 |
Fishing And
Minke Whaling In Iceland |
| |
I now wish to apply the threefold
categorization of modes of production discussed above to Icelandic
society. During the medieval period, Icelandic fishing was organised
on the basis of the household (Pálsson 1991). In the household
economy there was always some kind of ceiling on production, as
fishing effort was limited by a series of ecological, social and
technical factors. This was not an isolated economy, however, without
commerce and markets. Indeed, during much of the medieval period
surpluses were syphoned off through colonial relations. Timber and
handlines were imported as well as other necessities, such as grain,
and these could only be obtained by selling household products to
colonial merchants. Colonial influence on the Icelandic economy
was particularly strong from 1602 to 1787 when Danish merchants
monopolised foreign trade with Icelanders. Under this system, the
producers were compelled to sell their products to one particular
merchant who determined the terms of trade. The right to trade with
Icelanders was sold to the highest bidder at auctions in Copenhagen.
Access to foreign markets was limited because of Iceland's status
as a colony. People could have invested in boats, but capital accumulation
was negligible due to colonial relations and restricted markets
for fish. The hunting of sea mammals, particularly seals, was a
significant part of the Icelandic household economy (Einarsson 1990,
Pálsson 1990). Minke whales, however, were seldom hunted
because people considered them to be 'good' whales, sent by God
to protect humans against 'bad' species of whales (Sigurjónsson
1982: 291). In recent decades, prior to the ban imposed by the International
Whaling Commission, Icelandic whaling has largely been organised
on the basis of capitalist production. Most of the whales landed
in Iceland have been caught by the vessels of a single company (Hvalur,
see photo below).In Iceland, independent boat-owners or simple commodity
producers sustained capitalist fishing in its initial phase of development
at the beginning of the twentieth century (similar observations
have been made for other fisheries; see, for example, Breton (1977:130)
and McCay (1981)). Boat-foremen often owned shares in their boats
together with a local merchant or capitalist. Sometimes the foremen
managed to buy out the capitalist's shares and establish full ownership
after a few years of fishing. |
| |
Their sons often became crew members
while other household members worked at washing and processing the
catch. Despite full-scale capitalist development in some sectors
of the fishing industry, capitalist relations of production have
never managed to fully penetrate Icelandic fishing and the simple
commodity producer has never disappeared. Judging from data on patterns
of ownership in one fishing community on the south-west coast, it
seems that initially (from around 1913) capitalists owned a substantial
part of the local fleet while later on there was a gradual increase
in fisherman-ownership (see Pálsson 1982: 67). Minke whaling,
in particular, has always been the business of simple commodity
producers. |
| |
The minke whalers operated from several
fishing communities, primarily from the northern coast (for a detailed
description, see Sigurjónsson 1982). Their boats were fairly
small (18.9 ton on the average in 1980), with crews of 2 to 3 men.
After 1975, the number of boats was regulated by the Ministry of
Fisheries, with licences issued to individual boat owners. Not only
was the number of boats subject to control, there was a ceiling
on the total annual catch of whales. The whalers themselves decided
how to divide the total annual catch among licenced whalers. Each
baot was allocated a limited number of whales, a specific quota
(see Table 1). Since 1989, the whalers have been organized in a
national union. |
| |
| Year |
No. of licences
issued |
No. of vessels
participating |
No. of boats
taking more than 10 whales |
| 1975* |
6
|
9
|
4
|
| 1976 |
12
|
11
|
5
|
| 1977 |
14
|
10
|
6
|
| 1978 |
10
|
10
|
7
|
| 1979 |
11
|
10
|
5
|
| 1980 |
11
|
8
|
7
|
| *In 1975,
10 whales were caught by three unlicenced vessels. |
|
| |
In the case of the simple commodity
producer, the family budget is closely tied to that of the boat,
even though the latter may be kept separate on paper to comply with
tax laws. Usually, the whole nuclear family, and some neighbouring
kinsfolk as well, are engaged in production related to one boat.
The wife of the skipper-owner takes most of the responsibility for
running the household while the husband is working irregular hours.
Furthermore, she may bait lines, prepare nets, and work in a freezing
plant. The wife's earnings may be an important source of additional
income, especially if the boat has not been doing well. |
| |
If the skipper-owner has one or more
sons interested in fishing he may expand his business and buy a
larger boat. As the sons of the skipper-owner grow older they are
likely to take over the enterprise. If the owner has several children
he may sell the boat when he quits fishing, but more often the boat
remains the property of the family. Sometimes an expanding company
of shareholders is formed at this stage. This has not happened in
minke whaling, however, for three reasons. First, government policy
restricts minke whaling to small-scale producers (boats under 30
tons). Secondly, family enterprises often split as they expand.
While brothers often pool their resources, their cooperation is
usually limited to a few years. As they establish their own families,
their resources and commitments become different and, consequently,
they are likely to have different opinions in matters of investment
and maintenance. Thirdly, during fishing trips the symmetrical relations
between crew men who are not only brothers but also co-owners of
the boat tend to be incompatible with the authority relations between
skipper and deckhands. |
| |
The income and food provided by one
whale boat normally supported 4 to 5 families. The products of the
whale hunt were partly consumed by the households of the crew men.
Some parts were sold directly by the whalers to local people for
consumption, while the rest was packaged and frozen for both domestic
markets and export - particularly to Japan, the Faroe Islands and
Norway. Minke whaling was usually a summer-activity closely linked
to the cod fishery during the winter. After the introduction of
the whaling ban, minke whalers have had a hard time. They have tried
to compensate for the lack of income from whaling by increasing
their participation in the winter fishery. This is not that easy,
however. To fully participate in the winter fishery in rough weather
on distant grounds would demand much larger boats than applicable
to minke whaling. Also, since 1985 the cod fishery has been strictly
regulated on a quota basis, and minke whalers are only entitled
to minimal quotas, as quota allocation is based on average cod-catches
in the past, i.e. in the days of minke whaling (see Pálsson
1982, Durrenberger and Pálsson 1985). Some have become bankrupt
and lost their boats, others have managed to survive hoping that
the ban on whaling would be lifted in the near future. Minke whalers
have found it very difficult to understand why they should yield
to a multinational authority that denies them the opportunity to
catch minke whales, while at the same time granting indigenous hunters
in some other countries privileged rights of whale hunting. And,
indeed, it is difficult to justify such an arrangement. In both
cases, the household is the focus of production efforts. Both the
indigenous hunter and the simple commodity producer are involved
in the a cash economy, both participate in local networks of exchange,
and both are anxious to protect the stocks they have used against
overexploitation. |
|
Previous
Chapter 