Taiwanese fishing boats registered in Penghu and Keelung were involved in searches and detainments by China and Japan after they crossed into the countries’ territorial waters. Many people believe the incidents are about fishers’ rights or are due to cross-strait tensions. The reality is a bit different: The core of the problem stems from marine conservation.
As marine resources along coastal waters grow scarcer, fishers are traveling farther to find their catch, even crossing into other countries’ waters.
The incident involving the Penghu-registered boat and crew being searched and detained by the China Coast Guard is much more serious than the one involving Japan. Not only did the crew sail into China’s waters, they also contravened a moratorium on fishing in the area, while using prohibited equipment.
China’s seasonal fishing restrictions are effective tools against overfishing. The regulations cover the yearly spawning period for commercial marine species from May to August.
Because China strictly enforces the restrictions, they have been remarkably effective. Thanks to such policies, in place since 1995, the decline of some of China’s coastal marine resources has eased.
The increase in fish populations in China’s waters naturally boosts the diversity and number of fish in Taiwan, too. Taiwanese and Chinese fishers should comply and respect the laws of each other’s countries and not just care about their own.
That being said, where there is controversy over borders, such as at the Spratly Islands (Nansha islands, 南沙群島), as well as Taiwan’s fishing zones, the best means of resolving such conflicts should be the bilateral shelving of sovereignty issues.
Disputed maritime territories should be designated as conservation areas and jointly mapped and declared a “marine peace park.” The goal would be to together prioritize the conservation of “protected fish,” and not merely issue a joint declaration without any follow-up action.
If China and Taiwan could work toward this goal together, not only would it reduce conflict and the detainment of fishing crews and vessels, it could also help with the Marine Conservation Institute’s global “30 x 30” goal to protect and conserve at least 30 percent of waters and land across the globe.
Because marine conservation is a part of the international consensus and as the fishing boat incidents touch upon breaches of conservation, Taiwan cannot rely on international friends to bail it out. The government needs to bolster management of near-shore and coastal fishing, particularly in areas where it is easy to accidentally cross borders or zones.
The spread, guidance and training of marine conservation and sustainable fishing methods, as well as increasing fishing crews’ respect for laws and regulations should be the basis for further action.
The Ocean Conservation Administration is only responsible for the conservation of noneconomic organisms, while the Fisheries Agency is responsible for the conservation and protection of organisms of an economic nature used primarily as food.
The marine environment is one unitary system. Both classifications of organisms rely on one another. If the legislature were to hasten its review and pass a third reading of a marine conservation law, Taiwan’s surrounding marine ecosystems would be much healthier. The bill would be a big help in the replenishment of marine resources that are dwindling by the day. It would also help prevent fishers from crossing borders into perilous territories or controversial waters to chase down a catch.
Shao Kwang-tsao is an emeritus chair professor at National Taiwan Ocean University and National Sun Yat-sen University.
Translated by Tim Smith
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS