Page 43 - Sjæklen2004

Departementschef D. S. Dinesens arkiv, 1956, LB 1.
37. Dansk Fiskeritidende 1956, p. 209-210; Dansk Fiskeri-
tidende 1956, p. 261-262, Dansk Fiskeritidende 1956, p.
286-287; Dansk Fiskeritidende 1956, p. 338-339.
38. Dansk Fiskeritidende 1956, 441-442; Dansk Fiskeriti-
dende 1956, 578-579.
39. Dansk Fiskeritidende 1957, 541-542.
40. RA, FA, Diverse vedr. ny konvention 1957-1959, LB 14.
41. RA, FA, Diverse vedr. ny konvention 1957-1959, LB 14.
42. Dansk Fiskeritidende 1959, p. 67.
43. Dansk Fiskeritidende 1958, p. 701; Dansk Fiskeritiden-
de 1962, p. 285; Tillæg til Dansk Fiskeritidende nr. 30,
1962, p. 9.
Summary
In the development which the Danish fishing industry under-
went during the second half of the 20th century, politics
played an ever more important role. In step with the ever
increasing pressure on fish populations, the need for state
regulation increased, and the international fight for owner-
ship of the resources increased in intensity. As one of the
major European fishing nations, Denmark held a centre-sta-
ge position. This article focuses on the negotiations under the
North Sea Convention, which were the first step in this inter-
national game of fish and fishing rights. The Danish interests
and relations with competing fishing nations are the general
theme.
Although efforts were made in the years leading up to
World War II to regulate fishing in the North Sea, it was not
until the signing of the North Sea Convention in 1946 that
things began to happen. The Danish fishing industry was then
distinguished by its autonomous structure, stemming from its
fundamental liberalism. Most Danish fishermen did not stick
together out of solidarity, but rather out of a kind of common
interest denominator. In principle, therefore, the scope for
dominating the fishing industry was wide, but the employees
and changing ministers at the Ministry of Fisheries were very
loyal to the organisations during the period. The line of con-
tact from the individual fisherman to the negotiating table
was thus very direct.
An important problem with the North Sea Convention
was, however, that it generally only included minimum
sizes and mesh sizes as regulating measures. It was also
increasingly found to be a problem that many of the nations
which, like the Soviet Union, were building large fishing
fleets were not parties to the Convention. One final problem
was that the Convention would only be ratified in 1954,
when in principle it was outdated and inadequate. Many of
the conflicts which changing Danish delegations experien-
ced during negotiations were thus due to the fact that when
the Convention was drawn up, it was impossible to predict
the colossal scale of industrial fishing which developed in
the post-war period.
The Danish problems, especially with industrial fishing,
were the key point in numerous negotiations. The Danish
delegation felt many times that they had their backs to the
wall and were forced to defend themselves against major fis-
hing nations which were concentrating on fishing for edible
fish. Nevertheless, the Danes apparently soon learnt to play
this game. Having first sought alliances with Norway and
Sweden in particular, both of which had an ownership struc-
ture in the fishing industry similar to that of Denmark, and
therefore had similar problems, the Danes changed partners
in 1956-57. The preferred partner then became West Germa-
ny, which was facing some of the same problems concerning
subsidiary catches as the Danes. The Danes thus succeeded
time and again in manoeuvring and gaining dispensations for
Danish special interests. The Danish game was not, however,
without complications. It meant partly that Denmark had to
compromise in other areas, and partly that deep ditches were
dug between the negotiating partners.
The conflict lines which thus developed during the 17
years from 1946 to 1963, when the North Sea Convention
was in force, also cast their shadow on the problems with
which the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission, and
later the EEC/EU fisheries politicians, came to do battle.
Seen in this perspective, it may be argued that several of the
present day problems in fisheries politics have a direct con-
nection with the international entanglements which arose
under the North Sea Convention.
43