Advertisement

Case One: Driftnet Fishing

  • Isao Miyaoka
Chapter
  • 48 Downloads
Part of the St Antony’s Series book series

Abstract

It took only the three years between 1989 and 1991 for international campaigns against large-scale pelagic driftnet fishing to phase out the 100-year-old Japanese practice on the high seas. Driftnet fishing was conducted globally, with albacore fisheries in the North Pacific, the South Pacific, and the Indian Oceans; the squid and salmon fisheries in the North Pacific; and fisheries for swordfish in the Mediterranean.1 The driftnet fishing issue became the first case in the history of the United Nations (UN) in which Japan and the United States introduced conflicting draft resolutions to a committee of the UN General Assembly.2 Eventually, in November 1991, Japan decided not to conduct large-scale driftnet fishing on the high seas from January 1993.3

Keywords

United Nations Yellowfin Tuna International Whaling Commission General Assembly Resolution Fishery Agency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    UN General Assembly, 45th Session, Large-Scale Pelagic Driftnet Fishing and its Impact on the Living Marine Resources of the Worlds Oceans and Seas: Report of the Secretary-General A/45/663 (October 26, 1990), pp. 19–36.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Asahi shinbun (November 4, 1989), p. 3; Nihon keizai shinbun (November 4, 1989), p. 1; The International Herald Tribune (November 8, 1989).Google Scholar
  3. 4.
    UN General Assembly Resolution 44/225: Large-scale Pelagic Driftnet Fishing and its Impact on the Living Marine Resources of the World’s Oceans and Seas, in UN General Assembly, 44th Session, Official Records, Supplement 49, Resolutions and Decisions Adopted by the General Assembly during its Forty-Fourth Session: Volume I A/44/49 (1989), pp. 147–8.Google Scholar
  4. 5.
    South Pacific Forum, Review of Driftnet Fishing in the South Pacific Ocean — Issues and Impacts: The South Pacific Perspective (submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, August 1991), pp. 43–50.Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    World Resources Institute, World Resources 1992–93: A Guide to the Global Environment (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), p. 181; The Guardian (September 27, 1991); The Daily Telegraph (October 5, 1991); Asahi shinbun (October 30, 1991), p. 11; The Financial Times (August 25, 1992).Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    Ono Seiichiro, “K6kai shigen no goriteki riyo eno teigen” [Suggestions toward Rational Utilization of High Seas Resources], p. 209, in Kitahara Takeshi, ed., Kujira ni manabu [Learning from Whales] (Tokyo: Naruyamado Shoten, 1996), pp. 208–24.Google Scholar
  7. 8.
    The fishing that expanded onto the high seas was placed under a limited entry licensing system in 1990, which allowed more than 200 boats. At the beginning of 1992, a ban was introduced in this fishing as well. In 1990, approximately, 2000 fishermen on 150 vessels produced a yield of 30,000 tons. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Fisheries Division, “Kokai nagashiami gyogyo mondai” [High Seas Driftnet Fishing Issue], (Tokyo, June 18, 1992), p. 1; Yomiuri shinbun (November 26, 1991, evening edition), p. 2.Google Scholar
  8. 9.
    Japan Fisheries Association, “The High Seas Driftnet Issue: What is Known and What is Not Known” (Tokyo, March 1991).Google Scholar
  9. 10.
    Japan Fisheries Association, “The High Seas Driftnet Issue”; Asahi shinbun (October 16, 1990), p. 29.Google Scholar
  10. 13.
    Japan Fisheries Association, Fisheries ofJapan 1991 (Tokyo, 1991), p. 24.Google Scholar
  11. 15.
    Fisheries Agency, Gyogyo hakusho: Heisei 3 nendo [White Paper on Fisheries: Fiscal Year 1991] (Tokyo: Norin Tokei Kyokai, 1992), p. 23; The International Herald Tribune (November 27, 1991).Google Scholar
  12. 16.
    Japan Fisheries Association, “The High Seas Driftnet Issue.”Google Scholar
  13. 20.
