On January 18 multiple conservation NGOs got together and placed a paid advertisement in La Nación, Costa Rica’s largest newspaper that detailed the imminent problems the country faces when it comes to protecting its marine resources and how the Costa Rican Fisheries and Aquaculture Institute’s (Incopesca) board of managers caters to private interests because it is composed of members of the fishing sector. Six weeks later the fishing sector responded with its own paid advertisement. Now Pretoma’s president Randall Arauz has responded with a personal letter to the editor, published on March 22.
An Urgent Reform
We, national environmental NGOs, declare that the root of many of the problems we find in marine conservation, like the slaughter of turtles by the shrimp trawl fleet, the illegal use of private docks by the international fishing fleet, illegal fishing around Cocos Island, is attributed to the conflict of interest that exists in the heart of Incopesca’s board of managers, an entity that’s composed of businessmen from the industrial fishing sector.
In response to our paid advertisement on January 18th, the “fishing sector” published their own paid advertisement on February 25th, claiming that we lie and are really enemies of Costa Rica.
It’s curious that now this sector does not except the data that Pretoma has collected on the environmental impact of the national shrimp fleet and how it calls these studies “manipulated”. From 1995 to 2005, Pretoma undertook three studies on-board national trawls, in projects in cooperation with Incopesca, the Puntarenas’ Fishermen’s Union (CPP), and the Independent Shrimp Fishermen’s Union (Unipesca), financed at the time by national (Conicit and Micit) and international (USAid and NFWF) entities.
The “fishing sector” continues to affirm that the protection the shrimp trawl fleet provides to sea turtles constitutes a model for Latin America; however, the USA has embargoed the exportation of shrimp from Costa Rica four times since 1999.
It also affirms how it, along with environmental groups and the FAO, support the correct way to manage the use of shark resources in Costa Rica. What they fail to say is how conservation entities support the system that requires sharks to be landed with their “fins naturally attached”, a system that Incopesca firmly opposed and it was necessary for the State Attorney to intervene on three separate occasions in order for its implementation.
If it was for Incopesca, Costa Rica would still be running around “tying” shark fins onto bodies and looking ridiculous in the process.
Speaking about the creation of Responsibly Fished Marine Areas and the intention to create one of these in the Golfo Dulce where the shrimping sector agrees not to trawl, what the fishing sector does not say is how it bought the political will through a payment of one million dollars to the owners of the 57 shrimp fishing licenses – despite there being only four boats that operate in the Golfo Dulce – as compensation to no longer fish there. But as these are private funds, Incopesca’s board of managers denies any ties in this negotiation.
In 2008 only one foreign tuna boat was captured fishing illegally at Cocos Island, but a Minae, Coast Guard, and Marviva report notes that 905 national boats were sited illegally fishing during this same period, along with the confiscation of 217 fishing gear set-ups.
The good thing about the paid advertisement is that it strengthens our position because it clearly exposes that the “fishing sector” and Incopesca’s board of managers are one and the same. Only by eliminating this conflict of interest will we arrive at real marine conservation.
Un grupo de ONG nacionales afirmamos que la raíz de muchos de los problemas de conservación marina nacional, como la matanza de tortugas por la flota camaronera, el uso ilegal de los muelles privados por flotas extranjeras, y pesca ilegal en la Isla del Coco, se debe al conflicto de intereses que existe en el seno de la junta directiva de Incopesca, constituida por empresarios del sector pesquero industrial.
En respuesta a nuestra posición, el “sector pesquero” en un campo pagado publicado el día 25 de febrero en este periódico, afirma que mentimos y que somos enemigos de los costarricenses.
Es curioso que ahora no acepten los datos de Pretoma sobre el impacto de la flota camaronera nacional, y traten los estudios como “acomodados”. Desde 1995 y hasta el 2005, Pretoma ha realizado tres estudios a bordo de embarcaciones camaroneras nacionales, en proyectos conjuntos con Incopesca, la Cámara Puntarenense de Pescadores (CPP) y la Unión Independiente de Pescadores de Camarón (Unipesca), financiados en su momento por entidades nacionales (Conicit y Micit) e internacionales (USAid y NFWF).
Afirman que la protección que brinda la flota camaronera nacional a las tortugas marinas constituye un modelo en América Latina, pero EE. UU. ha embargado las exportaciones de camarón cuatro veces desde 1999.
Afirman además, que grupos ambientalistas y FAO han avalado la forma correcta de aprovechamiento del recurso tiburón que realiza Costa Rica. Lo que omiten decir es que estas entidades avalan el sistema de exigir la descarga de tiburones con las “aletas adheridas naturalmente”, sistema al cual Incopesca se opuso fieramente, y fue necesaria la intervención de la Procuraduría en tres ocasiones para su implementación.
Si por Incopesca fuera, Costa Rica todavía estaría haciendo el ridículo internacional permitiendo la descarga de aletas de tiburón “amarradas” a los cuerpos.
Hablan de la creación de Áreas Marinas de Pesca Responsable, y citan la intención de crear una en el golfo Dulce, donde el sector camaronero acepta no arrastrar más sus redes.
Lo que no dicen es que hubo que comprar la voluntad política, mediante un pago millonario (en US$) a los dueños de las 57 licencias de pesca de camarón como indemnización, a pesar de que solo 4 barcos operaban en el golfo Dulce. Como son fondos privados, la junta directiva de Incopesca niega vínculos con la negociación.
Bien es cierto que en el 2008 tan solo se capturó una embarcación atunera extranjera pescando ilegalmente en la Isla del Coco, pero un informe del Minae, Guardacostas, y Marviva, reporta el avistamiento de 905 embarcaciones nacionales realizando pesca ilegal en ese mismo periodo, así como el decomiso de 217 equipos de pesca.
Lo positivo del campo pagado es que fortalece nuestra posición, pues expone claramente que es lo mismo el “sector pesquero” y la junta directiva de Incopesca. Solo eliminando este conflicto de intereses, lograremos una efectiva conservación marina.