.
McCay (ed), The question of the commons: The culture and ecology
of communal resources. Tucson, The University of Arizona Press,
p. 142-167.
Census Commissioners, Ireland 1821. Report of the Census Commissioners,
Ireland, 1821. British Government.
Census Commissioners, Ireland 1841. Report of the Census Commissioners,
Ireland, 1841. British Government.
Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek 1796-1990. Bevolking.
Den Haag,, The Netherlands.
Central Statistics Office 1993. Census 91, No. 25 County Kerry.
Census 91, Local Population Report-1st Series, Dublin, Stationary
Office, 67 p.
Commissioners of Inquiry 1837. First Report of Commissioners
of Inquiry into the state of the Irish Fisheries. House of
Commons, London, No.1st.
Concannon, K. (ed) 1993. Inishbofin: Through time and tide,
Inishbofin, Ireland. Inishbofin Development Association,
129 p.
Congested Districts Board for Ireland, 1898. Report of Inspection
Committees, 1892-1898. Congested Districts Board for Ireland.
Congested Districts Board for Ireland,, 1901. Report for 1894-1901.
Congested Districts Board for Ireland.
Connolly, B. 1986. Ecology of aquatic insects, with special
reference to the Ephemeroptera of the Corrib catchment area. Ph.D.
Thesis , National University of Ireland, University College, Galway,
Ireland, 466 p.
Connolly, B. 1995 (in press). The role of fisheries in Indigenous
Agricultural Knowledge Systems: Indonesian agro-fishery systems
and analogous case studies from Europe, Africa and other Asian
regions. Ed.: M. Starkenburgh, J. Smak-Gregoor & L.J. Slikkerveer,
Proceedings of INDAKS Seminar and Workshop, 6th March 1995.
Leiden, The Netherlands, LEAD Programme, Dept. Cultural Anthropology,
Rijks Universiteit Leiden.
Copes, P. 1981. Rational Resource Management and Institutional
Constraints: the Case of the Fishery. In: J.A. Butlin (ed), Economics
and Resource Policy, London, Longman.
Cordell, J. (ed) 1989a.. A sea of small boats: Customary Law
and Territoriality in the World of Inshore Fishing. Cultural
Survival Report 62, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Cultural Survival,
Inc., 418 p.
Cordell, J. 1989b. Social marginality and sea tenure in Bahia.
In: J. Cordell, (ed), A Sea of Small Boats. No.Report No.
26, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Cultural Survival , Inc., p. 125-151.
Courcy Ireland, de J. 1981. Ireland's sea fisheries: a history.
Dublin, The Glendale Press.
Courcy Ireland, de J. 1994. The Maritime History of the Aran Islands.
In: J.W. O'Connell, & J. Waddell (ed), The Book of Aran.
Kinvara, Co. Galway, Ireland, Tír Eolas, 336 p.
Davis, A. 1984. Property rights and access management in the small
boat fishery: A case study from Southwest Nova Scotia. In: A.
Hanson & C. Lamson (ed), Atlantic Fisheries and Coastal
Communities: Fisheries decision-making case studies. Halifax,
Dalhousie Ocean Studies Program, p. 133-164.
Davis, S. 1989. Aboriginal tenure of the sea in Arnhem Land, Northern
Australia. In: J. Cordell, (ed), A Sea of Small Boats.
Cambridge, Massachusetts, Cultural Survival, Inc., p. 37-59.
DeWalt, B.R. 1994. Using Indigenous knowledge to improve agriculture
and natural resource management. Human Organization, 53
(2), p. 123-131.
Diamond, J. 1992. The Rise and Fall of the Third Chimpanzee.
London, Vintage, 360 p.
Dickson, D. 1995. The Other Great Irish Famine. In: C. Póirtíer,
(ed), The Great Irish Famine, The Thomas Davis Lecture Series.
Cork, Mercier Press, p. 50-59.
Durrenberger, E.P. & Palsson, G. 1987. Ownership at sea: fishing
territories and access to sea resources. American Ethnologist,
14 , p. 508-522.
Durrenberger, E. P. & Pálsson, G. 1987. The grass roots
and the state: Resource management in Icelandic fishing. In: J.M.
Acheson & B.J. McCay (ed), The Question of the Commons
- The culture and ecology of communal resources. Tucson, Arizona,
The University of Arizona Press, p. 370-392.
Durrenberger, E.P. 1994. Shrimpers, processors, and common property
in Mississippi. Human Organisation, 53 (1), p. 74-82.
Dyer, C.L. & Goodwin, J.R. (ed) 1994. Folk Management in
the World's Fisheries. Colorado, University Press: Colorado.
Dyrvik, S. 1993. Farmers at sea: A study of fishermen in North
Norway, 1801-1920. Journal of Family History, 18
(4), p. 341-356.
Ecologist, The 1995. The commons: Where the community authority.
In: J. Kirby, P. O'Keefe & L. Timberlake (ed), The earthscan
reader in sustainable development. London, Earthscan Publications
Ltd., p. 227-237.
Eurostat 1995. Yearly Statistics. Statistical Office of
the European Communities.
Eurostat 1996. Fisheries, Yearly Statistics. Statistical
Office of the European Communities.
Euroteam 1994. The New Common Fisheries Policy. Office
of Official Publications of the European Communities.
Evans, E.E. 1957. Irish Folk Ways. London, Routledge &
Kegan Paul Ltd.
Evans, E.E. 1964. Ireland and Atlantic Europe. Geographische
Zeitschrift, 52 , p. 224-241.
Feehan, J. 1994. The geology of the Aran Islands. In: J.W. O'Connell
& J. Waddell (ed), The Book of Aran. Kinvara, Co. Galway,
Ireland, Tír Eolas, 336 p.
Felt, L.F. 1994. Two tales of a fish: The Social construction
of indigenous knowledge among Atlantic Canadian salmon fishers.
In: C.L. Dyer, & J.R. Goodwin (ed), Folk Management of
the World's Fisheries. Colorado, University Press of Colorado,
p. 251-285.
Fitzpatrick, D. 1995. Flight from Famine. In: C. Póirtéir
(ed), The Great Irish Famine, The Thomas Davis Lecture Series.
Cork, Mercier Press, p. 174-184.
Flower, R. 1983. The western island or the Great Blasket.
Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Ford, J. 1988. The effects of chemical stress on aquatic species
composition and community structure. In: S.A. Levin, M.A. Harwell,
J.R. Kelly & K.D. Kimball (ed), Ecotoxicology: Problems
and Approaches. Springer advanced text in life sciences, New
York, Springer-Verlag, p. 99-144.
Frazer, J.G. 1987. The Golden Bough. London, Papermac.
Gans, de W. 1991. Kwartairgeologie van West-Nederland. Grondboor
en Hamer, November 1991, p. 103-114.
Gans, de W. 1996. Geology Katwijk. Geologische Dienst,
Haarlem.
