Few Combine Commercial Fishing and Tourist Fishing

Few Norwegian fishermen choose to combine commercial fishing and tourist fishing despite the industries operating in the same areas and both being important for value creation in coastal communities.

A new report from the Centre for the Ocean and the Arctic at UiT The Arctic University of Norway shows that what might appear as a natural combination is difficult to achieve in practice.

Few combine the activities

Both commercial fishing and tourist fishing are based on the same resources and often take place in the same areas. 

Both activities are important sources of value creation in many coastal communities through jobs, settlement, and development.  In addition, both activities are affected by changes in natural conditions, market, and management.

Traditionally, coastal communities have been built on a combination of industries and the ability to adapt to changing natural and market conditions. 

Today, the tourism industry is growing, and more tourists want authentic nature experiences. At the same time, fisheries are characterised by low quotas and increased regulation. 

Nevertheless, few choose to combine tourism and fishing, even though there are schemes that allow for such a combination.

Several reasons

The report shows that there are several reasons why so few choose to combine the two activities. 

The regulations for commercial fishing and tourist fishing are largely designed for one main activity per vessel or business. The activities are organised according to different rules and frameworks that can be challenging to navigate.

At the same time, commercial fishing is still profitable enough that fishermen do not see it as necessary to supplement with extra income through tourist fishing. Even though quotas have been historically low in recent years, fishermen have still had good earnings, partly due to high prices. 

A decrease in quotas therefore does not mean that more people automatically look for alternative sources of income.

Other reasons include that fishing vessels are often not built to carry many passengers and that the price level required to justify planning, time use, increased fuel consumption, wear and tear, and investments in certificates, courses, safety measures, systems, and insurance would be too high. 

Several fishermen also point out that those who fish commercially must adapt to the fish and be ready when it comes. This makes it difficult to create the predictability that tourists need to plan their trip and purchase access to activities well in advance.

Friction between the industries

Another important element is the level of conflict associated with tourist fishing activity.

Stories about 'tourist fishing emptying the sea' are reinforced by media reports about unregistered fish and large customs seizures. Climate change, reduced quotas, and stocks contribute to escalating the level of conflict. 

Additionally, part of the conflict revolves around differences in regulatory and control regimes. Professional fishing is strictly regulated, and fishermen react to unequal treatment and different controls in the two industries, both of which are based on the same resource.

However, actors in the sea fishing tourism industry emphasise that sea fishing tourism represents high value creation per kilo of fish, and that the activity largely takes place with handheld equipment and limited volume. 

Therefore, several actors believe that the pressure on stocks can hardly be explained by tourist fishing alone, and call for a more precise knowledge about the actual extraction.

The report concludes that the barriers to combined operations cannot be understood in isolation, but must be seen as an interplay between regulation, economic and practical conditions, responsibility and safety, as well as perceived legitimacy in the control regimes. None of these conditions stand alone, and none of them point to clear solutions.

Read the full report here.