Small-scale Fisheries Sector: PLAAS briefing

Meeting report

The Chairperson remarked that he would have preferred a physical meeting with the Prof, but the Committee Programme and the Prof's diary did not allow for an in-person meeting. The previous meeting had to be rescheduled and arranging this session took a lot of effort. He thanked Member Mabilo for chairing last week’s meeting, which he could not attend because of his deployment to attend a SADC meeting on international trade laws, including AGOA. He had received a complementary report from Members about a job well done by Member Mabilo. He forewarned Members that he might be cut off because of connectivity issues due to loadshedding and that he would re-join as soon as possible. He confirmed that the professor had joined the meeting and apologised to her for the mishap during the previously scheduled session. He thanked her for accommodating the Committee on this occasion to discuss a very sensitive matter. The Committee expected to be empowered by her presentation to assist the affected communities from an academic viewpoint. He invited Prof Isaacs to proceed with the presentation.

Fisheries Sector presentation

Prof Moenieba Isaacs introduced herself as a person coming from a community in Simonstown but who spent most of her young life in Ocean View. At the time of reporting, she was still living in Glencairn in the Deep South. She is rooted in fisheries from both her grandfathers, and although her father did not follow this path, fishing has always been part of her life. She believed that it was important to provide this context of her background. She warned that the presentation was lengthy and called on Members to ask questions for clarity whenever needed as part of the information sharing and discussion process.

An overview of the sector, including the policies and the impact on livelihood and food security, were some important elements covered in the presentation. The main challenge was to balance maximising the sector's social and economic potential while protecting the integrity and quality of the country’s marine and coastal ecosystems. Additional challenges included sustainability and transformation of the sector. The 1994 Fisheries Policy did not plan to reform the 1988 policy but merely to add to it. Before 1994, ownership was restricted to big white-owned companies such as I&J, Premier Viking Fishing, and Sea Harvest. In the early 1950s, the strategy on the West Coast was to diversify the sector with the inclusion of poor white farmers, hence establishing towns such as Port Nolloth, Strandfontein, Lamberts Bay and Elands Bay. The traditional fishing community was integrated with the industrialised fishing companies. Oceana had companies up to Port Nolloth and created company towns, known as fishing communities. The 2012 National Development Plan (NDP) called for a review of the Fisheries Policy to determine the best manner for allocating rights which had been chaotic at that stage. Many people who had expected to obtain fishing rights in the company towns could not access these rights. In 2012, Parliament adopted a policy for small-scale fishing to recognise, allocate and manage small-scale fishing rights. Small-scale and artisanal fishers largely depended on low-cost resources for their livelihoods and food security, and they have a long history of dependency on these resources. In 2025, there were approximately 147 fishing communities, more than 28 000 fisher households with an estimated 30 000 fishers.

(See Presentation)

Discussion

The Chairperson commented on two matters of interest. He grew up believing that eating fish was for people on the lower hierarchy of society and that eating red meat caused gout. He welcomed the proposal to pass legislation that would keep big companies such as I&J from fishing snoek and to leave it for the fishing communities to earn an income. He now understood the frustration of Member Farmer who has a background of small-scale fisheries and who was passionate about the plight of small-scale fishers. He was hoping that the Prof would in future be available for further engagement and more questions via the Secretariat and not necessarily in a setting similar to this session. He had a better understanding of the role of the big companies and the lack of opportunities available for small-scale fishers. He noted that Tanzania, Uganda, Egypt, and Nigeria were moving ahead regarding fish farming. The Committee would want to consider a study tour to these countries to learn about the best practices where the weather was similar, instead of going to Europe, where the practices might not suit the African conditions. He learnt that people could live comfortable lives from fishing if correct legislation were in place and if correct decisions were made. He was disappointed to hear about the comments made in a public meeting by the former Minister, who had since passed, but he understood her lack of knowledge might have played a part. He also did not have an understanding of the sector because fish is not big business in Gauteng. He has enjoyed eating fish since moving to Cape Town because the fish is fresher than in Gauteng. He opened the discussion to request further contributions from members.

