Case Number: 482 |
Case Mneumonic: SWORDFSH |
Case Name: Swordfish Trade and Species Loss |
The number of swordfish in both the North and South Atlantic has steadily declined in recent years. If depletion of the swordfish stock continues, it may mean extinction of the species in the near future. This has major implications for current and future commercial fishing practices throughout the world. In 1996, the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) was given the responsibilty for setting the 1997 quotas, which are known as the Total Allowable Catch (TAC) levels, for all member fishing nations. Conservationists, however are also calling for measures to eliminate certain harmful fishing practices, an issue that has not been adequately enforced internationally or domestically.
Swordfish or Xiphias gladius come from the family Xiphidae. They are a migratory species and can be found in the tropical and temperate seas of the world, from approximately 45 degrees North to 45 degrees South.1
One of the more defining characteristics of the swordfish is its sword which is actually part of its upper jaw. This sword acts as a spear with which it fights its enemies and catches prey such as squid, pelagic fishes and crustaceans. After reaching about two to four feet long, adult swordfish lose their ventral fins and teeth. They are bronze or gray with a silver underside. Their large dorsal fin becomes higher and shorter. 2
Swordfish can grow up to 445 cm in length and can weigh up to 540 kg or 1190 lbs. It is not clear from existing statistics whether or not females or males are larger at the age of maturity, normally considered to be five to six years. However, females do usually grow faster and are generally larger than males.3
The call to impose swordfish quotas is an issue that has gained a prominent place in the public arena and has stirred up much controversy. Conservationists who have been fighting for quotas and changes in fishing practices have strong feelings on this issue and are concerned about the preservation of marine wildlife. The fishing industry has also largely been in agreement that the Atlantic stock has been depleted due to overfishing although they may have concerns about the call for bans on drift nets and longlines. Fishermen and others in the industry are not so much concerned about the quotas but that campaigns banning swordfish in restaurants will harm the industry and reduce profits. Fishermen are often frustrated by the fact that they have largely followed the quotas imposed but that their counterparts in other countries have not.
Conservationists are not only highly concerned about the sheer number of swordfish that are being caught but they are also concerned with standard catching practices. On this issue, their target of criticism is the government for failing to introduce and effectively implement rules and regulations as well as the fishermen who continue to use drift nets and longlines as the main means by which to catch swordfish. Since about 1962, these popular but controversial methods have replaced harpooning. A 1991 UN resolution stipulated that drift nets could not be longer than two and one half kilometers. Drift nets less than two and one half kilometers, however, are still widely used throughout the fishing industry. 4
Longlines consist of a fishing line up to 80 miles in length that is baited with a countless number of hooks and are thus an equally, if not more so, cruel way in which to entrap marine mammals. Longlines do not target a single species but rather entrap whatever happens to come along, including baby swordfish, sea turtles and other marine wildlife.
Such indiscriminatory fishing practices have led to the inability of swordfish to adequately reproduce and contribute to the survival of their species. The average size of swordfish that have been caught has drastically declined from 266 pounds or more to about 90 pounds since the 1960s. This is a clear reflection of the fact that more immature, baby swordfish are being caught. Nearly 90 percent are caught before they are mature enough to breed. It has been estimated that the number of swordfish able to breed has declined by about 20 percent in the last 15 years.
Furthermore, what happens to these baby swordfish that are not adequate in size and the countless number of other marine wildlife that are entrapped and not wanted? Bycatch or Bykill refers to the marine wildlife that is caught, often accidentally killed as a result of their entrapment and then merely just discarded. Some of the unwanted fish and other marine wildlife are kept but most are thrown back into the sea as waste. Conservationists do not see this as a natural consequence of the fishing industry but rather as a result of neglectful and harmful fishing practices. 5
Since swordfish migrate, regulation within one country is largely ineffective unless it is accompanied by comparable regulatory measures in other countries. Indeed, this is an issue that must be addressed both domestically and internationally. ICCAT has been designated the international body responsible for addressing the problem of swordfish depletion by setting catch levels for individual member nations. However, many argue that ICCAT has consistently and unrealistically set these levels too high. A further point of contention is that the cut in quotas adopted by ICCAT will actually have the reverse effect than originally intended. The set quota does not count the amount of bycatch that is thrown back into the ocean. Another obstacle is that as an international body with overarching responsibilities, ICCAT is limited in its ability to oversee the implementation of these measures in individual member states. Instead, invidual governments are responsible for enforcing measures set by ICCAT and this is not always done uniformly across all countries. Some apply stricter measures on their fishermen and related fishing activities while others apply more lax rules. Many conservationists also point to the fact that by lowering the minimum size of swordfish to 33 pounds, ICCAT has, in effect, conduced the practice of catching immature baby swordfish. Even at 90 pounds, female swordfish are not yet mature enough to reproduce.