Geary, L.M. 1995. Famine, Fever and the Bloody Flux. In: C. Póirtéir
(ed), The Great Irish Famine, The Thomas Davis Lecture Series.
Cork, Mercier Press, p. 74-85.
Gemeente Goedereede 1995. Gemeentegids Goedereede 1995.
Den Helder, Holland Advertising B.V., 72 p.
Gemeente Urk, / Het Urkerland B.V. 1995. Gemeentegids Urk 1995.
Urk, The Netherlands, Het Urkerland B.V., 96 p.
Gill, D.A. 1994. Environmental disaster and fishery co-management
in a natural resource community: Impacts of the Exxon Valdez oil
spill. In: C.L. Dyer & J.R. Goodwin (ed), Folk Management
in the World's Fisheries. Colorado, University Press of Colorado,
p. 207-235.
Ginkel, van R. 1991. The sea of bitterness: Political process
and ideology in a Dutch maratime community. Man, the Journal
of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 26 (4), p.
691-707.
Goldschmidt, T. 1994. Darwins hofvijver. Een drama in het Victoriameer.
Amsterdam, Prometheus, 286 p.
Gordon, H.S. 1954. The economic theory of a common-property resource:
The fishery, Journal of Political Economy, 62 (2),
p. 124-142.
Green, T.G. 1994. Allocation between commercial and recreational
sectors in stressed marine fisheries. Society and Natural Resources,
7 , p. 39-56.
Gribbin, M. & Gribbin, J. 1993. Being Human. London,
Phoenix, 335 p.
Hageman, B.P. 1964. Blad Goeree en Overflakkee, Toelichting
bij de Geologische Kaart van Nederland 1:50.000. Haarlem,
Geologische Stichting, Afd. Geologische Dienst, 83 p.
Hardin, G. 1968. Tragedy of the Commons. Science, 163
, p. 1243-1248.
Harris, M. 1993. Culture, People, Nature - An Introduction
to General Anthropology. New York, HarperCollins College Publishers,
551 p.
Hayward, P.J. & Ryland, J.S. 1995. Handbook of the marine
fauna of northwest Europe. Oxford, Oxford Univ. Press.
Hobart, M. 1993. Introduction: the growth of ignorance? In: M.
Hobart (ed), An anthropological critique of development: the
growth of ignorance. London, Routledge, p. 1-27.
Hogan, D. & Gibbons, M. 1992. Inis Bó Finne:
A guide to the natural history and archaeology. Connemara
and Islands Heritage Tourism, Clifden, Ireland, Cleggan, Co. Galway,
Ireland, Connemara Field Studies Centre.
Howarth, R.W. 1988. Determining the ecological effects of oil
pollution in marine ecosystems. In: S.A. Levin, M.A. Harwell,
J.R. Kelly & K.D. Kimball, (ed), Ecotoxicology: Problems
and Approaches. Springer Advanced Text in Life Sciences, New
York, Springer-Verlag, p. 69-97.
Hudson, N. & Cheatle, R.J. (ed) 1993. Working with Farmers
for Better Land Husbandry. London, Intermediate Technology
Publications Ltd./World Association of Soil and Water Conservation,
272 p.
Hviding, E. 1991. Traditional institutions and their role in the
contemporary coastal resource management in the Pacific islands.
NAGA, The ICLARM Quarterly, 14 (4), p. 3-6.
Hviding, E. & Baines, G.B.K. 1994. Community based fisheries
management, tradition and the challenges of development in Marovo,
Solomon Islands. Dev. and Change, 25 (1), p. 13-39.
Ireland, Report of AdvisoryGroup in 1991. Review of the
Common Fisheries Policy. Department of the Marine of Ireland,
Advisory Report.
Johannes, R.E. 1994. Government-supported, village-based management
of marine resources in Vanuatu. South Pacific Forum Fisheries
Agency, No.94/2.
Johansson, S., Larsson, O. & Boehm, P. 1980. The Tsesis oil
spill. Mar. Poll. Bull., 11 , p. 284-293.
Keary, B. 1994. The conduct of Irish disputes: The issue of processes
and the issues in a marine environment. Irish Journal of Sociology,
4 , p. 80-104.
Kineman, J.J., Elmgren R. & Hansson S. (ed) 1980. The Thesis
Oil Spill. Washington D.C., U.S. Dept. of Commerce, N.O.A.A.,
296 p.
Klausewitz, W. 1976. Man, the Ruling Animal. In: H.C.B. Grzimek
(ed), Grzimek's Encyclopedia of Ecology. London, Van Nostrand
Reinhold, p. 537-545.
Knox Fortescue, T. 1846. Remarks on the deep sea fisheries
of Ireland. Dublin, Samuel J. Machen.
Knudsen, S. 1995. Fisheries along the Eastern Black Sea coast
of Turkey: Informal resource management in small-scale fishing
in the shadow of a dominant capitalist fishery. Human Organization,
54 (4), p. 437-448.
Konstapel, K. & Noort, L. (ed) 1995. Fisheries in Developing
Countries. Towards sustainable use of living aquatic resources,
Sectoral policy document of Development Cooperation No. 9.
The Hague, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Development Cooperation
Information Department, 96 p.
Krebs, C.J. 1994. Ecology: The Experimental Analysis of Distribution
and Abundance. New York, HarperCollins College Publishers,
801 p.
Kuperan, K. & Abdullagh, N.M.R. 1994. Small-scale coastal
fisheries and co-management. Marine Policy, 18 (4)
, p. 306-313.
Kuypers, J. & Vos, P.C. 1993. Field Trip 3, Field Trips;
International Conference on Coastal Zone Management. Noordwijk,
National Institute for Marine and Coastal Management, RIKZ. (The
Netherlands), 24 p.
Kwast, B.A. (ed) 1924. Bos-Niermeyer Schoolatlas der Geheele
Aarde. Groningen, J.B. Wolters, 45 p.
Lännergren, C. 1978. Net- and Nanoplankton: Effects of an
oil spill in the North Sea. Bot. Mar., 21, p. 353-356.
Leakey, R. & Lewin, R. 1993. Origins Reconsidered - In
search of what makes us human. London, Abacus, 375 p.
Leijendekker, M. 1995. Ministers nemen actie om minder en beter
te vissen. NRC Handelsblad, 18 Maart 1995, p. 18
Levin, S.A., Harwell, M.A., Kelly, J.R. & Kimball, K.D. (ed)
1988. Ecotoxicology: Problems and Approaches. Springer-Verlag
Press.
Long, P. 1991(?). The Sea Heritage of Dingle. 40 p.
Loomeijer, F.R. (Compiler) 1995. De Nederlandse Visserij 1900-1935.
De RIVO Collectie, Alkmaar, Nederland, Uitgeverij De Alk bv, 80
p.
MacCullagh, R. 1992. The Irish Curragh Folk. Wolfhound
Press.
