The uncertain fish, a contested resource.

Controversies and uncertainties about fish degradation and conservation practices in the Danube Delta artisanal fisheries

Veronica MitroiPost-doctorat LEESU, ENPC

Rural Est, Crisan, 2013

Danube Delta and territorial control Danube Delta is a huge flood plain, under-developed, under-populated

and under-exploited (until the first half of xx century) Ethnical diversity and Romanian “colonisation” (XIX century) Fishing as "natural activity” - the Antipa system (first half of XX century)

Economic hyper-centralized administrative system (Delta Central), organized in “production plans” and the intensive exploitation (1950-1989) Polderisation and drained out about 100 000 ha (15% of the region) until

the end of 1989, of which 42 000 ha for agriculture, 24 000 for fish farming, etc.

Economy and local population highly dependent on natural resources and state structures (nationalization of the land and fishing - 1954)

Economical breakdown after 1990

Biosphere Reserve (after 1990) Fish is a natural resource - the degradation problem

Les zones fonctionnelles de la réserve Zones strictement protégées

- 20 zones (50 600 ha) - 8,7%

Zones tampons - 223 300 ha - 38,5%

Zones économiques - 306 100 ha, 52,8 %: Polders agricoles (43

391) – 14,2 % Fermes piscicoles (39

567 ha) - 12,9% Forêts (6 442 ha) - 2,1% Zones habitées, propriété

privée et publique (27 243 ha) - 8,9%

Zones de reconstruction écologique (11 425 ha) - 3,7%

Property distribution in DDBRStrictly

protected areas (8,7 %)

Intermediary areas (38, 5%)

Economical areas(52, 8%)

Property Public property of national interest: 81,12 % Public property of regional interest: 13,71 %

Property of local interest: 5,71 %.

Actors DDBRA County, privates firms

Private or public local actors

Type of good

Water and wetland areas Polders Fields, villages

Some social aspects

15 000 inhabitants, 23 localities

A « problematic » population Depending on natural resource

use : Fishing, agriculture and tourism

Direct access to natural resource

Very heterogeneous communities

Isolation and poor infrastructure

Development inequalities between and inside villages

Les villages de la réserve

Economic profile of localities impacting Danube Delta

Fish as a local resource The socio-economic context :

State economy decline (abandon of the investment in see fish and in fish farms).

The transformation of “productive fields” in “natural areas” : ecological reconstruction of agricole polders

The integration with the Reserve status : “Protégez la nature et conservez les traditions ! » (devise de l’ARBDD) The artisanal fish Local rights The “traditional” dimmension

The local economies : The complexity of the local exchanges between fish and tourism

Quand le delta devient « naturel », la pêche doit devenir « traditionnelle »

Fishing complexity Fishing territories (12 monitoring areas)

Between 170 000 and 270 000 ha of sweet water

103 000 ha of maritime area 40 000 ha of fish ponds

Fish resources : 30 commercial species 160 fish species (70 sweet water)

Fishing tools : « petite pêche » et « grande pêche »

Social criteria : Commercial fishing (between 1000

and  1500 regulate fishermen) Familial fishing (3 kg per day for

DD families) Amateur fishing

The degradation problem (1990-1007)

How the issue of degradation natural resources in the fishing world was addressed in the biosphere Reserve Danube Delta?

Knowledge base in fish rights regulation

The dominant fisheries’ narratives (J.G. Abott & L.M. Campbell, 2009) or assumptions in fish rights definition (A. Charles, 1998).

Fish captures Fishing effort

(Output control ) (Input control)

Stocks degradation

Important factors of complexity and data's accuracy for small scale, multispecies,

artisanal fisheries.

Property rights systems in DDAdministrative system

Problematisations Main reglementations and actions

Open access / Free market (1990-2002)

Political and economical issues:The post-communist transition

- Private fishing companies appeared (123 until 2003)- The captured fish was de facto owned by the fisherman, who could sell it to the highest bidder.

Concessions(2003-2005)

Ecological and political issues:Overexploitation and black market

The captured fish is the property of the concessionaire; Fishermen no longer have the right to sell it, they are employees.

Fishermen associations (After 2007)

Social issue :Exclusion of fishermen.

The fishing quota, are given directly the fishing association or to the fishermen.

