Fishing Across the Centuries: What Prospects for the Venice Lagoon?

Fishing has always been an important part of the Venetian heritage as well as the local economy.
However, what once started as an artisanal trade with tight regulation has become highly mechanized and lacks regulation. The article titled "Fishing across the Centuries: What Prospect for the Venice Lagoon?" by Silvia Silvestri, examines the evolution of the Venice fishing industry and it's impact on the environment and the productivity of the lagoon.

Since the founding of the Venetian Republic, fishing was always a premier means of meeting the local demand for food. In the early stages, dating back to the 12th centuries, the industry was heavily controlled in order to ensure wise management of the lagoon. In 1510, a Supervisor of the Waters, called "Magistrato alle Aque," was enlisted to create and manage the regulations and improvements regarding fishing in the Venice lagoon.

A large portion of the regulation had to do with specifications on netting used to catch the fish. For instance, it was forbidden to use any sort of implement that would harm the environmental elements of the lagoon, such ad the banks and canals. Since motorized boats were not around yet, sail boats were most commonly used, and the tackle used was low-impact and non-invasive which fostered stable environmental conditions.

Netting, tackle and the boats themselves continued to evolve throughout the centuries. In the early 1900s, the main methods of fishing used trawl nets, fyke nets, drift nets, seine nets and various special nets or tackle. Greater evolutionary leaps have been in clam and mussel fishing, however. Though these types of fishing have historically been more invasive in nature, technological advancements have made things even worse. For instance, in 1993, 22,100 tons of mussels were harvested. As of 2006, the yield was five times smaller. This is likely due to the use of dredging, a mechanism in which sediment along the bottom of the lagoon is constantly disrupted and thus hindering the ability of other organisms, such as phytoplankton and algae, to grow and survive.

As of the year 2000, the estimated morphological damage caused by fishermen was about 10 million euros annually. Additionally, the ecosystem has changed so much due to the invasive fishing and clamming techniques that it has also caused a depletion of fish resources. This could be due to more pressure from the growing industry, as well as the lack of regulation on factors such as catch limits.

Altbough there are not many limitations on how much can be caught, there is regulation as to where fishermen can and cannot fish within the lagoon. This has caused an interesting yet concerning phenomenon in the Venice lagoon in the recent years, which we learned about during our visit to the Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (ISPRA), which is like the Italian equivalent to the EPA: many fishermen have resorted to illegal fishing within the lagoon in order to get greater yields. Since there are less fish to catch in those designated fishing areas, the boats will go out at night with their lights off to fish in prohibited areas in hopes of getting better yields, then selling their catch on the black market.

The biologist we spoke with informed us that this illegal fishing throws off the actual aggregate yield recorded, making it seem like the demand for fish cannot be met. As a result, more fish is being imported from other countries to supplement the local supply. This is an unfortunate and unnecessary cost that is facing the fishing industry, as well as consumers, in Venice.

We also learned that, as an attempt to stop this illegal fishing, infra-red lasers have been planted in several areas of the lagoon that are able to detect if fishermen are fishing in illegal areas and would otherwise go undetected. While this is an impressive way to use technology to combat the issue of overfishing, it isn't sufficient because illegal fishing is still going on. Whether it's with other technological advancements or stricter regulation, the city will need to get creative in order to solve the issue.