The debate on trawling has been reopened following the European Commission’s approval of reducing fishing days. The sustainability of this practice has long been questioned, and measures will now be implemented to reduce « overexploitation of the marine environment. »
The Need for Measures in the Mediterranean
César Bordehore, a biologist from Dianense and a marine ecology professor at the University of Alacant, states that « this is not an arbitrary imposition from Brussels, but a reality reflecting the critical state of marine resources. » He compares the situation to a person suffering from hypertension who ignores medical warnings and fails to take steps to control it. Eventually, the person’s health collapses. In this analogy, Bordehore explains, overfishing is the hypertension, the fishing sector is the patient, and the European Commission is the doctor. « If we keep fishing more than the ecosystem can regenerate, we will reach a point of no return, where marine species won’t have time to reproduce, » he warns.
The drastic reduction to 27 fishing days has been one of the major controversies of the measure. « This number of days was considered optimal by the Commission’s technical team to prevent species from disappearing or remaining at critical levels, » Bordehore explains. He adds, « When we talk about sustainable fishing, it’s like managing economic capital: if you spend more than you have, you end up with nothing. » In this context, Bordehore believes that overfishing generates a « technological response » that worsens the situation, such as increased engine power or more sophisticated equipment that, despite efforts, still fail to catch more fish because there are fewer left. « This creates a vicious cycle that accelerates the collapse. Fish don’t collapse gradually, but suddenly, without warning. » However, he emphasizes that the sector is not to blame for the current situation, as the legislation to prevent the stock from reaching its current levels does not depend on it.
Image: Fresh fish at Calp market
Efforts by marine experts now focus on helping citizens understand the necessity of these measures. « Fish and invertebrate populations are drastically decreasing, and this is proven. Catches in Dénia have dropped by 50% over the past 20 years and continue to decline, » Bordehore highlights. The biologist sees a positive role in the implementation of new measures because « finally, the fishing sector and the European Commission have understood that either we change things, or fishing will disappear as a productive activity in the Mediterranean. »
For his part, Basilio Otero, president of the National Federation of Fishermen’s Guilds, believes that EU measures « are correct to achieve sustainability and are seen as necessary. It’s better to fish less and sell well. » However, the fishing sector has concerns that have not been addressed by Europe, such as « considering that fishing is the same everywhere » or the need to establish agreements with countries that fish in a shared territory like the Mediterranean so that they « implement the same measures. » Another concern is that « imports of foreign products will increase as European fishermen’s fishing opportunities decrease, » says the president of the National Federation of Fishermen’s Guilds. This is why he stresses the need for « a calendar to comply with ecosystemic standards, » similar to the way we have European producers.
More Marine Reserves, « But Well Managed »
Despite the nuances, the common goal is shared: to allow the marine environment to recover, as it is the only way to achieve the productivity of past decades without the ecosystem suffering to the point where it can never be the same again. To guarantee this recovery, Bordehore raises the urgency of creating more marine reserves in the open sea, « because the conflict is not only about quantity, but also the size structure. The largest species are essential for reproduction, as they can generate between 40 and 50% of the fertility of a population, but they are the most fished, » he explains.
The biologist asserts that, ideally, 30% of the sea should be protected, as currently, protected areas are insignificant. « This would allow species to develop without fishing pressure, benefiting biodiversity, and, in the long term, also benefiting fishermen, as the recovered populations could repopulate adjacent areas. » In this regard, Bordehore mentions a recently approved European project involving a group of about twenty partners from various universities to design a large network of marine reserves in the open sea and promote recovery.
Image: Sardine in the port of Dénia
Once again, the president of the National Federation of Fishermen’s Guilds seems to share the scientific view on the issue and says he is « a fan of marine reserves, but well managed, » he specifies. He gives the example of Tabarca, « but there are others in Spain, which I won’t name, that bear the title of marine reserve but don’t function as such. » For this reason, he emphasizes that when managed properly, « The first years are painful, but in the end, the benefit outweighs the cost. » From his point of view, Otero believes this option could « mean the disappearance of many people from the sea, » but acknowledges that « it is a measure for the future, a very interesting model » that, if implemented, should be studied on how to do it gradually.
« Although fishing competence lies with the European Union, member states can anticipate and propose more effective measures, » says Bordehore, who also assures that « the first measure they should implement before anything else is to promote, or rather, facilitate the demolition of ships. » The biologist and Otero highlight that « there are many older boats, and they cause problems for the owners. This is why fishermen have been calling for a solution in this area for a long time. » This proposal would involve state investment to remove these ships from the market and « shut down » each business, a procedure that requires many resources. « If they are not demolished and fishing decreases, businesses will go bankrupt, » the biologist explains.
In terms of measures, the marine ecology expert suggests two other proposals to ensure the sector’s survival. « The second would be to encourage early retirement. Ideally, we should reduce the sector by 20 or 30% in terms of boats and employees. » His second proposal is to ensure that the economic viability of guilds does not depend on the catches made, but rather be something fixed. « I think guilds should be sized and ensure these revenues, and if the target is not reached, they should be paid with public money. Simply because fishing is a public concession, the fish below the sea are public, and a series of boats are authorized to fish them and bring them to market as a service to the public. »