    Nihon keizai shinbun (September 29, 1989, evening edition), p. 2; The International Herald Tribune (September 25, 1989).Google Scholar
  14. 25.
    Kazuo Sumi, “International Legal Issues concerning the Use of Driftnets with Special Emphasis on Japanese Practices and Responses,” p. 53, in Ellen Hey, William T. Burke, Doris Ponzoni, and Kazuo Sumi, eds, The Regulation of Driftnet Fishing on the High Seas: Legal Issues (Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 1991), pp. 45–73.Google Scholar
  15. 26.
    Edward E. Wolfe, “U.S. Responsibilities in International Fisheries Matters,” a Statement in Washington DC on May 2, 1989 by Deputy Assistant Secretary for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, Current Policy No. 1172 (Washington DC: United States Department of State, 1989).Google Scholar
  16. 27.
    Asahi shinbun (November 1, 1989, evening edition), p. 2; Yomiuri shinbun (November 2, 1989, evening edition), p. 2.Google Scholar
  17. 29.
    The Economist (August 5, 1989), p. 68; The Christian Science Monitor (July 27, 1989).Google Scholar
  18. 30.
    South Pacific Forum, Review of DrifMet Fishing in the South Pacific Ocean, p. 11; Nihon keizai shinbun (June 29, 1989), p. 8.Google Scholar
  19. 31.
    “Tarawa Declaration,” in South Pacific Forum, Review of Drifinet Fishing in the South Pacific Ocean, pp. 41–2; Geoffrey Palmer, Environmental Politics: A Greenprint for New Zealand (Dunedin, New Zealand: John Mclndoe, 1990), p. 36; Yomiuri shinbun (July 12, 1989), p. 7; Yomiuri shinbun (August 4, 1989), p. 11; Asahi shinbun (July 29, 1989), p. 4.Google Scholar
  20. 33.
    In September, the conference of the members of the SPF Fisheries Agency again called for a ban on Japan’s driftnet fishing. Nihon keizai shinbun (September 28, 1989, evening edition), p. 2.Google Scholar
  21. 34.
    Nihon keizai shinbun (July 15, 1989), p. 4; Asahi shinbun (July 29, 1989), p. 4; Yomiuri shinbun (August 4, 1989), p. 11; The Economist (August 5, 1989), p. 68.Google Scholar
  22. 35.
    Suisan Nenkan Henshu Iinkai, ed., Suisan nenkan 1990 [Fisheries Yearbook 1990] (Tokyo: Suisansha, 1990), p. 90; Nihon keizai shinbun (September 15, 1989), p. 5; The International Herald Tribune (September 20, 1989).Google Scholar
  23. 36.
    UN General Assembly, 45th Session, Large-Scale Pelagic Driftnet Fishing and its Impact on the Living Marine Resources of the Worlds Oceans and Seas, pp. 4–6. The Governing Council of the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) discussed this issue in May 1989.Google Scholar
  24. 38.
    Nihon keizai shinbun (September 29, 1989), p. 7; Nihon keizai shinbun (October 13, 1989), p. 7; Yomiuri shinbun (October 13, 1989, evening edition), p. 2.Google Scholar
  25. 40.
    Mainichi shinbun (October 26, 1989), p. 9; Nihon keizai shinbun (October 26, 1989), p. 5.Google Scholar
  26. 41.
    Asahi shinbun (November 4, 1989), p. 3; Nihon keizai shinbun (November 4, 1989), p. 1; The International Herald Tribune (November 8, 1989).Google Scholar
  27. 42.
    Suisan Nenkan Henshil Iinkai, ed., Suisan nenkan 1991, p. 90; Nihon keizai shinbun (November 7, 1989, evening edition), p. 2; Asahi shinbun (November 19, 1989), p. 9.Google Scholar
  28. 44.
    Nihon keizai shinbun (December 12, 1989, evening edition), p. 2; Asahi shinbun (December 12, 1989, evening edition), p. 2; Mainichi shinbun (December 13, 1989), p. 9.Google Scholar
  29. 54.