The United States has taken measures to remedy this problem by calling for the implementation of more sustainable catching practices. However, when compared to the few actual results, intentions are rendered meaningless. The response of the U.S. federal government, like that of ICCAT, has also been highlighted by inadequacies. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is the government agency responsible for managing and restoring the swordfish population. One of its main goals is to ensure that countries are obeying quota limits. Actions taken by NMFS, however, have insufficiently addressed the measures proposed under the 1996 Sustainable Fisheries Act. NMFS has not proposed any further measures to replenish the swordfish population and has not introduced measures to prevent overfishing. Furthermore, it has not promoted stricter regulations on current fishing practices. Instead, in 1997, it proposed to keep the existing U.S. fishing fleet which included allowing the continuance of the use of longlines and drift nets.6
Despite this frustration with the inadequate response of the government, one must recognize and appreciate the fact that the United States must act within a multitude of constraints. Many obstacles stand in the way of enacting effective domestic legislation. One of the main obstacles that the United States faces is that the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA) stipulates that the U.S. government cannot set its catch levels below this internationally determined level. This somewhat limits the domestic government's ability to address the issue of swordfish depletion but does not eliminate it altogether. The U.S. government can still take positive action to regulate domestic fishing practices.
The backlash against the continuance of harmful fishing practices has spurred action among the general public. Many campaigns have emerged to raise public awareness about the issue. One such campaign is the "Give the Swordfish a Break" campaign in which environmental organizations such as SeaWeb SeaWeb and the National Resources Defense Council Natural Resources Defense Council and prominent restaurant chefs have come together to protest overfishing. These chefs see it as their public duty to set an example and take swordfish off of their menu. Among the many restaurants who have stopped serving swordfish are Nora's in Washington, Hamilton's in Baltimore and Le Bernardin in New York City.
The goal of this campaign is to raise awareness on the part of the general public as well as that of the government. Increased public awareness means more pressure on the government to properly deal with this issue. These prominent chefs want to see the swordfish population restored and are not calling for a permanent boycott but for a temporary "break". This break, they argue, will allow for appropriate measures such as legislation guaranteeing better fishing practices. The recognition of Atlantic swordfish depletion is recognized as an important pressing issue for both conservationists and fishermen alike. Most recognize that the long-term benefits of ensuring the survival of the species will far outweigh the short-term benefits. Thus, this campaign is not targeted at the fishing industry but more at the government for its inaction and ineffective policies thus far.7
Shrimp and Sea Turtle Protection
ICCAT has set quotas for countries that stipulates the amount of swordfish and other marine wildlife that each member country can catch. Many, however, are not satisfied with this amount and some even say that this action has come too little too late. A related problem is that countries that the negotiated international level remains the standard and countries that aim to lower their quotas cannot unilaterally do so. Those who are not satisfied with how this issue has been addressed do recognize that quotas are necessary but they also argue that much of the problem lies in the fact that such unsustainable fishing practices have been allowed to continue. In order to reach a long-term solution quotas need to be imposed to ensure that no further depletion of the species will take place but fishing practices must also be changed. The Ocean Wildlife Campaign and American Sportfishing Association believes that drift nets and drift longlines should be replaced by other methods that do not unintentionally harm marine wildlife. It also believes that this issue must be addressed internationally at the United Nations General Assembly meeting to be held in December 1998. Issues that should be brought to the table include the issue of bykill and how to enact measures to reduce bykill. 8
This issue obviously goes beyond domestic action and must be a collective effort on the part of the international community. Action taken by ICCA has established the precedent for international action but will not be enough in itself unless it undertakes more rigorous reforms of current fishing practices. The United Nations has also taken some positive steps in the right direction. However, an effective, binding policy will only emerge if the international community makes a commitment to work together on finding a way to remedy the problem. Countries must work together to establish acceptable standards and practices. In addition, we must address issues concerning the level at which regulation should occur. Yes, this is an international issue as it affects fishing practices in all countries but should individual countries be able to set their quotas lower than the international standard? Does allowing a country to set lower quotas undermine the legitimacy of international decision-making bodies? These are questions that are raised by such an issue and ones that must be addressed. Indeed, many in the fishing and food industries point to their frustration that U.S. fisherman are meeting their quotas yet they are still being punished because other countries are not.
