San Antonio Express
September 26, 2003

New business plan would benefit shrimpers, environment

By Peter M. Emerson and Pamela B. Baker

Your series "Shrimping in Peril" was a heart-wrenching account of tough times for Gulf of Mexico shrimpers. But it also provides important clues on what might be done to secure a better future for shrimpers and coastal communities.

The shrimping industry desperately needs a comprehensive management overhaul that will foster efficiency and smart business choices to boost standards of living.

Shrimpers shouldn't waste time on dead-end schemes to block imports or win subsidies that create dependency on handouts. And frustrated politicians shouldn't outlaw a way of life.

Instead shrimpers, supported by their communities, should work for better stewardship of the natural resource on which their livelihood depends.

Government regulation of gulf shrimping, like many marine fisheries, has failed because it ignores the incentive that motivates shrimpers to put too many boats and nets in the water. Gulf shrimp were fully exploited in the 1960s, but since then the number of days fished annually has doubled with no increase in catch.

As a result, shrimpers have driven their costs sky-high and alienated fishermen and nature lovers because popular fish and endangered sea turtles drown in their nets.

To escape this waste, regulators need to give shrimpers a direct stake in sustaining the fishery and turn around their incentive to overexpand. This can be accomplished by setting a total allowable catch and assigning it to shrimpers via exclusive quota shares - or, "transferable fishing quotas" - that can be freely bought and sold.

Over time, fishing quotas would be acquired by the most efficient shrimpers through voluntary market transactions. Extra boats and nets would leave the industry, resulting in a major, and likely difficult, downsizing of the fleet. But profits would almost certainly rise and accidental killing of marine life would drop.

Shrimpers and others who would benefit from transferable fishing quotas have several alternatives. A system could be implemented regionwide by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council in cooperation with state regulators.

Or shrimpers might decide to create fishing cooperatives to allocate the catch - dividing the quotas among smaller inshore boats and larger offshore vessels. Or they might favor a regional approach, assigning quotas to shrimpers in designated bays and offshore areas.

Regardless, a new system would integrate successful approaches like turtle and bycatch excluders and season closures.

Properly managing the catching-side of the industry would help shrimpers and allied businesses and complement a strategy to take advantage of changing consumer preferences.

Trends point to a rapidly growing demand for fresh, high-quality, sustainably caught seafood. Gulf shrimpers and wholesalers could capture a share of this market by emphasizing freshness, reliability and the absence of chemical additives.

They could also strive for an industry that has little bycatch, protects turtles, avoids marine debris and complies with rules.

More and more, people care about what they eat, how it is caught or grown and where it comes from. Meeting these conditions - by giving shrimpers more control over their own destiny and taking advantage of new markets - would give a streamlined shrimp industry a chance to contribute to the new coastal economy.

It might also reduce tensions with environmentalists, fishermen and other coastal residents who want less environmental damage and abundant fisheries. It could give the parties a chance to recognize their common interests in maintaining freshwater flows to coastal bays, reducing pollution and saving wetlands.

And if shifting away from commercial fishing and leaving shrimp in the water proves the most valuable use of the resource, then those who benefit can buy the shrimpers' quota shares, providing an efficient and fair way for the economy to grow.

Certainly, this would be compatible with American values and preferable to simply legislating shrimpers out of business.

Peter M. Emerson, a senior economist in Austin, and Pamela Baker, a fisheries biologist in Corpus Christi, work for the public interest group Environmental Defense.