Biodiversity, Development & Aid, Environment, Headlines, Latin America & the Caribbean

ENVIRONMENT-ARGENTINA: Alarm Sounded for Patagonian Seas

Marcela Valente* - Tierramérica

BUENOS AIRES, Jan 26 2007 (IPS) - Some believe it was exaggerated; others that it will help prevent future environmental tragedy. These are the two extremes in reactions in Argentina to a report on the impact of anchovy fishing in the seas off the Patagonia region.

In an article published in the Jan. 5 edition of Science magazine, scientists from the Argentine Fundación Patagonia Natural and the U.S. University of Washington warned that fishing for anchoita (Engraulis anchoita) in the South Atlantic threatens endemic species that sustain ecotourism in the region.

Tens of thousands of visitors from Argentina and abroad head to the coasts of the Patagonian provinces of Chubut and Santa Cruz, drawn by the chance to go on whale-watching tours, see penguins, sea lions and sea elephants in nature preserves, and spot birds like the albatross and cormorant.

The Science article warned that this paradise could be dramatically altered if there is expanded fishing for anchoita, which represents 50 percent of the diet of the Magellanic penguin (Spheniscus magellanicus), and is also food for hake, cormorants, dolphins, sea lions and dozens of other species in the region.

The alert “proposes an integral perspective of use of marine resources, which encompasses the interaction of all species,” biologist Claudio Campagna, a researcher from the National Patagonia Centre and expert in sea mammals, told Tierramérica.

Campagna believes that “the world’s fisheries are rarely sustainable, and their impact on other activities and interests that rely on the same resources is not taken into account when it comes to calculating the benefits of fishing.”

“The ideal would be to scientifically model the functioning of the system in order to understand what effects the extraction of critical species would have on processes that involve endemic and emblematic species of the Patagonian coast,” he added.

But Ernesto Godelman, president of the non-governmental Centre for the Defence of National Fishing (Cedepesca), disagrees with so much caution.

“It’s good to raise awareness about taking care of the marine environment, but here there is somewhat of an overreaction in prevention. The information doesn’t coincide with what Science has published, and much less with the subsequent repercussions,” he said in a Tierramérica interview.

For now, “we don’t see any indications that the current or planned exploitation of the Patagonian anchoita endangers sustainability in a broad sense, that is, including food-chain interactions,” Godelman said.

According to a study by the National Institute of Fishing Research and Development (Inidep), to date “the commercial exploitation of Patagonian anchoita has not reached great levels, averaging some 2,000 tonnes annually since the 1960s.”

The volume of the total catch differs greatly from the limit approved by Inidep for the population between southern Brazil and the southern coast of Buenos Aires province (anchoita bonaerense), the maximum is 120,000 tonnes annually. For the Patagonian anchoita it is 60,000 tonnes.

“At Inidep we are very caution, and we maintain that the problem is not so dramatic,” a scientist from the institute who participated in the research told Tierramérica, requesting anonymity.

Concern over this resource began in 2003 when the Federal Fisheries Council approved the development research plan for sustainable Patagonian anchovy fishing, proposed by the province of Chubut.

Faced with the emergency declared for the over-fished common hake, or merluza (Merlucius hubbsi), the province turned to an under-exploited species. The experimental plan, extended in 2005, had the support of officials, fishing companies, Inidep scientists and the Fundación Patagonia Natural.

Now the Fundación argues that the Inidep studies did not include specific mechanisms for quantifying the effects of anchoita fishing on other fish and animal species that rely on it as a food source. And the group expressed concern that the catch would be used to produce fishmeal.

The Inidep source responded that the institute “is not studying in particular the impact on other species,” but that they are being taken into account in looking at the parameters of the natural death of the anchoitas when other animals feed on them.

As for the fear that the species is used as a raw material for the fishmeal industry, Godelman explained that the plan approved by the Council established that the participating firms “may not have as an objective the manufacture of fishmeal.”

The head of Cedepesca indicated that only the anchoita bonaerense – not the Patagonian anchoita – is used for that purpose, and not in Argentina, but neighbouring Uruguay. The two countries catch a combined total of 70,000 tonnes yearly (out of a maximum 120,000 tonnes allowed), and most is utilised for fishmeal.

“This indeed is a problem that must be closely tracked. The exploitation of the Buenos Aires anchoita for producing fishmeal represents a real threat,” Godelman said.

(*Originally published by Latin American newspapers that are part of the Tierramérica network. Tierramérica is a specialised news service produced by IPS with the backing of the United Nations Development Programme and the United Nations Environment Programme.)