Mr P Mabilo (ANC, Northern Cape) said the Chairperson gave a good synopsis of the Prof’s presentation. He appreciated the historical context and the explanation of the core mandate of the Fisheries Sector. He found the sector's evolution interesting given that he came from the coastal town of Port Nolloth where the harbour has been undergoing major development. He noted the massive transformation in other sectors, such as mining, where previously disadvantaged people have participated in the mainstream sector as owners and co-owners. He believed the Fisheries sector was untapped and underdeveloped and asked how participation in the value chain could be fast tracked. He noted that factories, as part of the value chain, had not been mentioned in the presentation. A fishing factory in Port Nolloth used to employ more than 5 000 people but has been closed for many years. He asked the Prof to investigate this aspect of processing and manufacturing to minimise importing food that could be locally produced. He wanted to know if the country had the requisite capacity to monitor and combat the exploitation of our natural resources by trawlers and big fishing companies, foreign-owned vessels, and syndicates which he regarded as worse than the zama-zamas. He enquired about the existence of a multi-disciplinary stakeholder body that could respond to the available opportunities in the fisheries industry. He asked for the Prof’s view on creating entrepreneurship for the youth, women and people living with disabilities within the sector. He wanted to know if any research had been conducted by either the government or the environment sectors to determine the lack of success in the Aquaculture Initiatives and Ventures Project despite the large investments made. He thanked the Prof for the useful presentation.

Mr B Farmer (PA, Western Cape) welcomed the presentation and wished to meet with Prof Isaacs to discuss the fishing industry more deeply. He grew up in Lamberts Bay where his father was a fisherman and his mother worked on the Oceana factory floor for 39 years. The factory had since closed and all the operations were centralised in Hout Bay and other areas. He asked if she could highlight any flaws in the Small-scale Fisheries Policy since it was introduced, specifically concerning the co-op issue, which has been creating community difficulties. Some directors were found to be criminals and treated the other fishers badly. He agreed that the small-scale aquaculture could benefit the fishing communities and the fishing stock in the seawater. He asked if she agreed that the treatment of small-scale fishers was contributing to the poaching problem. He believed that sections of the fishing industry were heading for a collapse because of poaching, which was placing pressure on the resources. The government was not taking care of small-scale fishers; therefore, the small-scale fishing community got involved in poaching for their survival while big businesses were catching as much as they could. The context of the food security and poverty eradication policy mentioned in the presentation might have been noble at the time but the fishermen were not benefitting from it. The sentiment in the fishing communities is that turning poverty eradication into wealth creation was not their experience. The 36% rights referred to by the Minister related to consumption and not sales and this was not helping the fishermen. He was once involved in a discussion with a gang member present and learnt from him that gangs have perfectly legal permits to catch and export rock lobster. The transfer of the stock from the factory floor to the port of export is not recorded in the books which allow the gangs to use the permit for more than the permitted quantity. This pointed to a management problem in dealing with poaching and organised crime.

Ms S Boshoff (DA, Mpumalanga) asked if the Prof could expand on whether small-scale fishers have been adequately represented and not marginalised. She wanted to know how co-ops have disadvantaged or benefitted small-scale fishers and if any alternative models have been considered. She asked if the Prof was aware of any measures to prevent over fishing and to ensure sustainability of species such as abalone and rock lobster. She enquired about any studies conducted on climate change and the impact thereof on fish stocks. She asked if there were any developments in combatting illegal fishing and poaching and the effectiveness of marine protective measures in balancing conservation with the economic needs of fishing communities. She wanted to know how the fishing permit fees and levies were determined and what mechanisms were in place to ensure the fees were fair and not a barrier to small-scale fishers. She enquired about the existence of partnerships with international or private entities to develop the fishing industry in the country.

Prof Isaacs remarked that the questions were very insightful and hoped she would have enough time to provide adequate responses. She found the engagement with the issues revitalising.

Ms Boshoff said she was not expecting the Prof to answer all the questions in this session and asked if it would suffice to send the written questions to the Prof and receive written responses from her.

