TED Case Studies

Japan Driftnet Fishing

     CASE NUMBER:        251
     CASE MNEMONIC:      DRIFTJAP
     CASE NAME:          Japan Driftnet Fishing

I.  IDENTIFICATION

1.  The Issue

In early 1980s Japanese fleets, as well as Taiwan and South Korea,
came to use large-scale driftnets in the North Pacific Ocean to
catch salmon, tuna, squid, etc. A driftnet typically stretches as
wide as 40 miles and traps any species in the wide area.1 Among
victims are marine mammals such as whale, dolphin, porpoise, fur
seal; and other sea animals such as sea turtle and even sea birds.2
Also driftnet fishing by Japanese and other Asian fleet is believed
to have contributed to a decrease in the population of such
economically valuable fish as tuna, marlin, swordfish, salmon,
etc., in the North Pacific Ocean.3  The U.S., Canada and Russia,
all of which have their own fishery industry respectively, were
concerned about the rapid destruction of valuable sea resources by
those Asian fleets and in fact tried to restrict their fishing in
the North Pacific region.4 As pressures from the U.S., Canada,
Russia increased, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution
which bans driftnet fishing in the high seas effective December
1992.5 As a result, Japan has halted driftnet fishing on the high-
seas ever since.

2.   Description

Driftnets have been commonly used by many countries in coastal
waters. However, Japanese driftnet fishing began to draw America's
attention in the mid-1980s when Japan and other Asian countries
began to send large fleets to the North Pacific Ocean to catch
mainly tuna and squid.6 Those fishing boats were blamed not only
for the indiscriminate destruction of sea lives but also for the
poaching of North Pacific salmon.7 Japan operated about 900
driftnet vessels and earned $300 million a year.8

Driftnet usually have a length of as long as 60 kilometers and
indiscriminately snare not only target species but also a variety
of marine mammals, fish species, sea birds, sea turtles, etc.9 Even
dolphins and young whales fall a victim to them. That is why those
nets are called "walls of death."10 According to the 1990 observer
report on Japan's squid driftnet fishery, "in addition to the 7.9
million squid caught by these 74 [Japanese] vessels, 3.2 million
pomret, over 253,000 tuna, 82,000 blue sharks, over 30,000 sea
birds, nearly 10,000 salmonids were entangled in squid driftnets."11

Driftnet fishery inflicted not only an ecological damage to oceans
but also economic damage to coastal regions. As noted above, a
great amount of tuna and salmon was intercepted by Japanese fleets
on the high seas, though the target of those vessels was only
squid. A large majority of have "mother rivers" in the U.S. or
Canada where local governments and the private sectors invested in
restoring or enhancing salmon and other fish resources. For
example, in Oregon the state government alone spent $30 million for
two year period from 1989 to 1991 for that purpose in addition to
the private sector investment.12  Ironically, these programs are
being curtailed in 1996 as federal budget cuts to programs have
reduced funding.  In February, many in Oregon were prematurely
released due to lack of funding.  This will probably kill all of
them.

Besides legal fleets, illegal vessels were also reportedly poaching
U.S.-origin salmon. Some Japanese and Taiwanese ships had been
catching valuable migrant fish within the U.S. Exclusive Economic
Zone or just outside of it. Those illegal activities curtailed the
flow of those fish into the United States.13 Furthermore, many
salmon smuggling cases were reported in which salmon caught by
Taiwanese fleets were smuggled into Japan, by way of the United
States to circumvent "both Taiwanese and Japanese export/import
prohibitions."14

Those uncovered cases seemed to be just the tip of iceberg. The
"illegally caught fish from these [Asian] driftnetters compete
directly with our [American] legally taken fish in the market
place, but with much cheaper cost."15 The practice has both
environemntal and economic impacts.  "So not only are they [Asians]
intercepting fish that should be caught and processed by us
[Americans], but by dumping these products into the market place at
cheap prices, they also depress the price. These are difficult
times in the [American] sea food industry. Fishermen and processors
can"t afford these adversities."16

To deal with these ecological and economical concerns, the United
States Congress passed Driftnet Impact Monitoring, Assessment, and
Control Act in 1987. It required that the U.S. government
"negotiate cooperative agreements with those countries conducting
high seas driftnet fisheries that take U.S. marine resources in the
North Pacific Ocean."17 In line with the Act, the United States
concluded bilateral agreements with Japan and, Taiwan and South
Korea in 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991.18 Those agreements "established
scientific monitoring and enforcement programs for driftnet
fisheries in the North Pacific Ocean."19 In these programs,
scientists from North America and Asian countries " monitored the
number of fish, mammals, sea birds, and other living marine
resources taken by driftnet fleets."20 In addition, Asian vessels
were strictly observed under these program "so that these fleets do
not operate in areas where they may take U.S.-origin salmonids."21

