"Initiative 696: ‘To whom do the fish belong?’"by Bishop William S. Skylstad (From the Oct. 21, 1999 edition of the Inland Register)
On Nov. 2, voters will have the opportunity to ban commercial net fishing in Washington State waters. Initiative 696 (I-696) would prohibit non-tribal commercial net, troll and trawl fishing from Washington state fresh and marine waters. The initiative has sparked fierce debate over the use of nets in commercial fishing. Proponents point to commercial net fishing as a culprit for declining fish population, and look to I-696 as a way to stop what they see as wasteful harvesting techniques. Opponents argue that nets have a minimal effect on fish populations and that I-696 would have a devastating effect on their livelihoods. The debate over I-696 has the flavor of an argument over ownership of property. To whom do the fish belong? Who has the right to claim them? Both sides have valid arguments. As voters, we could answer this question by simply asking ourselves, “Which side do I favor?” However, the common good calls us to take a different approach. Like those of many religious traditions, we see fish as creatures of God. Ultimately, they belong to God. We recognize God’s role as creator and see our role described in Genesis: “The Lord God took and placed the human in the garden of Eden, to serve it and protect it.” We must care for fish in the same way as we care for all of God’s creation. We neglect this duty if we discuss I-696 by simply choosing a side and fighting to secure access to the fish for our side. Instead, we must seek the common good, and our discussion of I-696 should seek to preserve the fish for all people. Our discussion should be especially cognizant of the endangered status of many salmon species and the significance of these fish to our region. The salmon were a source of life for people in Washington State long before this land was called Washington State. Indigenous people depended upon the abundant wild stocks of these fish native to our waters. When Europeans came to this land, they too came to see the value of these plentiful fish as food and as a commercial resource. Today, overfishing, industrial practices, dam construction, habitat loss and development have diminished the numbers of salmon. Some wild stocks are extinct while others are endangered or threatened. As we have seen the numbers of salmon fall, our sense of their value has heightened. We see our dependence on the salmon for recreation, commercial enterprise and preservation of our environment. Without enough fish, native people lose their cultural tradition and economic opportunity, businesses suffer hardship, fishers lose an economic base and a treasured sport, we all lose a healthy source of nourishment and our beautiful ecosystem is diminished. More and more, we see why native people understood the salmon as sacred. Our science is confirming what native spirituality has proclaimed for many years: the health of the salmon indicates the health of our entire ecosystem. As the Catholic Bishops of this region have participated in the writing of a pastoral letter on the Columbia River, we have become more and more impressed with the fact that there will be no single, simple way to preserve our environment, including the salmon. Our effects on this resource go well beyond fishing practices to include how we generate electric power, operate our industries and develop our land. As a community, we have endangered the salmon and, unless we act as a community, we cannot succeed in saving them. I-696 and the debate over commercial net fishing is only one facet of a problem that demands a multi-faceted solution. Whether this initiative passes or fails, our community will still be left with much work to do if we want to restore salmon population. We need a comprehensive strategy to preserve fish populations, and we will all need to make sacrifices in order to make this strategy successful. Public discourse about this issue should be transformed from an argument over who gets to harvest a resource into a discussion of how we as a community should care for a special part of God’s creation that brings life to so many of us.
"We cannot interfere in one area of the ecosystem without paying due attention both to the
consequences of such interference in other areas and to the well-being of future
generations ... delicate ecological balances are upset by the uncontrolled destruction of
animal and plant life or by a reckless exploitation of natural resources. It should be pointed
out that all of this, even if carried out in the name of progress and well-being, is ultimately
to [hu]man-kind’s disadvantage.... An education in ecological responsibility is urgent:
responsibility for oneself, for others, and for the earth." (To learn more about the Columbia River Pastoral Letter Project, visit the project web site. For further information, please contact the Washington State Catholic Conference at (206) 301-0556.)
 Home |
(Editor’s note: The Catholic bishops of Washington State — Archbishop Alex J. Brunett of
Seattle, Bishop William S. Skylstad of Spokane and Bishop Carlos A. Sevilla S.J. of Yakima —
released the following reflection on Initiative 696, which would ban commercial net fishing.)