    UN General Assembly, 45th Session, Provisional Verbatim Record of the 71st Meeting A/45/PV.71 (January 11, 1991), pp. 21–2. For UN General Assembly Resolution 45/197: Large-scale Pelagic Driftnet Fishing and Its Impact on the Living Marine Resources of the World’s Oceans and Seas, see UN General Assembly, 45th Session, Official Records, Supplement 49 A, Resolutions and Decisions Adopted by the General Assembly during its Forty-Fifth Session: Volume I A/45/49 (1990), pp. 123–4. For the process of adopting the resolution at the committee level, see UN General Assembly, 45th Session, Development and International Economic Co-operation: Report of the 2nd Committee, part 2 A/45/849/ADD.1 (December 18, 1990), pp. 15–18.Google Scholar
  30. 56.
    UN General Assembly, 46th Session, Report of the Second Committee (Part VII) A/46/645/Add.6 (December 16, 1991); Nihon keizai shinbun (October 11, 1991), p. 3; Nihon keizai shinbun (October 11, 1991, evening edition), p. 1; Nihon keizai shinbun (October 12, 1991), p. 5; Yomiuri shinbun (October 22, 1991, evening edition), p. 22.Google Scholar
  31. 57.
    UN General Assembly, 2nd Committee, 46th Session, Official Records, Summary Record of the 52nd Meeting A/C.2/46/SR. 52 (December 11, 1991), para. 61; UN General Assembly, 46th Session, Provisional Verbatim Record of the 79th Meeting A/46/PV.79 (January 8, 1992), pp. 64–6; Nihon keizai shinbun (December 21, 1991, evening edition), p. 2. For Resolution 46/215, see UN General Assembly, 46th Session, Official Records, Supplement 49, Resolutions and Decisions Adopted by the General Assembly during its Forty-Sixth Session: Volume I A/46/49 (1991), pp. 147–8.Google Scholar
  32. 58.
    Palmer, Environmental Politics, p. 33. For New Zealand’s foreign policy in the late 1980s, see Richard Kennaway and John Henderson, eds, Beyond New Zealand H: Foreign Policy into the 1990s (Auckland, New Zealand: Longman Paul, 1991).Google Scholar
  33. 60.
    South Pacific Forum, Review of Driftnet Fishing in the South Pacific Ocean, pp. 43–50; 29 I.L.M. 1449 (1990); Mainichi shinbun (November 22, 1989), p. 9; Nihon keizai shinbun (November 30, 1989), p. 7; Nihon keizai shinbun (December 2, 1989), p. 7.Google Scholar
  34. 61.
    Ted L. McDorman, “The GATT Consistency of U.S. Fish Import Embargoes to Stop Driftnet Fishing and Save Whales, Dolphins and Turtles,” George Washinton Journal of International Law and Economics, vol. 24, no. 3 (1991), pp. 477–525.Google Scholar
  35. 62.
    Christopher S. Gibson, “Narrow Grounds for a Complex Decision: The Supreme Court’s Review of an Agency’s Statutory Construction in Japan Whaling Association v. American Cetacean Society,” p. 486, Ecology Law Quarterly, vol. 14 (1987), pp. 485–516.Google Scholar
  36. 65.
    Suisan Nenkan Henshu Iinkai, ed., Suisan nenkan 1990, p. 89; Wolfe, “U.S. Responsibilities in International Fisheries Matters,” p. 2; Asahi shinbun (August 12, 1987), p. 9; Yomiuri shinbun (October 3, 1987), p. 7; Asahi shinbun (May 3, 1989), p. 9.Google Scholar
  37. 66.
    UN General Assembly, 45th Session, Large-Scale Pelagic Driftnet Fishing and its Impact on the Living Marine Resources of the Worlds Oceans and Seas, para. 91; Suisan Nenkan Henshu Iinkai, ed., Suisan nenkan 1990, p. 90; Yomiuri shinbun (June 24, 1989, evening edition), p. 3.Google Scholar
  38. 67.