Macdonald, R.D.S. 1984. Canadian fisheries policy and the development
of Atlantic coast ground-fisheries management. In: A.J. Hanson
& C. Lamson (ed), Atlantic Fisheries and Coastal Communities:
Fisheries Decision Making Case studies. Halifax, Dalhousie
Ocean Studies Programme, p. 15-75.
MacDonogh, S. 1993. The Dingle Peninsula; History Folklore
Archaeology. Dingle, Co. Kerry, Ireland, Brandon Book Publishers
Ltd., 256 p.
Au Maoileoin, P. 199x. The Blaskets. Dublin, The Stationary
Office, Government of Ireland, Office of Public Works, 38 p.
Margavio, A.V., Forsyth, C.J., Laska, S. & Mason, J. 1994.
Shrimpers, conservationists, and coastal developement: a case
for dependency theory. Sociological Spectrum, 14
(1), p. 1-23.
Marmion, A. 1860. The ancient and modern history of the maritime
ports of Ireland. London, W.H. Cox, 5 Gt. Queen Street, Lincoln's
Inn Fields.
Martens, R. & Westra, L. 1995. Aanzien van de Oude Visserij.
Almere Haven, Christina, 126 p.
McCay, B.J. & Acheson, J.M. (ed) 1987. The question of
the commons: The culture and ecology of communal resources.
Tucson, The University of Arizona Press, 439 p.
McGinley, J. 1991. Ireland's Fisheries Policy ?. Teelin,
Co. Donegal, Croaghlin Press, 96 p.
McGoodwin, J.R. 1990. Crisis in the World's Fisheries - People,
Problems, and Politics. Stanford, California, Stanford University
Press, 235 p.
McNeill, W.H. 1991. The Rise of the West. Chicago, The
University of Chicago Press, 828 p.
Meltzer, E. 1994. Global overview of straddling and highly migratory
fish stocks: The nonsustainable nature of high seas fisheries.
Ocean Development and International Law, 25 (3),
p. 255-344.
Micks, W.L. 1925. History of the Congested Districts Board.
Dublin, Eason & Son Ltd.
Miller, D.L. 1989. The evolution of Mexico's Caribbean spiny lobster
fishery. In: F. Berkes, (ed), Common property resources: Ecology
and community-based sustainable resources. London, Belhaven
Press, p. 185-198.
Moring, B. 1993. Household and family in Finnish coastal societies
1635-1895. Journal of Family History, 18 (4), p.
395-414.
Mullen, P. 1970. Man of Aran. London, The M.I.T. Press,
287 p.
Munro, G.R. 1981. The economics of fishing: an introduction. In:
J.A. Butlin, (ed), Economics and Resource Policy, London,
Longman.
Nelson-Smith, A. 1970. The problem of oil pollution at sea. In:
M. Yonge & F.S. Russel (ed), Advances in Marine Biology
8. London, Academic Press, p. 215-306.
Nielsen, J.R. 1994. Participation in fishery management policy
making. National and EC regulation of Danish fishermen. Marine
Policy, 18 (1), p. 29-40.
Nietschmann, B. 1989. Traditional sea territories, resources and
rights in Torres Straits. In: J. Cordell (ed), A Sea of Small
Boats, No.Report 26. Cambridge, Massachusetts, Cultural Survival,
Inc., p. 60-93.
Nussbaum, R.H. & Kohnleim, W. 1995. Health consequences of
exposure to ionizing radiation from external and internal sources:
Challenges to radiation protection standards and biochemical research.
Medicine and Global Survival, p. 198-213.
O'Crohan, T. 1951. The Islandman. Oxford, Oxford University
Press, 245 p.
O'Dowd, A. 1994. Resources and Life: Aspects of Working and Fishing
on the Aran Islands. In: J.W. O'Connell & J. Waddell (ed),
The Book of Aran. Kinvara, County Galway, Ireland, Tír
Eolas, p. 336.
O'Grada, C. 1994. Ireland, A new economic history, 1780-1939.
Oxford, Clarendon Press.
O'Guiheen, M. 1982. A Pity Youth Does Not Last. Oxford,
Oxford University Press, 137 p.
O'Neill, T. 1987. Merchants & Mariners in Medieval Ireland.
Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Irish Academic Press, 164 p.
O'Rourke, C. 1994. Recent Changes and Future Prospects of Agriculture
in the Dingle Peninsula, 1973 - 1994. B.A. Geography degree
requirement, National University of Ireland, St. Patrick's College,
Maynooth,
O'Sullivan, P. & Godwin, N. (ed) 1977a. A World Of Stone.
O'Brien's Island Books, Aran Series, Dublin, O'Brien Educational
Ltd., 80 p.
O'Sullivan, P. & Godwin, N. (ed) 1977b. Field And Shore.
O'Brien's Island Books, Aran Series, Dublin, O'Brien Educational
Ltd., p. 81-168.
O'Sullivan, M. 1983. Twenty Years A-Growing. Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 298 p.
Odijk, T. & Oosterhoff, B. 1992. Indigenous knowledge and
innovation: Socio-economic and cultural changes in Igombe, a fishing
community in Tanzania resulting from the introduction of Nile
Perch in Lake Victoria. Afstudeerscriptie, Catholic University
of Nijmegen,
Opsomer, J-D. & Conrad, J.M. 1994. An open-access analysis
of the northern anchovy fishery. Journal of Environmental Economics
and Management, 27 (1), p. 21-37.
Ordnance Survey 1994. Kerry. Discovery Series no. 70 Dublin,
The Ordnance Survey of Ireland.
Ormeling, F.J. (ed) 1961. Bos-Niermeyer Schoolatlas Der Gehele
Aarde. Groningen, J.B. Wolters, 171 p.
Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions
for collective action. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Parsons, R.C. 1894. General Report. Congested Districts
Board for Ireland.
Pasterkamp, S 1995. Reactie op dagboek en de RIVO-biologen. Visserijnieuws,
Vrijdag 24 Maart, p. 5-6
Pálsson, G. 1996. The birth of the aquarium: The Historical
ecology of Icelandic fishing. The Politics of Fishing,
Politics Department, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, England,
17-18 September 1996.
Pálsson, G. 1997. "Having a pee in the salty sea":
practical engagement and environmental concerns. In: C. Folke
& F. Berkes (ed), Linking Social and Ecological Systems:
Institutional learning for resilience. Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press, p. Ch.13 (in press).
Phyne, J.G. 1996. Balancing social equity and environmental integrity
in Ireland's salmon farming industry. Society & Natural
Resources, 9 , p. 281-293.
Pinkerton, E. 1987. Intercepting the state: Dramatic processes
in the asserion of local comanagement rights. In: J.M. Acheson
& B.J. McCay (ed), The question of the commons: The culture
and ecology of communal resources. Tucson, The University
of Arizona Press, p. 344-369.
Plomp, C. 1989. Urk, Sociografie van een Eilandbevolking.(Facsimile
of 1940 Ph.D. Thesis Univ. Amsterdam). Zutphen, De Walburg
Press, 126 p.