Prof Isaacs replied that she could do so but it might take time to connect all the dots. The matters required in-depth responses, especially on issues of conservation, sustainability, rights allocation, poaching, poverty and aquaculture, which were all very important questions. She offered to provide packs of literature to assist Members but was willing to provide some oral responses.

Mr N Pienaar (DA, Limpopo) said the Prof recommended eating two cans of sardines daily. He wanted to know if studies had been conducted on heavy metals and microplastics found in sardines. He did not want the recommendation to negatively affect the population if the message is spread. 

Mr H Van den Berg (FF+, Northern Cape) said he is mostly a sheep farmer but understood the contentious issues raised. He asked for her view on the big-scale fishing companies, their indiscriminate use of fishing nets, and the perceived inability of the port authorities to police international fishers, which was leading to the depletion of fishing stocks. He wanted to know the position of the weekend leisure fisher in the equation. He had tried his hand at aquaculture and found that his Eskom energy input was far more than his earnings from the business. However, resolving to use solar energy required substantial investment. He explained how business is being conducted in China, where the government would create many economic hubs, each with ten or more companies producing a different part of a product, with a state department specialising in global marketing and sales of the product. This model compensates for future failures because of the number of producers that service the market. He suggested that the aquaculture business should follow the same approach and asked for her view on the matter.

Prof Isaacs replied to Member Pienaar that the recommendation was for two cans of sardines per week and not daily. She was not in a position to answer questions related to microplastics. The justification for recommending smaller fish is that it takes less time for them to be in the ocean to absorb heavy metals. Larger game fish such as tuna and yellowtail migrate to other areas or stay in areas that absorb heavy metals. Mercury and heavy metals are particularly found in tuna and yellowtail. She agreed with Mr Mabilo that the Committee could play an important role in understanding how the Fisheries Sector is connecting with green hydrogen projects and the impact on the species and resources in terms of the seismic surveys being promoted by Total in the Northern Cape because they have lost court cases in the Southern Cape. It was important to understand the benefits of the green hydrogen projects. She explained that transformation in the Fishing Sector was dominated by two factors, i.e. race and gender. The management of fishing companies changed with the appointment of white women, and not surprisingly, with the appointment of people connected with politicians, particularly political parties. Transformation had been skewed mainly on race and gender, which was the focus for the first ten years after 1994. But the transformation did not filter down to fishing communities. At one point, the sector had jobs for many people, but companies started closing down because the reconstruction and development programme of the ANC government was not implemented. The unions sided with the fishing companies by bargaining for better rights for the fish workers instead of the fishing communities. The position of the unions led to the status quo being maintained. It was interesting to note that COSATU had invested in some of the fishing companies. The big companies concluded that the smaller companies were not making enough profit, and they started concentrating on one particular area, and diverted all processing through one particular plant, leaving the smaller companies dormant. This did not necessarily provide great opportunities for smaller communities to use the dormant facilities for processing. A facility in Doring offered an opportunity for communities to become involved in abalone aquaculture, but she had not followed up on the success of this venture. The jobs were a massive loss in the company towns, which became ghost towns because when the industry left, the jobs dried up.

Prof Isaacs stated that South Africa was playing a leading role on the continent concerning policing, surveillance, and control of the large fishing area. There was an agreement to allocate tuna targets to the Japanese. She was not familiar with the details of other such agreements. The monitoring, control, and surveillance functions have been weakened over the years, and the Navy was enlisted to support the monitoring, control, and surveillance of the areas. However, political decisions might also play a role, as was noticed with the docking in Simonstown. Illegal, unreported and unregulated fisheries were a big issue internationally. It was important for the Committee to separate criminal activity from the management of regulated subsistence fishing compared to fishing for a syndicate or a network. For this reason, poaching required a deeper analysis. She tried to work with the Buffelsjagbaai community in the Southern Coast, where she engaged with the women and not the poachers to understand the continuous poaching of the high-value abalone species. She found the violation of the abalone species, in terms of the vast numbers being caught daily, unimaginable. Gangs have been focusing on abalone and West Coast rock lobster. All the initiatives by the police, the army, and the community have been unsuccessful in reducing poaching. The Fisheries official does not have discretionary power to decide whether to fish for pot or do crime-related fishing. The state has marginalised fishing communities and they were under siege by the gangs involved in rock lobster and abalone poaching.