    Asahi shinbun (October 26, 1990, evening edition), p. 2; Yomiuri shinbun (October 27, 1989), p. 7; Yomiuri shinbun (August 4, 1989), p. 11; The Christian Science Monitor (July 27, 1989).Google Scholar
  39. 68.
    UN General Assembly, 45th Session, Large-Scale Pelagic Driftnet Fishing and its Impact on the Living Marine Resources of the Worlds Oceans and Seas, para. 25; Asahi shinbun (October 3, 1990, evening edition), p. 18.Google Scholar
  40. 69.
    Ministry of Foreign Affairs, “Kokai nagashiami gyogyo mondai,” p. 2; Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Fisheries Division, “Kankyo to gyogyo mondai” [Environment and Fishing Issue], (Tokyo, December 3, 1992), p. 5; Asahi shinbun (September 19, 1991, evening edition), p. 2; Nihon keizai shinbun (September 19, 1991, evening edition), p.1; Mainichi shinbun (September 20, 1991), p. 11; Yomiuri shinbun (September 21, 1991), p. 7.Google Scholar
  41. 71.
    Asahi shinbun (August 3, 1991, evening edition), p. 2; Yomiuri shinbun (August 3, 1991, evening edition), p. 3; Nihon keizai shinbun (August 3, 1991, evening edition), p. 1; The Guardian (September 13 and 27, 1991); TheInternational Herald Tribune (November 29, 1991); Nihon keizai shinbun (August 3, 1991, evening edition), p. 1.Google Scholar
  42. 74.
    Suisan Nenkan Henshu Iinkai, ed., Suisan nenkan 1989, p. 25; Mizuguchi Kenya, “Umi to kujira eno kakawarikata no tayosei to suisanshigen” [Variety in Relationship with Ocean and the Whale and Fisheries Resources], pp. 69–70, in Kitahara Takeshi, ed., Kujira ni manabu [Learning from Whales] (Tokyo: Naruyamad6 Shoten, 1996), pp. 63–79. The Financial Times of January 30, 1992 reported, “Mexican tuna fishermen, unlike their US counterparts, fish in the eastern tropical Pacific, where for unknown reasons, schools of yellowfin tuna swim below dolphin herds. US tuna boats fish near New Guinea, where dolphins stay apart from the predominantly albacore and skipjack tuna.”Google Scholar
  43. 76.
    “GATT: Dispute Settlement Panel Report on United States Restrictions on Imports of Tuna,” 30 I.L.M. 1594 (1991); World Resources Institute, World Resources 1992–93, p. 182; The Economist (May 4, 1991), p. 91.Google Scholar
  44. 77.
    Gareth Porter and Janet Welsh Brown, Global Environmental Politics: Dilemmas in World Politics, 2nd edn (Oxford: Westview Press, 1996), p. 133.Google Scholar
  45. 79.
    The Fisheries Agency opposed it, pointing out that the bill could be in a violation of the GATT provisions. House of Representatives, Secretariat, Shugiin nôrinsuisan iinkai kaigiroku [Minutes of the Standing Committee on Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries, House of Representatives] (July 28, 1987), pp. 10, 16; House of Councillors, Secretariat, Sangiin norinsuisan iinkai kaigiroku [Minutes of the Standing Committee on Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries, House of Councillors] (July 30, 1987), p. 19; Yomiuri shinbun (September 8, 1987), p. 7.Google Scholar
  46. 85.
    Mainichi shinbun (January 6, 1990, evening edition), p. 10; Asahi shinbun Uanuary 6, 1990, evening edition), p. 12; Asahi shinbun (February 5, 1990), p. 3.Google Scholar
  47. 86.
    Asahi shinbun (July 21, 1990, evening edition), p. 13; Asahi shinbun (October 16, 1990), p. 29; Asahi shinbun (August 16, 1990), p. 26.Google Scholar
  48. 90.