Poggie, J & Gersuny, C. 1974. Fishermen of Galilee. University
of Rhode Island Marine Bulletin Series No. 17.
Pollnac, R.B. 1988. Social and cultural characteristics of fishing
peoples. Marine Behaviour and Physiology, 14 (1),
p. 23-39.
Póirtéir, C. (ed) 1995. The Great Irish Famine,
The Thomas Davis Lectures Series. series ed.: M. Littleton,
Cork, Mercier Press, 283 p.
Pracht, M. 1996. Geology of Dingle Bay, A geological description
to accompany the bedrock geology 1:100,000 map series, Sheet 20,
Dingle Bay. series ed.: B. McConnell, Dublin, Geological Survey
of Ireland.
Pramanik, S.K. 1994. Work participation of fisherwomen: A case
study of two fishing villages in West Bengal. Man in India,
74 (1), p. 69-80.
Pruissers, A.P. & de Gans, W. 1988. De bodem van Leidschendam.
In: C.F.H. Daams & J.P. de Kort Snr. (ed), Over, door en
om de Leytsche Dam: Geschiedenis van een Gouden Gemeente.
Leidschendam, Gemeente Leidschendam, p. 11-27.
Reijn, G. 1994. De oceanen raken leeg en de vissersvloot aan lager
wal. de Volkskrant, 20 Augustus 1994, p. 47
Roep, Th. B., van der Valk, L. & Beets, D.J. 1991. Strandwallen
en zeegaten langs de Hollandse kust. Grondboor en Hamer,
November 1991 , p. 115-124.
Rogers, J. & Tedebrand, L.G. 1993. Living by the sea: Farming
and fishing in Sweden from the late eighteenth to the early twentieth
century. Journal of Family History, 18 (4), p. 369-393.
Roling, N. & Engel, P. 1989. IKS and knowledge management:
Utilising indigenous knowledge in institutional knowledge systems.
In: D, M. Warren, L.J. Slikkerveer & S.O. Titilola (ed), Indigenous
Knowledge Systems: Implications for Agriculture and International
Development. Studies in Technology and Social Change Series
No. 11, Ames, Iowa, Iowa State University, p. 101-115.
Ruane, J. 1992. Colonialism and the interpretation of Irish historical
development. In: P.H. Gulliver & M. Silverman (ed), Approaching
the Past: Historical anthropology through Irish case studies.
New York, Columbia University Press, p. 293-323.
Ruddle, K. 1988. Social principles underlying traditional inshore
fishery management systems in the Pacific basin. Marine Resource
Economics, 5 , p. 351-363.
Ruddle, K. & Akimichi, T. 1989. Sea tenure in Japan and the
southwestern Ryukyus. In: J.C. Cordell (ed), A sea of small
boats: Customary Law and Territoriality in the World of Inshore
Fishing. Cambridge, Massachusettes, Cultural Survival Inc.,
p. 337-370.
Ruddle, K. 1994. Local knowledge in the future management of inshore
tropical marine resources and environments. Nature & Resources,
30 (1), p. 28-37.
Ruttledge-Fair, R. 1893. Confidential Inspector's Report of
District of Aran Islands. Congested Districts Board for Ireland,
No.54.
Salsa, P. & Davits, W.P. 1996. Effecten van de quota verlaging
in 1996 op de omvang van de Nederlandse Kotter vloot. L.E.I.
Landbouw-Economisch Institute.
Sayer, P. 1974. Peig. Dublin, The Talbot Press, 212 p.
Schuttenhelm 1996. Geology Urk. Rijks Geologische Dienst,
Haarlem.
Slikkerveer, L.J. 1983. Medisch pluralisme in Noordoost Afrika;
Multipele utilisatie van gezondheidszorg in Babile (Ethiopie).
Ph.D., Rijks Universiteit Leiden, The Netherlands,
Slikkerveer, L.J. 1989. Changing values and attitudes of social
and natural scientists towards indigenous peoples and their knowledge
systems. In: D.M. Warren, L.J. Slikkerveer & S.O. Titilola
(ed), Indigenous Knowledge Systems: Implications for Agriculture
and International Development, Studies in Technology and Social
Change Series No. 11. Iowa, Technology and Social Change Program,
Iowa State University Research Foundation, p. 121-137.
Slikkerveer, L.J. & Slikkerveer, M.K.L. 1995. Taman Obat Keluarga
(TOGA): Indigenous Indonesian medicine for self-reliance. In:
D.M. Warren, L.J. Slikkerveer & D. Brokensha (ed), The
Cultural Dimension of Development. Indigenous Knowledge Systems.
London, Intermediate Technology Publications Ltd., p. 13-34.
Smith, M. E. 1995. An anthropologist's view of the fishery science
and management session. ICES Information, (25), p. 8-10.
SPSS 1990. Manual SPSS Categories. Chicago, SPSS Inc.
Squires, D. 1994. Sources of growth in marine fishing industries.
Marine Policy, 18 (1), p. 5-18.
Starke, L. (ed) 1996. State of the World 1996 - A Worldwatch
Institute Report on the progress towards a sustainable society.
series ed. Lester R. Brown, New York, W.W. Norton & Company.
Stopford Green, A. 1924. The making of Ireland and its undoing
1200-1600. London, MacMillan, 574 p.
Symonds, T.E. 1855. Observation on the fisheries of the west
coast of Ireland, having reference more particularly to the operations
of the London and West of Ireland Fishing company. London.
Taylor, L.J. 1980. Colonialism and community structure in Western
Ireland (re fisheries). Ethnohistory, 27 (2), p.
169-181.
Thiessen, V. & Davis, A. 1988. Recruitment to small boat fishing
and public policy in the Atlantic Canadian fisheries. Canadian
Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 25 (4), p. 603-627.
Thio, A. 1989. Sociology, An Introduction. New York, Harper
& Row, Publishers.
Thomas, H. 1989. An Unfinished History of the World. London,
Pan Books Ltd., 794 p.
Thompson, P., Wailey, T. & Lummis, T. 1983. Living the
Fishing. London, Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Tont, S.A. & Delistraty, D.A. 1977. Food resources of the
oceans: An outline of status and potentials. Environmental
Conservation, 4 (4), p. 243-252.
U.N. 1997. Yearbook. United Nations.
Vos, P. 1996. Geology Goeree. Rijks Geologische Dienst,
Haarlem.
Waddell, J. & O'Connell, J.W. (ed) 1994. The Book of Aran,
The Aran Islands, Co. Galway. Kinvara, Co. Galway, Ireland,
Tír Eolas, 336 p.
Warren, D.M., Slikkerveer, L.J. & Brokensha, D. (ed) 1995.
The Cultural Dimension of Development, IT Studies in Indigenous
Knowledge and Development. London, Intermediate Technology
Publications Ltd., 582 p.
