By Charles George
(President, All-India Deep Sea Fishers Association)
The Government of India has announced its intention to permit large Indian-owned vessels to operate in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and the high seas, beyond India’s sovereign maritime boundaries. A notification has since been issued by the Union Government's Fisheries Department, and a parallel code of conduct or protocol has been released by the Ministry of External Affairs. The lack of clarity—whether these are binding laws, guidelines, or advisory frameworks—creates both institutional ambiguity and policy confusion.
The government deserves credit for, for the first time, registering vessels and issuing formal passes. This is a necessary step towards regulating activity in waters that have long remained under-monitored. But registration alone will not suffice. India needs a comprehensive Vessel Act covering all aspects of EEZ fishing: vessel monitoring systems (VMS), fishing rights, operational limits, and enforcement mechanisms. Multiplicity of authorities—the Fisheries Department, External Affairs Ministry, and Shipping Ministry—only compounds complexity, raising the risk of fragmented governance.
India already has a problem of excess fleet capacity. In 2022, the government told Parliament that 3,14,677 fishing vessels operated within the EEZ, against a sustainable requirement of only 93,287. While the dominance of small-scale, traditional craft means the sustainability threshold is blurred, the sheer numerical imbalance raises questions. Adding large industrial vessels to this mix could worsen pressures on fish stocks and jeopardise livelihoods.
The Murari Committee in 1997 had argued for strengthening and co-operativising the traditional fishing sector rather than licensing monopolies and large companies. That advice remains relevant. Instead of promoting industrial fleets, government support should flow to co-operatives of fish workers and their federations—ensuring equity, resilience, and sustainability.
The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has warned that 1,616 fish species face existential risk due to over-fishing; 989 are threatened, and 627 stand on the brink of extinction. Iconic species such as Bluefin Tuna, European Eel and Beluga Sturgeon have already collapsed. In the Indian Ocean, the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) has flagged that yellow-fin tuna stocks are at 89 percent capacity—well beyond safe biological limits. Bigeye tuna (79 percent), skipjack tuna (70 percent), and longtail tuna (99 percent) are all nearing unsustainable levels. Introducing industrial fishing for tuna under these conditions defies logic.
India’s deep-sea fisheries represent only 4 percent of the country’s total resources. Pursuing them requires higher fuel expenditure at a time when high-speed diesel prices are already elevated. History tells us that industrial deep-sea ventures have repeatedly failed: Tata, ITC, Dunlop and others have withdrawn in the past due to unviability. Newly formed companies such as Indochem and Fortune Fisheries have also collapsed.
The inevitable consequence has been encroachment into near-shore zones, devastating small-scale operators. The use of high-wattage LED lights (1.5–4 lakh watts) to attract fish intensifies pressure on coastal ecosystems, threatening the livelihoods of over 64,000 fishers dependent on these waters.
India has argued at the WTO that fishing subsidies should not be equated with over-fishing, as they remain vital to protecting the livelihoods of poor coastal communities. Yet our position will be weakened if we introduce large-scale industrial fishing. While developed nations spend $22.3 billion annually on subsidies for industrial fleets, India provides a meagre $15 per fisherman. Meanwhile, 67.1 percent of Indian fishers live below the poverty line, supporting nearly 40 million coastal families. The question is whether scarce government support should be redirected to industrial fleets—or used to uplift these communities.
India’s fishing policy requires urgent reform grounded in sustainability and equity:
A single comprehensive Vessel Act, covering registration, VMS, fishing rights and enforcement.
Publication of species-wise statistics to inform policy and demonstrate accountability.
Updating the Murari Committee’s recommendations, prioritising co-operatives of fish workers over corporate fleets.
Expansion of subsidies from 50 percent to 90–100 percent, directed specifically at small-scale fishers.
Reconsideration of territorial waters and EEZ limits through international legal channels, but anchored in ecological rationale rather than expansionism.
A moratorium on industrial tuna fishing in line with IOTC findings.
A strict ban on mid-sea transfers, which in practice amount to sanctioned poaching.
India’s stand at the WTO has rightly highlighted that our fisheries sector is not comparable to that of developed nations. It is dominated by small-scale, low-income, food-insecure communities. Industrial fishing fleets will neither secure sustainability nor strengthen food security. They will only intensify ecological stress while undermining millions of livelihoods.
Sustainable fisheries policy demands clarity of law, unity of command, and commitment to equity. The government’s proposals, in their current form, risk creating precisely the opposite.