In 1989, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a Driftnet
Resolution (44/225) which called for "a conditional moratorium on
high-seas driftnet fishing by June 30, 1992."22 It is also called
for "cooperation among coastal states and relevant national and
regional organization in the collection and sharing of
statistically sound scientific data in order to assess the impact
of driftnet fishing methods on living marine resources."23 The
United States was the primary proponent of the Resolution and the
bilateral agreements between U.S. and Asian countries reflected the
central ideas of the Resolution.24

In 1991, United Nations General Assembly adopted another Driftnet
Resolution (46/215) which called for "a global moratorium on large-
scale high-seas drifrnet fishing effective December 31, 1992.25 In
line with the UN Resolution 46/215, Japan has completely halted
large-scale high-seas driftnet fisheries, including those in North
Pacific Ocean.

Japan has engaged in fishery of its coastal area since the
beginning of its history. Japan is an island country and has a long
coast line, therefore, fish have been the primary source of protein
for Japanese people. They seldom ate beef, pork, chicken or other
animals partly due to their religion. No matter how strong demands
for fish have existed in Japan, technological limits have prevented
them from catching fish in large quantity. Even whaling have long
been seen only in the coastal area. Technological advancement
enabled Japanese fishermen to go as far as the opposite side of the
globe, searching for economically valuable fish and mammals
including tuna, squid, salmon and whale.

In addition to technological progress, an increase in demand for
fish encouraged fishermen to go to the high-seas. For a majority of
Japanese people, tuna, salmon, whale, etc. have been very precious
and, therefore, expensive food. It is not until the middle of this
century that ordinary Japanese people became to be able to buy
them. In this sense, we can say that an increase in income of
Japanese people did send many Japanese fleets to the high-seas all
over the world. Japanese tradition of eating fish or whale per se
is not bad; instead, a rapid progress of technology and a rapid
increase of income might be responsible for the destruction of sea
environment and resources by Japanese fleets. However, Japan has no
excuses for exploiting ocean resources. Nearsighted pursuit of
short-run profits must have caused the conflicts with other nations
and it will in turn damage not only the sea environment but also
the long-run benefits of Japanese fishing industry. 

3.   Related Cases

     TUNA case
     GILLNET case
     UKCOD case
     CANCOD case
     TURBOT case
     SHARK case
     SALMON case
     SHRIMP case

     Keyword Clusters    
     (1): Forum                    = UN
     (2): Bio-geography            = OCEAN
     (3): Environmental Problem    = Species Loss Sea [SPLS]



4.   Draft Author:  Takashi Morioka

B.   LEGAL Cluster

5. Discourse and Status: AGReement and COMPlete

As Japan has halted high-seas driftnet fishery since 1993 in
compliance with UN Resolution 46/215, North Pacific driftnet
fishing dispute between Japan and the United States (Canada) can be
said to have been resolved.

6.   Forum and Scope: UN and MULTIlateral

Many bilateral talks were held to deliberate the issue between U.S.
and Japan and both parties in fact reached several agreements on
concrete regulatory steps. However, since marine resources
preservation is by nature a global issue and the U.S. used UN
General Assembly as a tool to effectively apply pressures to
driftnet users, the issue was finally taken up at UN level.

7.   Decision Breadth: 100+

Important Resolutions over driftnet fishing were adopted by UN
General Assembly, though only the United States, Canada and Japan
were directly involved in this particular dispute.

8.   Legal Standing: TREATY

United States General Assembly Resolution 46/215 

Several UN resolutions and bilateral agreement had existed that
partially regulated the driftnet fishery since mid-1980s, however,
the above listed resolution finally terminated the Japanese high-
seas driftnet fishing.

C. GEOGRAPHY Cluster

9.   Geography
     a. Geographic Domain:         Pacific Ocean 
     b. Geographic Site:           North Pacific Ocean 
     c. Geographic Impact:         Japan 

10.  Sub-National Factors: NO

11.  Type of Habitat: OCEAN

12.  Type of Measure: Regulatory Ban [REGBAN]

13.  Direct vs. Indirect Impacts:  DIRect

14.  Relation of trade Measure to Resource Impact

     Directly Related:        Yes  FISH
     Indirectly Related:      No
     Not Related:             No
     Process:                 Yes  Species Loss Sea [SPLS]

The U.S. banned the import of tuna. This must have discouraged the
Japanese fleets from catching tuna in the high-seas to some extent.
Japan also banned the imports of tuna from Taiwan to discourage the
Taiwanese boats from poaching tuna in the North Pacific, though
some Taiwanese tried to smuggle tuna into Japan via the U.S. 