Warriner, G.K. 1988. Common property rights and regional subordination
in a staples economy: The rise and decline of the British Columbia
coastal fishing community, 1880-1981. Canadian Review of Sociology
and Anthropology, 25 (4), p. 493-519.
Went, A.E.J. 1946. The Irish Pilchard Fishery. Proceedings
of the Royal Irish Academy, 51, Section B (5), p. 81-120.
Went, A.E.J. 1949. Foreign fishing fleets along the Irish coast.
Journal of the Cork Historical and Archaeological Society,
54 (second series) , p. 17-24.
Wheeler, A. 1978. Key to the Fishes of Northern Europe.
London, Frederick Warne (Publishers) Ltd., 383 p.
Whelan, K. 1994. Settlement patterns in the West of Ireland in
the pre-famine period. In: T. Collins (ed), Decoding the Landscape,
Centre for Landscape Studies. Galway, Social Sciences Research
Centre Galway, p. 60-78.
Whelan, K. 1995. Pre and Post-Famine Lanscape Change. In: C. Póitéir
(ed), The Great Irish Famine, The Thomas Davis Lecture Series.
Cork, Mercier Press, p. 19-33.
Wiersma, J. 1991. De ontwikkeling van de Hollandse kust; een kwestie
van schaal. Grondboor en Hamer, November 1991 , p. 129-134.
Wilson, E.O. 1992. The Diversity of Life. London, Penquin
Books Ltd., 406 p.
Wilson, J.A., Acheson, J.M., Metcalfe, M., & Kleban, P. 1994.
Chaos, complexity and community management of fisheries. Marine
Policy, 18 (4), p. 291-305.
World Bank, The, 1992. A study of international fisheries research.
H. Smida,, W. Krone,, T.S. Rothermel, & M.J. Petit, (ed),
Policy and Research Series, 19, Washington, D.C., The World Bank,
106 p.
Woodham-Smith, C. 1968. The Great Hunger. London, The New
English Library Ltd., 429 p.
Yano, L.I. 1993. Protection of the ethnobiological knowledge of
indigenous peoples. UCLA Law Review, 41 (2), p.
443-486.
Young, T. 1975. The Dingle commercial fisherman. Ph.D.,
Pittsburgh
Zagwijn, W.H. 1986. Nederland in het Holoceen, Geology van
Nederland, Deel I. s'Gravenhage, Rijks Geologische Dienst
Haarlem, Staatsuitgeverij.
Zwiers, Partners 1995. Onderzoek Visafslag Stellendam: Strategievorming.
Gemeente Goederede.
Block 1a: (Individual background)
1. Place of Residence:
2. Place of birth:
3. Are you married: single / married / separated / co-habitating
/ widower
Family group:
4. May I ask your birth year: head child 1 child 2 child 3 child
4 child 5 child 6 others others
Sex
at home
not at home
5. Socio-economic status: R / M / A
(not asked but assessed
by interviewer):
7. May I ask your religious denomination: RK / Gereformeerd
/ oud-geref / Hervormd / C of I /
: none / others ........
8. Is that important to you:: yes / moderately / no
9. Which school education did you follow: primary / tech / secondary
/ Fishery School Greencastle / Skippers Diplomas
other qualifications ......
10. Involvement in fisheries: - full-time / part-time / retired
- .... hours per week / ... % van het jaar
11. If part-time-on which other sector past, agriculture / tourism
/ industry / state / fish trade / shop / others .......
Block 1b: (Individual fishery background)
12. What is/are the reason(s) why you started fishing: no other work available / better paid / circumstances / family tradition / community tradition / manly type work / outside work / love of the sea / feeling of freedom / like the work / others ....
13. Where or from whom did you learn most about fishing: school
/ father / other family / during first job
in fishing / others ........
14. What was the difference between what you learned in school
and courses and what you learned in practice
15. Which family members are involved in fisheries: self / father(in
law) / uncle(by marriage) / sons / grandfather(s) / brothers /
brother-in-law / nephews / cousins / others.
16. With whom did you start fishing: father / brother(s) / uncle / grandfather / cousin / others .......
17. How many generations were involved in fishing in family
or in-laws:
- father ship ....... fish species ....... techniques ..... ship
....... fish species ....... techniques .....
ship ....... fish species ....... techniques .....
- grandfather ship ....... fish species ....... techniques ..... ship ....... fish species ....... techniques .....
- great grandfather ship ....... fish species ....... techniques ..... ship ....... fish species ....... techniques ..... ship ....... fish species ....... techniques .....
- great- great grand- ship ....... fish species ....... techniques
....
father ship ....... fish species ....... techniques .....
18. Do you see yourself as a fisherman or as someone who just
works in the fishing industry: / fish industry worker / professional
fisherman,
19. Would you like to swap fishing with other work:: yes /
no / later
20. If yes, why: other work : better paid / lowering quota / family
stopped fishing / was offered easier work / home every evening
/ others ....
21. How is the relationship with other fishermen: friendly / cooperative / neutral / professional competition / strong competition / aggressive / others ....
22. In the past was relationship more or less cooperative: much less / bit less / same / bit more / much more / don't know
23. Are you a member of a fisherman's organisation: Crew's
association / IFO / IFPO / Shellfish coop / P.O. / none / others
....
2: PRODUCTION METHODS (traditional and modern).
Block 2a: (Fishing experience).
24. Your fishing experience:
Year
Crew
Skipper
Ship type
Ship length
Engine hp
technique
season
fish type
fish type
fish type
fish type
25. Do you think that current method of fishing is new development
or based on older method:
26. Duration of fishing trip: 1 tide, ..... days, 1 week, ...
weeks
27. Duration of 1 pull or setting of net ... hours :
28. How long is net: ......... m
29. Mesh size: ....... mm
30. How long is long-line: ... m ...... hoeks
31. How much ground covered: in each fishing operation: ... mile
32. Highest wind force during which fishing is still carried
out:: force ........
33. How many gear units: ..... (fykes, lobster pots, trammel nets)
34. Type of lobster pots or fyke: ............
35. Are you part of the V-notching programme: yes / no
:
36. Used you return berried females or small lobsters in the
past: berried females programme yes / no; small lobsters yes /
no
37. Quality of fish: - appearance: very bad / bad / reasonable
/ good / top
- Flesh: very bad / bad / reasonable / good / top
- Undersize: none / few / some / many / very many
- Days fresh: same day / 2-4 days / more / frozen
38. Practices to improve the quality of the fish: short trips
/ short pulls / strip well / rinse well / boxes not to full /
ice well cook on board / others
39. Survival of small fish: approx. ...... %
40. Specific problems with current methods:
41. Would you like to fish using a different technique
what would that be
- (passive net) drift net / gill net / trammel
, - (active net/trawl fishery) / beam / snurrevaer /
: bottom trawl / mid water trawl / pair trawl / purse seine /
draught net / pelagic trawl / electric trawl
- (fish "traps")lobster+crab pots / fyke / baited pots
- (hoeks) long line / rod
- as of now
42. Why .............
43. Do you think that your grandson will fish in the same way
as you do now:: no / maybe / yes / don't know / others .......