    Asahi shinbun (March 10, 1990), p. 3; Mainichi shinbun (March 10, 1990), p. 3.Google Scholar
  49. 91.
    See, for example, Akao Toshinobu, Chikyu wa uttaeru: Taikenteki chikyu kankyo gaikoron [An Agenda for Global Survival: An Ambassador Reflects on Environmental Protection] (Tokyo: Sekai no Ugokisha, 1993), p. 38.Google Scholar
  50. 92.
    B. Gifford, “Inside the Environmental Groups,” p. 73, Outside (September 1990), pp. 69–84 (quoted in Arne Kalland, “Whose Whale is That? Diverting the Commodity Path,” p. 182, in Milton M. R. Freeman and Urs P. Kreuter, eds, Elephants and Whales: Resources for Whom? (Basel, Switzerland: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, 1994), pp. 159–86); Asahi Shinbunsha, ed., KankyBgaku ga wakaru [Leaning of Ecology] (Asahi Shinbunsha, 1994), p. 125.Google Scholar
  51. 94.
    The Fisheries Agency is headed by a Director-General, who is not a Minister of State but a bureaucrat ranking lower than an Administrative Vice-Minister. The Fisheries Agency is virtually a bureau of MAFF. Management and Coordination Agency, Administrative Management Bureau, Organization of the Government ofJapan 1993 (Tokyo: Institute of Administrative Management, 1993), pp. 118–20.Google Scholar
  52. 98.
    Suisan Nenkan Henshu Iinkai, ed., Suisan nenkan 1993, pp. 294, 300, 315; Asahi shinbun (July 29, 1989), p. 4.Google Scholar
  53. 100.
    Government of Japan, Environment and Development: Japans Experience and Achievement (Tokyo, December 1991), p. 47.Google Scholar
  54. 101.
    Japan Fisheries Association, Fisheries ofJapan 1991, p. 15.Google Scholar
  55. 102.
    Suisan Nenkan Henshu Iinkai, ed., Suisan nenkan 1993, pp. 294, 305.Google Scholar
  56. 105.
    Suisan Nenkan Henshu Iinkai, ed., Suisan nenkan 1993, pp. 294, 297.Google Scholar
  57. 111.
    UN General Assembly, 46th Session, Large-Scale Pelagic Driftnet Fishing and its Impact on the Living Marine Resources of the Worlds Oceans and Seas, para. 137. For the US reaction to this proposal, see ibid., para. 139. The term “by-catch” means “the unintended and unwanted part of the catch.” Milton M. R. Freeman, “Science and Trans-science in the Whaling Debate,” p. 152, in Milton M. R. Freeman and Urs P. Kreuter, eds, Elephants and Whales Resources for Whom? (Basel, Switzerland: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, 1994), pp. 143–57.Google Scholar
  58. 113.
    Mainichi shinbun (November 2, 1991, evening edition), p. 2; Nihon keizai shinbun (November 2, 1991, evening edition), p. 2. The presidential visit was postponed indefinitely. Asahi shinbun (November 6, 1991, evening edition), p. 2; Yomiuri shinbun (November 7, 1991), p. 7.Google Scholar
  59. 122.
    Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries, Statistics and Information Department, Gyogyo yoshokugyo seisan tokei nenpo: Heisei 3 nen [Annual Statistics Report on Fishery and Aquaculture Output: 1991] (Tokyo: Norin Tdkei Kyokai, 1993), pp. 60–7; Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries, Statistics and Information Department, Gyogyo keizai chosa hokoku: Kigyotai no bu, Heisei 3 nendo [Survey Report on Fisheries Economy: Part on Companies, Fiscal Year 1991] (Tokyo: Norin TOkei Kyokai, 1993), pp. 2–3, 86–8.Google Scholar
  60. 123.
    Suisan Nenkan Henshu Iinkai, ed., Suisan nenkan 1993, p. 300.Google Scholar
  61. 124.
    Ministry of Foreign Affairs, “KOkai nagashiami gyogyO mondai,” p. 3; Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries, Gyogyo yoshokugyo seisan tOkei nenpo: Heisei 3 nen, p. 71; The International Herald Tribune (November 27, 1991).Google Scholar
  62. 125.