Many people have been appointed to develop the Ocean Master Plan. A criticism of a multi-stakeholder approach in the Blue Economy is that it creates inequality when one party is well versed and able to articulate its position compared to the fisher who cannot articulate his or her position as clearly. In most cases, the decision is made before the meeting, and the people representing the fishers are only there to rubber stamp the decision. Government processes need to be in place to accommodate the identity of fishing communities and not in a multi-stakeholder forum. She believed that opportunities exist for entrepreneurship for the youth, women, and people living with disabilities. However, the inability of the Fisheries Department to govern and police the commercial fisheries was making it difficult to access. Co-ops as an initiative was introduced to the fishing industry by the Department of Trade and Industry as part of the regulations of the Small-scale Fisheries Policy. There was a mismatch between the policy and the regulations. A legal entity was then identified as a governance mechanism for small-scale fisher communities. However, a collective entity was a challenge because of the dysfunctionality within communities that prefer individual permits and quotas. She agreed that aquaculture is an important aspect and that the species must be palatable for South Africans in addition to the costs involved. Aquaculture was a pilot project in South Africa. She advised that Tanzania's investment in this industry and environmental factors should be considered to determine the viability of aquaculture in South Africa. Environmental laws were prohibiting most of the aquaculture initiatives in South Africa.

She replied to Member Boshoff that the licensing policy was based on a basket. The money for 120 kilograms is approximately R35 000 per year. The amount is much lower compared to social welfare and the minimum wage. The fishers received a small amount compared to the actual amount for selling West Coast lobster on the Chinese market. She proposed a review of the policy's regulations and model to align with the reality of the business. The co-op model was found to be dysfunctional and should be amended. With proper social science research and investment, the best governance structure for the industry could be developed. The debate about climate change showed the difficulty in attributing its effect on small-scale fishing. But overfishing by big and small companies was a definite problem. The big factor in changing the make-up of the species is the plastics and metals found in the ocean, and human waste being pumped into the ocean.

She replied to Member Van den Berg that it was not only China but also Indonesia that was involving communities in economic hubs based on a collective approach to stimulate development of the Chinese people as a whole. The Chinese economic system is encouraging the creation of economic hubs, but South Africa does not have the political will to do the same. If the money allocated to fishing communities could be invested differently, it would result in thriving communities. People do not merely want to survive but wish to create wealth from the harvested fish. Providing a proper cold chain, a value chain, and market accessibility to provide fresh fish to the South African market would benefit the small-scale fisher. The value chain offers many opportunities that the South African government was not investing in. The Norwegian government was sponsoring research in climate change diversification. It was important for the government to make its own investment. Many foreign investments are made in plastic pollution, ocean conservation, and small-scale fishers, but NGOs have been redirecting the money allocated for small-scale fishers.

She thanked Members for the insightful questions.

Closing remarks

The Chairperson said the responses were lengthy and quite detailed. He asked if any Member had a closing remark for the Prof.

Mr Farmer thanked her for the information. In addition to advocating for the plight of the fishers, he called for consideration of the wider picture and to merge all the issues for a better future and the industry's sustainability. He wished to work with the Prof on issues concerning small-scale fishers.

The Chairperson confirmed that Prof would welcome further engagement on any issues from Members.

Prof Isaacs replied that she is at the committee's service, to assist with governance processes and ask critical questions. She thanked the members for their openness to accepting her on the platform.

The Chairperson thanked the Professor and said the Committee would develop a programme based on the information received and would engage with her in the near future.

Minutes

The Committee adopted the following minutes as a true reflection of the meetings held on:

4 February 2025; and

19 February 2025.

The Chairperson advised that formal communication about the next meeting would be distributed when details become available.

The meeting was adjourned.