44. Which traditions in the Dingle peninsula have helped to maintain
and develop fishing: share system / pay-agreement / religion /
cooperative / history of community / hard work / bank / others
45. Are there other techniques which play a role in the present
fishery: work type / beam trawl / gill nets / fishery knowledge
/ community effort / others ....
46. Do you think that fishing is much less safer than it used to be: / bit less / same / bit more / much more because .............
Block 2b: (Technology and knowledge)
47. Modern navigation equipment: compass / radio / radar /
depth sounder / decca / SatNav(GPS) / ComputerSatNav(DGPS)
48. In which way did fishermen navigate in the past:: experience / colour of water / lead line / wind direction / size of waves / time of steaming / compass / stars / sun / Decca / others ......
49. Which of these methods are still is use:
50. Modern fish finding fish equipment: finder / computer SatNav
and logbook/ others .......
:
51. How was the fish found in de past: time if year / depth
of water / lead line / colour of water / information from others
/ own experience of catches / watch were others fish / trial and
error / temperature of the water / beacon at sea or on land /
52. Which of these methods are still in use:
53. Reasons for working on high current ship: earnings / new ship
/ big ship / small ship / family ship / home often / good relation
with colleagues (crew) / same religion / good skipper / others
......
54. Are you (part)owner: yes / no
55. If yes, what was the reason for purchase of ship: license / quotum / economic reason / family / low in overheads / hp race / competition / state subsidy / decommissioning / available credit / good markets / previously granted license / other investors / greater fishing capacity / others ....
56. Distance steaming before commencing fishing:..... mile
57. Overheads compared with earnings: low / middling low /
reasonable / bit high / very high
58. What would you choose: to catch more fish with higher overheads / to catch less fish with lower overheads
59. Reason for answer to previous question: market price /
better net earnings / more fish means greater gross earnings /
better for environment / better for fish stocks / keep quotum
/ others .......
60. Did fishermen know more about fishing in the past than they
do now: much more / more / same / less / lot less
(Over halfway)
3: MARITIME RESOURCES AND THEIR MANAGEMENT.
Block 3a: (Natural Resources)
61. Fish stocks:
Species
Current state of fish stock very rare / scarce / reasonable /
good / abundant
Fish stock compared to the past much less / less / stable
/ more / much more
Current state of fish stock very rare / scarce / reasonable /
good / abundant
Fish stock compared to the past much less / less / stable
/ more / much more
Current state of fish stock very rare / scarce / reasonable /
good / abundant
Fish stock compared to the past much less / less / stable
/ more / much more
Current state of fish stock very rare / scarce / reasonable /
good / abundant
Fish stock compared to the past much less / less / stable
/ more / much more
Current state of fish stock very rare / scarce / reasonable /
good / abundant
Fish stock compared to the past much less / less / stable
/ more / much more
Current state of fish stock very rare / scarce / reasonable /
good / abundant
Fish stock compared to the past much less / less / stable
/ more / much more
Current state of fish stock very rare / scarce / reasonable /
good / abundant
Fish stock compared to the past much less / less / stable
/ more / much more
Current state of fish stock very rare / scarce / reasonable /
good / abundant
Fish stock compared to the past much less / less / stable
/ more / much more
Current state of fish stock very rare / scarce / reasonable /
good / abundant
Fish stock compared to the past much less / less / stable
/ more / much more
62. Gathering sea weed: none / for personal use / small extra earnings / important extra earnings / main earnings / others ....
63. Opinion on sea weed potential in future: none / small amount
per year / reasonable / big tonnage
64. Other maritime resources: important extra earnings ..................
hobby / for personal use / small extra earnings/
.................. hobby / for personal use / small extra earnings/
important extra earnings
.................. hobby / for personal use / small extra earnings/
important extra earnings
Block 3b: (Conservation and management of fish stocks)
65. Is HP limit effective not / imposed / reasonable / good / others .........
66. How high should HP limit .should have been during last.
15 years:.... hp
Practices for management and improvement of fish stocks.
67. Minimum fish size: no effect / moderate effect / good
/ must be higher / must be lower
68. Reduce fishing effort in certain seasons (when ready to
spawn or in cold of winter):: disastrous / counteractive / no
effect / moderate effect / good / must be introduced / can't be
introduced
69. Not fish certain grounds: disastrous / counteractive / no effect / moderate effect / good / must be introduced / can't be introduced
70. No fishing on certain days of the week: disastrous / counteractive / no effect / moderate effect / good / must be introduced / can't be introduced
71. Current controls on fishing gear: (mesh size, net size)
: disastrous / counteractive / no effect / moderate effect
/ good
72. Current practices TAC+quota: disastrous / counteractive /
no effect / moderate / good / must be done in other way: ...........
73. Are/were their practices not prescribed by law, which you
did, which protected the fish stocks: ........................
74. Are other measures needed: ..........................
75. Were there practices to protect fish stocks in the past::
no / same / yes
76. If yes, which were they: ................
77. Which practices in particular are important to protect
fish stocks in the future:..................
78. Will the same fish species be important in the future::
yes / partly / no
79. If no, which will not not and which will: yes ...............
4: BUSINESS MANAGEMENT.
80. Crew's payment system: share system / regular pay / regular + % / ship owner / owner of quotum / owner of fishing gear / others ...
81. What is advantage of Share system: - better paid / work harder / own boss / others ...
regular pay - more security / better hours / pay with low catches
/ others ..........
ship owner - own boss / good earnings / others .....
82. What is disadvantage of Share system:
- must work harder / no money with low catch/ no pension / no
insurance / no quotum / others ........
regular pay - less earnings / less independence / no quotum /
others .......
ship owner - more risk / more responsibility / regulation to conform
to / others ......
83. Decisions on board in the past by skipper v. crew: 100:0 / 90:10 / 75:25 / 50:50 / 25:75 / 10:90 / 0:100
84. Decisions now on board skipper v. crew: 100:0 / 90:10 / 75:25 / 50:50 / 25:75 / 10:90 / 0:100
85. Which system do you see in existence in 50 years time:
Regular pay / share system / regular pay + % / fish on one's own
/ others ........
:
5: EU AND NATIONAL POLICY.
Block 5a: (EU policy)
86. Which non-quotum fish do you fish for: .... .... .... ....
87. Catch of non-quotum species: .... % a year
88. By catch of non-commercial species: .... % per year
89. Throwing back of non-quotum fish: .... % per year
90. Enough quotum: - late 1970's + to 1984: to little / just enough
/ more than enough
- 1984 to 1990's: to little / just enough / more than enough
- in the future: to little / just enough / more than enough /
not predictable
91. Opinion over quotum share out, system best to: hire / sale / state share it out / own share out via (PO's) / no quota / lottery / others ....
92. Would it be better if crew also had quotum: no / no difference
/ yes / others .....