For all purposes of this case study, the main country of focus is the United States. However, the number of countries that will be affected by decisions concerning quotas on and regulations on the catching of swordfish reaches far beyond just one nation. Furthermore, decisions that are made to protect swordfish will set an international precedent. It will make a statement that commercial practices that are harmful to the environment will not be tolerated no matter how great the financial returns are seen to be.
Again, this issue highlights the tension that exists between state and international law. Each state will face a unique set of challenges that reflect the sentiments and beliefs of their people. These states, however, will not likely be able to respond differently to their situation and set their own standards but must act within those rules and regulations that have been set at an international level. International rules and regulations might set a standard for all to follow but may also leave some leeway for individual state interpretation or implementation.
a. Geographic Domain: United States.
b. Geographic Site: North Atlantic which includes the entire Atlantic Ocean north of 5 degrees North latitude. Solid data is hard to come across, but the swordfish population is severly depleted in the North Atlantic while in other areas, such as the Pacific, the populations are not in as much jeopardy.
c. Geographic Impact: United States. However, those that will be affected by international regulations would be the thirty-six member states of the ICCA and even non-member states. Since swordfish can be found throughout the world, this is an issue that will affect all states.
Ken Hinman, the President of the National Coalition for Marine Conservation, stresses that the role of the swordfish in the world's oceans is necessary to maintain a healthy balance in the ecosystem. He adds that swordfish are one of the top predatory species in the world's oceans and are at the top of the food chain.9 Adult swordfish prey on squid, pelagic and demersal fishes and crustations. Larvae swordfish eat fish larvae and zooplankton while juveniles eat squid and small fishes. Among the few enemies of the swordfish, are sperm, killer whales and large sharks.
Quotas have been proposed as the primary means of addressing this issue. However, quotas by themselves may not have the expected long-term effects. They must be accompanied by measures to regulate and eradicate the use of harmful fishing practices. If quotas are imposed but the use of driftnets and long lines still entrap innocent wildlife, an effective policy will not emerge.
a. Directly Related to Product: Yes. Quotas will impact the number of swordfish that is allowed to be caught, thus reducing the possibility of extinction of the species.
b. Indirectly Related to Product: Yes. The call to eliminate the use of drift nets and drift lines affects the manner in which not only swordfish, but in which other marine wildlife are caught. Drift nets and drift lines entrap any kind of marine wildlife, not just the intended target which in this case, is swordfish. Changing existing fishing practices that harm swordfish will also contribute to increased awareness of the need to protect the environment and the animals and wildlife that live in it.
c. Not Related to Product: No
d. Related to Process: Species Loss Sea
Depletion of swordfish will mean there is less to be caught and will result in lower values of the stock as well as lower revenues for fishing vessels and individual business and fishermen. The federal government has also estimated that fishery depletions have resulted in an $8 billion loss for the United States each year, accompanied by the loss of 300,000 jobs. Furthermore, the depletion of the swordfish stock has led to the restriction of recreational fishing which also results in large losses for vessels and businesses. If the fishing industry fights quotas and restrictions on fishing practices, it will not only face a loss in the value of the fishing stock but it will simultaneously face downward pressure on revenues, profits and wages.10
Another cost comes from the sheer amount of swordfish that are discarded as bycatch. In 1996, the average amount of swordfish that was discarded was 40,000. Shore to Door Seafood, a company that sells swordfish meat to consumers, estimated a wholesale price of about $5.50/lb. for swordfish meat. If one multiplies this price by the average weight of the swordfish that are caught, which is 90 lbs, the average cost of the amount of swordfish lost to bycatch is $19.8 million. Presently discarded swordfish is not included in the quota limits and therefore, poses a cost which could effectively be eliminated if discards were counted against the quotas. It should also be noted that swordfish prices are based on size and quality, not by country of origin. 11
Fisheries have also seen a loss of about $27 billion annually due to development that destroy inshore habitats. This is not a cost directly due to the overfishing of swordfish but it does add into the cost if we allow these development projects to continue destroying these natural habitats.12
Some in the fishing industry often argue that imposing quotas will essentially have the same effect as extinction of the species. That is, it will be detrimental to their industry. However, one must weigh the short-term benefits against the long-term benefits. Quotas will regulate the amount of swordfish that fishermen can catch. There may be an initial loss in profits but weigh that against the disastrous situation the fishing industry would experience in the longer run if the species was exterminated.