    Suisan Nenkan Henshu Iinkai, ed., Suisan nenkan 1993, p. 321; Nihon keizai shinbun (November 26, 1991, evening edition), p. 19. A crew member could reportedly net an income of two to three million yen a season. Asahi shinbun (October 16, 1990), p. 29.Google Scholar
  63. 131.
    Nihon keizai shinbun (November 26, 1991, evening edition), p. 1; Mainichi shinbun (November 26, 1991, evening edition), p. 1; Yomiuri shinbun (November 26, 1991, evening edition), p. 2; The International Herald Tribune (November 27, 1991); The Independent (November 27, 1991); The Financial Times (November 27, 1991). The editorial of Nihon keizai shinbun of November 27, 1991 (p. 2) supported the decision by the Japanese government, arguing that the decision was unavoidable for Japan, a nation that has to live in international society.Google Scholar
  64. 134.
    McDorman, “The GATT Consistency of U.S. Fish Import Embargoes to Stop Driftnet Fishing and Save Whales, Dolphins and Turtles,” p. 500. For further legal arguments on driftnet fishing, see Ellen Hey, William T. Burke, Doris Ponzoni, and Kazuo Sumi, The Regulation of Driftnet Fishing on the High Seas: Legal Issues (Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 1991).Google Scholar
  65. 137.
    UN General Assembly, 45th Session, Large-Scale Pelagic Driftnet Fishing and its Impact on the Living Marine Resources of the Worlds Oceans and Seas, para. 92; Suisan Nenkan Henshu Iinkai, ed., Suisan nenkan 1991, p. 90; International North Pacific Fisheries Commission, “Final Report of 1990 Observations of the Japanese High Seas Squid Driftnet Fishery of the North Pacific Ocean” (Seattle: Alaska Fisheries Science Center, 1991), pp. 193–5 (quoted in World Resources Institute, World Resources 1992–93, p. 181).Google Scholar
  66. 138.
    UN General Assembly, 46th Session, Large-Scale Pelagic Driftnet Fishing and its Impact on the Living Marine Resources of the Worlds Oceans and Seas: Report of the Secretary-General A/46/615 (November 8, 1991), para. 121.Google Scholar
  67. 143.
    William T. Burke, Mark Freeberg, and Edward L. Miles, “United Nations Resolutions on Driftnet Fishing: An Unsustainable Precedent for High Seas and Coastal Fisheries Management,” p. 168, Ocean Development and International Law, vol. 25 (1994), pp. 127–86. For a precautionary principle, see Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration.Google Scholar
  68. 160.
    UN General Assembly, 46th Session, Large-Scale Pelagic Driftnet Fishing and its Impact on the Living Marine Resources of the Worlds Oceans and Seas, para. 124. In the report, the Fisheries Agency added that the Japanese squid driftnet fishing was conducted in only 1.7 percent of the North Pacific, and that 90 percent of the sea turtles caught incidentally were thrown back alive. Asahi shinbun (September 28, 1991), p. 3; Mainichi shinbun (September 28, 1991), p. 9: Yomiuri shinbun (September 28, 1991), p. 7.Google Scholar
  69. 161.
    In the meantime, 44.5 percent of people supported the incidental catches of marine mammals and sea birds while 89.1 percent upheld the diet of whale meat. Kawai Tomoyasu, Nihon no gyogyo [Japan’s Fisheries] (Tokyo: Iwanami, 1994), pp. 86–99.Google Scholar
  70. 165.
    US Marine Mammal Commission, Annual Report of the Marine Mammal Commission, Calendar Year 1990 (Marine Mammal Commission, Washington, DC, 1991), p. 101 (quoted in World Resources Institute, World Resources 1992–93, p. 182).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Isao Miyaoka 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Isao Miyaoka
    • 1
  1. 1.Osaka University of Foreign StudiesJapan

Personalised recommendations