93. Good aspects of quota system: control of competition / conservation of fish stocks / market stability / fish in other EU Member state waters / others .....
94. Bad aspects of quota system: to little quotum / quotum to expensive / to changeable / to many forms / to many rules / not flexible / not adapted to fishing seasons / wasteful of by catch / biologists are wrong / politicians don't negotiate well enough for fishery / control is not the same in other EU countries /
95. To be able to take unused quotum over to next year:: not good
/ makes no difference / good idea
96. Maximum % of quotum that can .be transferred:........ %
97. Mesh size measuring system: doesn't work / bad / depends on
individual inspector / reasonable / good
98. Opinion on decommissioning of tonnage and hp: has reduced HP / has modernised fleet / has pushed HP increase / reduced catch capacity / increased catch capacity / good for smaller fishermen / good for larger fishermen / others ...
99. Since EU regulation, have earnings: large decrease / small decrease / no difference/ small increase / large increase
100. Overall opinion of effect of EU on fishery : very bad / unfavourable / no difference / reasonably advantageous / very good
101. What sort of influence will the EU have in the future: bad influence / try to avoid influence /makes no difference / reasonable influence / very favourable influence / don't know / others .....
102. What is your opinion on the control of EU regulations
in other EU countries: not the same in all countries / reasonably
the
same but not exactly / same everywhere
Block 5b: (national policy)
103. Regulation best State fisheries done via: inspectors / fisheries research / P.O.'s / Fishermen's Organisations / Cooperative / local fish market / local community / others ....
104. Opinion on how Fishery Inspection service carries out
its work at the moment: Fair / good for fish stocks / to strict
/ not strict enough / can continue / need control but has to change
/ not necessary / fines to heavy / fines to light / is not familiar
enough
with fishing / others .....
105. Opinion on Fisheries: trying to bankrupt fishermen / good knowledge of fish research: stocks / own career most important / try no protect fish stocks but guess as to their size / have a reasonable idea of variation of stocks between years / have good idea about fish stocks / others ........
106. Traditional attitude of authorities towards the fisheries:
are against them / use it for political exigency / neutral / some
help / strong promotion / very changeable
107. Is there a need for regulation during the next 50 years:
no / some / yes
if yes, why: ............
if no. why: ............
6: MARKET DEVELOPMENTS.
108. Fish sold in: auction: ..... ...... ..... / local fish shops / restaurants / to individuals / factory / direct to dealer / others .......
109. Access to capital and credit:
before war: not possible / very difficult / reasonable / without
difficulty
1950's: not possible / very difficult / reasonable / without difficulty
1960's: not possible / very difficult / reasonable / without difficulty
1970's: not possible / very difficult / reasonable / without difficulty
1980's: not possible / very difficult / reasonable / without difficulty
1990's: not possible / very difficult / reasonable / without difficulty
110. Ways to stabilise market prices in the past :
111. Confidence in future market prices: none / maybe okay
/ reasonably confident / full confidence
112. How do you see the effect of the black market:: good / has
some good aspects / no difference / little bit negative
/ bad
113. Why (to answer of previous question):
7: FISH PRODUCTION
114. % of quotum caught and typical catch per year:
year ship hp sole plaice cod whiting herring lobster salmon
115. Trend in earnings:
( - ) fish caught overheads Net earnings reason
after war
1960's
1973
1984
1990's
116. Opinion about catches in the future: very bad / will be less / as now / more / top / reasonably confident / full confidence
117. Why level of confidence ..............
118. Was there confidence in fish stocks and catches in the
past:: very bad / was less / as now / more / full
119. Why level of confidence in the past:
Predisposing system variables
Concept Dimension Indicator Variable (Question)
Socio- sex of respondent sex of respondent 1.1
demographic
age age 4
religion religious 7
denomination
household number ages and sex 4, 4.1, 4.2.1/4.2.10, composition
of children and 4.3.1/4.3.10, 4.4,
household size
marital Status marital Status 3
geographic place of residence 1, 2
origins and birth
1 Place of residence
1.1 Sex of respondent
2 Place of birth
3 Marital status
4 Age of respondents
4.1 Number of children
4.2.1/4.2.10 Age of child
4.3.1/4.3.10 Sex of child
4.4 Household size
7 Religious denomination
Education/experience formal, non-formal level of schooling 9
informal education and fishery training
gained from whom 13
professional over number of 24.13, 24.14
fishing experience years
Concept Dimension Indicator Variable (Question)
with whom started 16
fishing
experience of which 24.1.1/24.10.7, 24.15,
methods 24.16, 24.17
9 Highest level of schooling achieved
13 where or from whom learned most about fishing
16 with whom started fishing
24.1.1.....24.10.7 past fishing experience of respondent
24.13 Total years of fishing experience of respondent
24.14 Total years as skipper
24.15 Total number of methods used by respondent in fishing career
24.16 Number of boats fished on during fishing career
24.17 Number of engines fished with during fishing career
Fishing experience family members currently 15
of predecessors in fishing
+ family previous generations 17.1 - 17.9, 17.10
15 family members now in fishing
17.1...17.3 fishing behaviour of father
17.4...17.5 fishing behaviour of grandfather
17.6...17.7 fishing behaviour of great grandfather
17.8...17.9 fishing behaviour of greatgreatgrandfather
17.10 Number of previous generations in fishing
Concept Dimension Indicator Variable (Question)
Predisping attitudesos variables
Socio- perception of reason for starting 12
psychological own position to fish
profile in fishing
professional self-view 18
reason for current 53, 55
fishing practice
other choices within 19,20,41,42
and outside fishing
12 reason why started with fishing
18 See yourself as professional fisherman or as someone with a
job in fisheries
19 Would you like to swap fishing with other work
20 If swap, why
41 Which other method would you like to try
42 Why would like to try other method
53 Reason for working on current ship
55 Reason for buying ship
opinion about formal and 14
education v. non-formal
practice v. informal and
experience
14 Difference between school and father/family/first job
religious strenght of 8
attitude belief
8 Importance of religious belief to respondent
memory knowledge of past 48.1, 48.2, 51.1, 51.2,
regarding practices 25, 46, 60, 75, 76, 83, traditional practices
110,
Concept Dimension Indicator Variable (Question)
knowledge of past 118, 119
opinions and view
48.1 Method of navigating in the past
48.2 Number of traditional navigation methods mentioned
51.1 Methods of finding fish in the past
51.2 Number of traditional fish finding methods mentioned
25 Which traditional method does the current method resemble
46 Is fishing safer now than it used to be
60 Did fishermen know more about fishing in the past
75 Where there fish conservation practices in the past
76 Which fish conservation practices were there in the past
83 Decisions on board in the past
110 Methods to stabilise markets in the past
118 Was there confidence in catches in the past
119 What was the reason for the confidence in the past
opinions opinion on future 43
regarding of current way of
sustainability fishing
practices
opinion on current 61.1.1-61.2.23
stock levels and
trends
opinions on current 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71,
fisheries management 72, 91, 103
measures
opinion on share- 81.1+2, 82.1+2
out of earnings
43 Will grandson be able to fish using current methods
61.1.1-61.2.23 Current fish stock assessment and level compared
to the past
65 What is opinion on HP limit
66 What should the HP limit have been over the last 15 years
67 Minimum fish size effective
68 Certain seasons no fishing effective
69 Certain areas no fishing effective
Concept Dimension Indicator Variable (Question)
70 Days no fishing effective
71 Present regulations on fishing gear effective
72 Present regulations on fishing practices effective
81.1+2 Advantages of share system and being owner.