Average loss of $8 billion/year for U.S. caused by depletion |
Average loss of 300,000 jobs |
Average loss of $27 billion/year for fisheries due to habitat losses |
Average of $19.8 billion/year lost on discarded swordfish or bycatch |
Average Total Cost: $35,019,800,000 + 300,000 jobs |
Unfortunately, there is not much available data on how much it costs to preserve the swordfish. Ken Hinman, the Director of the National Coalition for Marine Conservation states that such a figure would include the amount that the government, the private sector and international agencies actually contribute to the preservation of the species.
The depletion of swordfish in the Atlantic has both direct and indirect impacts on trade. While just over half of the swordfish is provided by domestic fishermen, the United States also imports a large amount of swordfish from other countries. From 1992 to 1996, the U.S. imported an average of 11.8 million pounds of swordfish each year.12International standards have set a uniform level of quotas for each member state. However, there are future implications if states fight such regulation and seek to determine their own quotas. If this happens and states adopt different quotas, trade among nations may be affected.
Name: Swordfish or commonly referred to as the broadbill swordfish. Swordfish live in the oceans of the world, in temperate and tropical seas. Its size ranges from 4 to five feet in length and 150 to 1,000 pounds. The large sword is used for both feeding and self-defense against predators.
Type: Atlantic Swordfish
IUCN Status: North Atlantic Swordfish has been identified as an endangered species on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature's "Redlist" of Threatened Animals.
1. McCrae, Jean, " Oregon Developmental Species: Swordfish, Xiphias Gladeus," Internet document from the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 1994, p. 1-6.
2. Grassroutes Computer Services, Ltd., " The Swordfishing Industry, " 1997, p. 1-2. (http://www.grassroutes.ns.ca/seafoods/sword.htm)
3. McCrae, Jean, " Oregon Developmental Species: Swordfish, Xiphias Gladeus," Internet document from the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 1994, p. 1-6.
4. National Audubon Society, " Indiscriminate Slaughter at Sea," Internet document, 1998, p. 1-3. (http://www.audubon.org/campaign/lo/ow/iss.html)
5. Natural Resources Defense Council, " Swordfish in the North Atlantic: The Case for Conservation," Internet document, January 1998, p. 1-12. Was also included in the Press Kit distributed by NRDC and Seaweb. (http://www.nrdd.org/nrdc/nrdcpro/water/nasfrep.html)
6. Natural Resources Defense Council, " Swordfish in the North Atlantic: The Case for Conservation," Internet document, January 1998, p. 1-12. Was also included in the Press Kit distributed by NRDC and Seaweb. (http://www.nrdd.org/nrdc/nrdcpro/water/nasfrep.html)
7. Natural Resources Defense Council and SeaWeb, A Project of the Pew Charitable Trusts, Press Kit, " Give Swordfish a Break Campaign," Washington DC and New York, 1998, p. 1-6.(http://www.nrdd.org/nrdc/nrdcpro/water/nasfrep.html)
8. National Audubon Society, " Indiscriminate Slaughter at Sea," Internet document, 1998, p. 1-3. (http://www.audubon.org/campaign/lo/ow/iss.html)
9. Hinman, Ken. National Coalition for Marine Conservation. Telephone interview. 8 April 1998.
10. Natural Resources Defense Council, " Swordfish in the North Atlantic: The Case for Conservation," Internet document, January 1998, p. 1-12. Was also included in the Press Kit distributed by NRDC and Seaweb.
11. Average discard figure from Natural Resources Defense Council, " Swordfish in the North Atlantic: The Case for Conservation," Internet document, January 1998, p. 1-12. Was also included in the Press Kit distributed by NRDC and Seaweb. Wholesale prices from Shore to Door Seafood, 8 April 1998.
12. Lee, Mercedes and Carl Safina, " A Storm is Brewing Over Our Oceans," from the Friends of the National Zoo Archives, Internet document, 1997, p. 1-4. (http://www.fonz.org/zgstorm.htm)
13. Natural Resources Defense Council, " Swordfish in the North Atlantic: The Case for Conservation," Internet document, January 1998, p. 1-12. Was also included in the Press Kit distributed by NRDC and Seaweb.
Go to All Cases
Go to TED Geography