Week capacity for fishing indicators to legitimate policies

Questioning conservation policies through fishing practices

“All the debates on the Danube Delta refer to the conservation of the environment, but what do they want to do with us, folks, preserve us too?” (Fisherman of Danube Delta, 2005).

Fish resource management is about managing fish, or about managing people who fish, or about managing environment, etc.?

Conserving fish resources, as part of the biodiversity, means conserving fishermen population, or on the contrary ?

How fish and fishermen can co-exist ? How they could not ?

“ We have a mission : The poachers – an endangered specie” (Salvati Delta Dunarii Asociation).

Acteurs Sources de données

Documents écrits Entretiens

Scientifiques(INDD, Université de Bucarest)

Articles, rapports de recherche, statistiques, cartes, etc.

9

Politiques Projets de loi, déclarations de presse. 5

Organisations internationales(UNESCO, GEF, BM)

Littérature grise. 5

Institutions de gestion et contrôle(ARBDD, ANPA, etc.)

Documents administratifs, rapports d’évaluation et d’activité, littérature grise, etc.

15

Collectivités territoriales(Mairies, Conseil régional)

Documents administratifs locaux, statistiques, etc.

10

ONGs Documents d’information, rapports d’activité et brochures.

6

Acteurs locaux de la pêche Entretiens (115 enregistrés et non enregistrés) Entreprises 14

Agents de contrôle 7

Pêcheurs (différentes catégories)

97

Associations 7

Deux études de cas dans les centres de pêchede la Réserve de la Biosphère du Delta du Danube

Le bassin du Danube en Europe

Fishing practices laboratory

What fishermen say about degradation? Village 1

There are no more fishermen, the fish industry was abandoned, privatized.

They want to keep us “traditional”, but : “traditional” fishing tools and local methods to entertain resource are forbidden (reed burning, keep the channels opened and the lakes clean, etc).

The ecologist are “accused” about the deterioration of “good fishing” places and “abusive” control.

Village 2 The fish farms was abandoned : fish is a produced resource. Excessive birds protection influence fish stocks. They protest against poaching and ask authorities to defend them against

exterior poachers – complexity of “poacher” category.

Fish degradation

The fish’ « nature »

The fish’ functions

Actors « identities »

« Tout comme une maison, le delta doit être nettoyé en permanence. Si tu laisses les herbes pousser autour de ta maison, tu n’es pas un homme bien, et la maison va petit à petit se détruire. Avec le delta, c’est pareil, si nous laissons faire la nature, la tendance est au colmatage, la végétation gagne du terrain sur l’eau » (Entretien, 2008, pêcheur, Sfantu Gheorghe).

Uncertain fish, contested identities

Main controversies are not anymore around fish rights definition, but more about environmental objects (birds, lacks, allevins, etc.) that participate to actors definition (theirs rights and capacities to deal with environment).

The marginalization of local population is still justified by the fact that local population is considered as “not concerned enough” with environmental conservation and responsible of resource degradation.

Who is speaking in the name of Nature ? :

“ Today, we only know what is written on paper. If we do what is written on paper , we will end up by eating the fish marked on paper” (Danube Delta fisherman).

Main conclusions

There is no “degradation” neither “protection” which are socially neutrals : A system of rights meant to “protect” nature is involving a “valorification” of different actors in their relation with nature.

The necessity to overpass the classical distinction between knowledge producers (“those who know”) and knowledge users (“those who fish”).

Actors will mobilize to protect the fish resources when they will be able to express their needs and interests in relation to the degradation of resources and to participate at the political formulation of fish degradation.

The uncertain fish, a contested resource.Danube Delta and territorial controlLes zones fonctionnelles de la réserveProperty distribution in DDBRSome social aspectsLes villages de la réserve Fish as a local resource Quand le delta devient « naturel », la pêche doit devenir « traditionnelle »Fishing complexity The degradation problem (1990-1007) Knowledge base in fish rights regulationProperty rights systems in DDWeek capacity for fishing indicators to legitimate policies Questioning conservation policies through fishing practices PowerPoint PresentationDeux études de cas dans les centres de pêche de la Réserve de la Biosphère du Delta du Danube Fishing practices laboratory What fishermen say about degradation? Diapo 20Diapo 21 Uncertain fish, contested identities Main conclusions