82.1+2 Disadvantages of share system and being owner.
91 Opinion about quota share-out
103 Regulation control best done by whom
opinions opinion on future 74, 77, 107
regarding conservation practices
future of fishing
confidence in future 78, 79, 116, 117, 63, 90.3
stocks + quotas
confidence in future 111
markets+earnings
future payments 85
system
opinion on longterm 58, 59
fishing business
strategy
changes in quotum 92, 95, 96
regulation
future influence 101
of EU
58 Would you prefer to catch less with less overheads, or
more with higher overheads
59 Why opinion on amount of catch and overheads (Q.58)
63 Potential for collecting seaweed
74 Other conservation practices which are needed
77 Which conservation practices will be important in the future
78 Will the same species be important in the future
79 Which species will be and which won't
85 Which payment system will exist in 50 years time
Concept Dimension Indicator Variable (Question)
90.3 to little/enough/to much quotum in the future
92 Should crew have quotum.
95 Use of unused quota during the following quota period
96 Max. % quota carried over
101 Opinion on future influence of the EU
107 Opinion on need for fisheries regulation in the future
111 Confidence in future markets
116 Opinion on future catches
117 Why opinion on future catches
Relationship with non-formal cooperation in the 21, 22
other fishermen ccoperation past and present
organised membership of 23
cooperation fisherman's
organisations
21 Relationship with other fishermen, cooperative etc.
22 Relationship with other fishermen in the past compared to present
23 Membership of fishermens' organisations
23 Membership of Fishermans' Organisations
Concept Dimension Indicator Variable (Question)
Predisposing Enabling variables
Economic status current economic current economic 5, 54
status status
5 Socio-economic status
54 Is respondent (part)owner of ship
Vleet size vleet of firm number of boats and 24.11, 24.12
total engine power
24.11 Number of boats in family firm
24.12 Total horse power in the firm
Allowed catch availability of in the past 90.1, 90.2
catch quota an up to present
90.1 to little/enough/to much quotum during 70's and early
80's
90.2 to little/enough/to much quotum from middle 80's until present
Type of fishing gear current or last ship ship's horse power
24.18
fished with
24.18 Current horsepower of ship
catching units number and length 28, 30, 33, 34
of cathing units
(where applicable)
28 How long gill net.
30 How long long-line
33 How many lobster pots/units of fishing gear
34 Type of lobster pot
Instrumentation wheelhouse 47, 50, equipment
Concept Dimension Indicator Variable (Question)
47 Current navigation equipment
50 Modern fish finding equipment
limitations of limitations of 40
method method
40 Problems with current method.
Access to capital investment capability ease of borrowing 109.1
- 109.5
109.1 Access to capital in 50's
109.2 Access to capital in 60's
109.3 Access to capital in 70's
109.4 Access to capital in 80's
109.5 Access to capital in 90's
Concept Dimension Indicator Variable (Question)
Regulation of fisheries
Fishery regulation functioning of effect of 93, 94, 98, 106, 112, fishery policy fishery policy 113
manner of regulation 97, 104
enforcement
experience/opinion 105
of fisheries research
93 Good aspects of quota system
94 Bad aspects of quota system
97 Mesh size measuring system
98 Experience of decommissioning of boats
104 Opinion on the manner in which the state fishery inspection
does its work
105 Experience/opinion on effect and functioning of fisheries
research
106 Experience/opinion on attitude of national authorities towards
fisheries sector
112 Opinion on black market.
113 Why opinion on black market
experience of experience of 100, 102
influence of influence of
EU Fishery Policy EU Fishery Policy
100 Experience/opinion on influence of the EU
102 Experience/opinion on regulation control in other EU countries
Influence social traditions which traditions which 44
background on influenced influenced
fishing development of development of
fishery fishery
44 Which local traditions were important in maintaining
and developing the fishing industry
Concept Dimension Indicator Variable (Question)
Fishing behaviour
Role of old traditions old fishing practices old fishing practices
45, 49, 52
and practices in and methods and methods
current fishing
45 Which old tradition and methods still play a role and
influence the current ways of fishing
49 Which old navigation methods are still in use
52 Which old methods of finding the fish are still in use
Sustainable fishing practices to conserve practices to conserve
35, 36, 39, 73
practices fish stocks fish stocks
35 Return of females and small lobsters in the past
36 Participation in lobster conservation programme
39 % survival of small fish
73 Current practices not prescribed by regulation but which do
conserve fish stocks
practices concerned assessment of 37.1-37.4
with fish quality fish quality
practices to conserve 38.1, 38.2
quality
37.1-4 Quality of fish, undersizeds and freshness
38.1+2 Practices to improve fish quality
Level of involvement amount of time fulltime/parttime 10, 11
in fishing spent fishing
10 full time/part time employment in fisheries
11 other part time employment
Concept Dimension Indicator Variable (Question)
Type of fishing fishing method method type 24, 62, 64
done
mesh size 29
24 The current fishing method
62 Gathering seaweed
64 Other marine resources
29 Mesh size
parameters of duration of fishing 26, 27
fishing effort
area covered while 31
fishing
capacity of boat 32, 56
as regards weather
and operating range
26 Duration of fishing trip
27 Duration of tow
31 How much habitat
32 Highest wind force with which fishing is carries out
56 Distance steaming before fishing
decision making decision taking 84
on board
84 Decisions on board currently
catch composition quota, over- quota, 86.1+2, 87, 88, 89,
non-quota and
non-commercial
by-catch fish in
year's catch
% of quota filled 114.1-114.6
86.1+2 Which and how many non-quota fish are fished for
87 How much by catch of non-quota fish
88 How much by catch of non-commercial species
89 % thrown away at sea of over- quota fish
Concept Dimension Indicator Variable (Question)
114.1-6 % of quotum filled for 6 fish species
Crew payment share or regular pay share or regular pay 80
system
80 Payment system of crew
Marketing of fish market facilities auctions and/or 108
and type dealer
108 Fish sold via auction or dealer
Trend in earnings earnings compared earnings compared 57
overheads overheads currently
57 Overheads compared to gross earnings
trend in earnings trend since EU 99
since WWII membership
trends in catches 115.1-115.4
overheads and
net earnings in
recent decades
99 Earnings during the EU period
115.1-4 Trends in catches, overheads, net earnings and the reasons
