This post should really be called “Adventures in Info Hell.”

I have been working all term on a 100 page assignment on a certain topic. I have researched it thoroughly.

When it is completed, I will probably upload the entire project… although I doubt anyone will want to read it.

However, I am researching the benefits of implementing Individual Fisher Quotas to manage fisheries.

A commercial fishing vessel in Norway (Hakon Iversen via Flickr)
A commercial fishing vessel in Norway (Hakon Iversen via Flickr)

They are a type of catch share that allocates a certain portion of the particular fishery industry’s Total Allowable Catch to fishermen. It’s a market-based strategy. Quota can be bought and sold and acts sort of like shares on the stock market.

They are being hailed as the savior of the fisheries because they can protect the environment and provide a profitable industry as well instead of constantly making compromises that help neither the fish nor the fishermen.

Here are the environmental benefits:

-IFQs streamline the industry, making it more efficient. This mean less vessels to

-IFQs allow the Total Allowable Catch set in the industry to be lowered without affecting profits

-A fisherman with quota has a guaranteed long-term share in the industry. Something that he’ll want to protect. This means more environmentally-friendly fishing practices.

-IFQs often lengthen the season (after an IFQ system, Alaskan Halibut went from a 3 day season to a season lasting months), which means fishers can be careful about reducing bycatch. It also means fishers don’t catch as much as they can, often overfishing and also flooding the market.

-In some fisheries, if fishers caught more than allowed by the TAC on accident, they would have to dump the fish. This fish was then wasted and no money was gained. Under an IFQ system, quota must be bought to cover this extra fish. It isn’t wasted and because fishers have to pay for quota if they catch more than their quota, they have incentive to be careful.

Unfortunately, although catch share systems have been shown to protect fish stocks and allow them to rebound, there are a variety of social problems associated with IFQs, mainly the allocation of the quota. In Iceland, quotas have been in place for 30 years, but quota has become so concentrated, certain vessels hold a monopoly. The UN ruled that the system was discriminatory. A post on the Iceland Weather Report Blog explains the Iceland situation.

Currently, debates on allocation rights are going on right now as the Pacific Fishery Management Council is attempting to put the groundfish fishery on the West Coast under an IFQ system.

As for me, I will continue to research and read the hundreds of sources I have found on IFQs as I prepare this project for my class, a class lovingly called Info Hell by all parties, including the professors.