15.  Trade Product Identification: FISH

16.  Economic Data

Industry output is about about $30 million a year and roughly
10,000 fishermen were directly involved in the high-seas driftnet
fishery 

17.  Impact of Trade Restriction: LOW

18.  Industry Sector: FOOD

19.  Exporter and Importer:  MANY and JAPAN

D.   ENVIRONMENT Cluster

20.  Environmental Problem: Species Loss Sea [SPLS] 

21.  Species

     Name:          MANY
     Type:          MANY
     Diversity:     MANY

22.  Resource and Effect: MEDium and SCALE

23.  Uruguay and Lifetime: LOW and MANY

24.  Substitute: LIKE products

Other fishing methods will be employed though output will
dramatically decrease. A subsequent lack of supply will be
partially covered by an increase in imports or be partially cleared
by means of a price hike.  Consumers might buy fish which have
similar taste.

E.   OTHER Factors

25.  Culture: YES

Though many people in the world have a custom of eating squid,
tuna, salmon, etc., Japanese culture seems to make Japanese people
consume and demand far more fish than most of other peoples. This
strong demand for those species must have sent many driftnet fleets
to high-seas in the North Pacific region.

26.  Human Rights: NO

27.  Trans-Boundary: NO

28.  Relevant Literature

Sagawa, Shigeko. "Net Disagreement, Nature. Vol 345, June 14,     
1990.

United States. "Gist: High-Seas Driftnet Fishing," US Department
of State Dispatch. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office,
1990.

United States. Expansion of the North Pacific High Seas Driftnet  
Fisheries - Hearing before a Subcommittee of the on  Appropriations
United States Senate. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing
Office, 1990.

United States. High Seas Driftnet Fishing - Hearing before the 
National Ocean Policy Study of the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation United States Senate. Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1992.

                           References

1 United States, High Seas Driftnet Fishing - Hearing before the
National Ocean Policy Study of the Committee on Commerce,  Science,
and Transportation United States Senate (Washington DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1992), 11.
2 Ibid.
3 Ibid.
4 United States, Expansion of the North Pacific High Seas
Driftnet Fisheries - Hearing before a Subcommittee of the on 
Appropriations United States Senate (Washington DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1990), 9.
5 United States, "Gist: High-Seas Driftnet Fishing," US Department
of State Dispatch (Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office,
1992), 783.
6 United States, High Seas Driftnet Fishing - Hearing before the
National Ocean Policy Study of the Committee on Commerce,  Science,
and Transportation United States Senate (Washington DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1992), 20, 27.
7 Unite States, Expansion of the North Pacific High Seas
Driftnet Fisheries - Hearing before a Subcommittee of the on 
Appropriations United States Senate (Washington DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1990), 4.
8 Sagawa, Shigeko. "Net Disagreement," Nature Vol 345, June 14,
1990: 567.
9 United States, High Seas Driftnet Fishing - Hearing before the
National Ocean Policy Study of the Committee on Commerce,  Science,
and Transportation United States Senate (Washington DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1992), 27.
10 Ibid., 11.
11 Ibid., 25.
12 Unite States, Expansion of the North Pacific High Seas
Driftnet Fisheries - Hearing before a Subcommittee of the on 
Appropriations United States Senate (Washington DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1990), 45.
13 Ibid., 31.
14 Ibid.
15 Ibid., 63
16 Ibid.
17 United States, High Seas Driftnet Fishing - Hearing before the
National Ocean Policy Study of the Committee on Commerce,  Science,
and Transportation United States Senate (Washington DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1992), 28.
18 United States, "Gist: High-Seas Driftnet Fishing," US Department
of State Dispatch (Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office,
1992), 783. 
19 Ibid.
20 Ibid.
21 Ibid.
22 United States, High Seas Driftnet Fishing - Hearing before the
National Ocean Policy Study of the Committee on Commerce,  Science,
and Transportation United States Senate (Washington DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1992), 26.
23 Ibid.
24 Ibid.
25 United States, "Gist: High-Seas Driftnet Fishing," US Department
of State Dispatch (Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office,
1992), 783.