Part 1: Issues
6.1 Stakeholder concerns
6.1.3 Balancing stakeholder needs
way of life for recreational fishers, just as it was for small-scale fishers. Some also pointed out that the sector did not present a threat as it was generally low effort.
… it’s custom and tradition… it’s sort of religion to go fishing and diving… Who are the bigger threat, those commercial guys or the guy that goes out with three people in his boat.
We are not the threat, we low impact, high reward. (R9)
There was also debate around whether recreational fishing made a valuable contribution to the coastal fishing towns. There was doubt as to who precisely benefited from tourism.
The value chain is quite difficult to unravel, but there are lots of jobs that are created downstream of recreation. (R7)
I’m not convinced it’s creating jobs and livelihoods and trickling down to these poor coastal communities. (R10)
The local filling stations employ local people, they stay at local B&Bs during fishing competitions. They require some fishing gear from locals, often they come with their own fishing gear, very specialised… but the bigger issue is that people may not see it coming down to them. (R15)
emphasis on satisfying stakeholders would lead to the detriment of the marine resources. Many feared a situation where one problem would be solved, but with the result that a multitude of others would be created. The question was asked whether it was about what (marine resources) or who (stakeholders) was being managed.
… science doesn’t always go with political needs… I think the Department gave in too soon…
Department is trying to give everybody a chance. (R7)
Some were of opinion that all South Africans deserved equal access to the resources.
… I feel it’s the right of each and every single citizen within the Republic of South Africa…
And it’s a way of enabling each and every citizen to that resource. (R12)
The problem to some was that MCM had not taken accountability for decisions that were made and were now taking away resources from some to give to others.
Now you give to another group of fishers, and you have to take away from them (commercial sector). (R6)
The Equality Court has ordered MCM to give rights to a group… small-scale fishers… the problem is when they did the draft proposal… they mentioned most of these fish will be coming from the recreational sector… (R9)
If you take away, somebody’s going to be affected. (R13)
Certain respondents argued that the only way to move forward was for rights-holders to give up some of their quota.
… start a dialog with the existing rights-holders so they come to the table and that MCM work hard to convince them that some of the rights, the fish they have, will need to be shared with this group. The advantage for them, the gain that can be made for them, is that the industry as a whole will then have more chance of being sustainable because you can address poaching properly. (R10)
Some felt overwhelmed by the negativity directed at the commercial sector.
It’s the perceptions people have, how they see the commercial sector… It’s emotional, it’s coming from both sides… from the near-shore rights-holder and the other side, those that don’t have, that feel that they don’t have a right to it... How the Minister is going to accommodate them in terms of the Act, we don’t know… (R13)
Some were cognisant of the financial losses that the commercial sector suffered as a result of losing quota.
… the commercial sector went to court, because they had a long-term right, they had a loan to the bank, their business was affected… they had a backlog too… (R6)
Reference was made to greed being a driver, as there were people who just wanted to make quick money. Some also pointed to an attitude of entitlement.
… you have individuals driven by greed. And you also have law-abiding individuals, that
“this is my livelihood, this is my right and I’m looking after this and I’m catching only what I’m allowed to catch, so that next year there will still be enough for me to catch and even for future generations”. Some rights-holders or recreationals think that way, but others tend to deviate from the law. And greed is the driver. (R12)
Some felt that it was impossible to satisfy everybody because people had the tendency to want more and more.
… the solution will not be a win-win situation, because there just isn’t enough for everybody.
Somewhere along the line you’ll make people unhappy. The question is who, and whether you’ll have fallout, and that’s the reality of fisheries and fisheries management. It’s worldwide, and there’s no way around this. You have limited resources, you have people, you have conflict. You have to manage conflict as best you can. (R7)
But you may find that those rights are not going to sustain or keep everybody happy. (R8)
Solutions are easy on paper but it never works. (R13)