To Regulate or Not to Regulate

Is the U.S. Fishing Industry Caught in the Net of Chaos?

Federal funding freezes are affecting day to day operational decisions in multiple agricultural sectors. From farming to fishing it's become clear that a significant amount of economic activity is reliant on government agencies, federal regulations and financial support. For fishermen who have struggled to keep business afloat under mounting regulations the freeze is acting as a wrecking ball to a system that many believe is making their livelihoods impossible. For North Atlantic fishermen the freeze has felt more like an obstacle they don’t have the tools to navigate.

The commercial fishing industry in the United States employees over 2 million people and is a vital part of our food security. Much like farms across the midwest, commercial fishing corporations are made up of family operations who have built their businesses over generations and are a core component of coastal economies.  Funding freezes are forcing the fishing industry to identify where protective regulatory measures are hurting economic development and where they are effectively achieving what they were intended to do. 

Fishing Quotas and Sustainability

Reuters reported in late March that the mandatory federal freeze was having a negative impact on the fishing industry because it delayed seasonal start dates and created an employee shortage at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration which resulted in no one around to ensure fishermen were not exceeding harvest limits. While southern fishermen were essentially left unchecked, North Atlantic fishermen have been unable to fish. Could this dynamic go on indefinitely and eventually balance itself out without agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) there to ensure fishing opportunities are fair to the environment as well as all fishermen in the U.S.?

The NOAA employs biologists responsible for surveying fish populations and their impact on coastal ecosystems. It is made up of America's first conservation agencies who united under one organization for the sake of safeguarding the fishing industry largely through scientific study. Since the 1970s fishing businesses have relied on the NOAA to dictate when the fishing seasons start and end for each species and exactly how many fish can be harvested. 

Losing the data and the network of communication for sharing data up and down the coastlines of the U.S. could take away the predictability of an important food supply. Fishing quotas mean someone is ensuring that this year and the next year will be productive years for the industry. Fishing companies don’t have to spend time calculating how many fish they can safely harvest without risking next year's populations. Someone has already calculated what is best for the economy, food security and the environment; and that someone is a federally funded agency responsible for protecting their livelihoods by protecting the environment.

In California, crab fishing is heavily monitored. Area fishermen believe that they are being regulated out of business as season start dates are pushed back every year and harvest quotas numbers are smaller and smaller. Soon there will be no one left who can realistically make a living crab fishing because they will never bring in enough crabs to offset expenses. They argue that sustainability focused initiatives have created a new problem where aquatic populations will not be kept in check because there is no one left who can afford to keep their fishing business afloat. 

While less fishing would most certainly lead to increased aquatic life, it would also remove a needed food supply. The average American consumes 20 pounds of seafood every year which is far less than beef consumption, but still a growing staple of the American diet. To lose even a portion of seafood options would shift consumer purchasing to other protein options like poultry, pork and beef or force more imports of sought after varieties. Amid Avian Flu outbreaks and one of the smallest domestic cattle herds in decades harvesting fewer fish could add further tension to an already taught food supply.

The Economics of a Deregulated Fishing Industry

Economically speaking, the question of regulation is just as nuanced. In the short term, with no one to enforce regulation, northern fishermen worry that migrating fish populations will be smaller and that they will not have enough time to catch the amount of fish they need to at least break even this year. Many have already made financial commitments based on what they believed they would be earning this season in the form of boat equipment upgrades and hiring decisions. Commercial fishing is experiencing competition from fish farms that offer even more predictability in supply which makes current delays and disruptions added pressure to tight balance sheets.

Fishing quotas are set well in advance of the fishing seasons and monitored closely which means that individual businesses can make informed decisions about how many boats they send out, how many people they hire and how much risk they can take. Local economies benefit from this predictability as well when they house fishermen, feed them, and fill their boats with fuel. A thriving fishing industry makes for thriving coastal town economies. This year’s confusing dynamic will likely disrupt these fragile economies particularly in northern fishing towns, and possibly benefit southern areas where fishing was less regulated due to the freeze.

In 2024, fishermen stood before the supreme court maintaining that the federal government had overstepped their bounds in the fishing industry by requiring fishing boats to have a regulatory agent present to assess methods. Failure to fully access the practice as beneficial or not was creating a financial burden for herring fishermen resulting in the closing of fishing businesses. Much like the California crab fishermen, herring fishermen believe that too much regulation has stalled economic momentum in the industry. The more fees they are responsible for paying the less money they are able to make. 

At the same time, fishermen from the Atlantic to the Pacific who have invested in environmentally friendly equipment and technology who expected tax breaks or even reimbursement for these investments fear they will now be responsible for footing expensive bills.  Many of these industry shifts are made possible through fiscal policy which creates funding for tools fishermen might not otherwise spend money on. For the fishermen who fronted the money on the new diesel motor now wondering if they will be able to catch fish at all, the current situation could make or break a business. In the long run, decisions made in the coming months will have a big impact on food supply chains in the United States.