Historically, the fishing in Colombia has played a preponderant role in the country’s regional economy, an activity that, in fact, It has grown in its contribution to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
For example, in 2021, the agricultural sector generated $77 billionof which fishing and aquaculture contributed $2.4 trillion, which gives a growth of 22.1% on the part of these two activities, as reported by the Dane.
This growth occurred mostly thanks to exports from the aquaculture subsector, although the contribution of fishing at its different levels of capture (artisanal, semi-industrial and industrial) have generated a significant percentage compared to previous decades.
(Also read: What did Petro talk about with the leader of the World Trade Organization).
The capture of fish, crustaceans and mollusks has contributed substantially to the generation of employment, but also to the food security of the most vulnerable populations in the country, in particular those that are located on the coasts of the Pacific Ocean and the Caribbean Sea, as well as on the banks of rivers, lakes and lagoons throughout the country.
However, the fishing activity has been the victim of a systematic attack, based on false arguments and out of the reality of the sector, by various environmental groups and NGOs in a supposed defense of artisanal fishing; however, what they are looking for is for ecotourism to be carried out with the actors that are convenient for these NGOs.
(Plus: Almost $20,000 million, a figure destined for aid to agriculture due to La Niña).
Another ‘attack’ has been sold by the Government itself, since decree 281 of March 18, 2021, for example, which was signed at the time by President Iván Duque, indicates that, if a shark, ray or chimera is captured in their tasks , even if it happens incidentally, the action becomes an attack against the hydrobiological resource (crime). Thus, the norm turns fishermen into people outside the Law.
Now, ‘incidental’ must be understood as the way in which any fish, shark, crustacean or mollusk is captured or ‘fished’ by any gear or tackle used, when it is not that species that is desired to be captured and that, for the case, it ‘falls’ into a net or hook by accident.
(In addition: Agro: $19,685 million were allocated to those affected by the winter wave).
In practice, it is impossible for bycatch to reach zero or zero, since there will always be a risk that one of the listed species may fall into any fishing gear.
Thus, the decree is an unnecessary tool in the context of protecting these species from being fished, since it is based on a totally legal fact, and even within common sense: “no one is forced to do what is impossible to do”. Therefore, it is worth asking what was the objective of issuing said decree?
(Keep reading: Economic activity in Colombia grew 1.3% in December).
It could be presumed that this is the justification of some NGOs for the items they receive for, supposedly, contribute to the care and conservation of our ecosystems and coastal and marine resources.
Another example of ‘environmental populism’ is found in the declaration of new ‘Marine Protected Areas’ and the expansion of some already created, models analyzed by scientists familiar with the matter, who concluded that this was not necessary.
However, the decision made led to certain large marine areas being totally unprotected and now being used by illegal fishing by foreign-flagged vessels in Colombian waters.
(We recommend: Colombia’s GDP: the country’s economy grew 7.5% in 2022).
Now, it is worth asking: who is responsible for the illegal fishing that takes place in these Colombian waters? How many million dollars does the country lose for not adequately monitoring the areas that have been expanded, curiously, with the idea of protecting national fishing resources and food sovereignty?
Finally, the issue is not entirely in the contribution of fishing activity to the country’s GDP. Here the reality must be seen from the hunger that calms and the possibility of a job that needs to be dignified.
Unfortunately, this has become the only legal activity in the most vulnerable areas of our country. To put an end to fishing in this way is to leave the poorest people vulnerable so that, finally and by necessity, are forced to be recruited by different groups outside the law.
OTTO POLANCO
Master in International Business, Master in Agribusiness
