Men have exploited marine plant stocks for centuries. At the end of the 19th century and in the early 20th century, seaweed harvesting activity was intense. Although cutting takes place along the entire littoral, stocks have always seemed well able to reproduce themselves.
Is this proof of rational resource management? Harvesters have acknowledged the need for resource management and the choice of cutting periods reflects their awareness of resource maturity and of technical imperatives (drying time, coordination of the harvest with the plowing season, etc.).
Rotation is practised in some areas. Gear and methods considered harmful to the resource are often prohibited by local regulations and traditions. A genuine commitment to resource exploitation management has been made.
This effort has been directed toward the social rather than the biological aspects of management. Exploitation is highly organized, demonstrating that control of effort as well as control of competition exists. The regulations include compensation for social inequities, such as widow's rights and "Veiz ar peorienn".
In this maritime region, where the principle that "the sea belongs to all" is usually the rule, resource attribution lends a unique character to seaweed exploitation.
Allocation may take place at the communal, neighbourhood or family level. There is a trend towards individual benefit and away from community use of the resource. This shift, linked to intensification of exploitation, represents, in fact, the only means of achieving equitable resource distribution in this situation.
We reach the conclusion that seaweed harvesters perceived two distinct areas of resource management, both equally important. These were the rational exploitation of the stock and the organization of community participation in this exploitation.
Achieving these ends required a true sense of community loyalty and even commonality of thought and way of life. Fishery studies too often neglect the social behaviour of fishermen. For many, rational management of fishery stocks involves no level beyond that of population dynamics. Man's intervention in this approach is seen only as a coefficient of fishing mortality.
An inventory of equipment and resources, management objectives and programme definitions are all vital to fishery management, but should retain a human face. Like history and works of art, tradition contributes to the patrimony of a people. It should be respected and adapted to meet the changing needs of resource management.
It would be futile to try to make modern tuna seiners of the Jingadeiros of Brazil or the canoe fishermen of Senegal. We have seen that Breton seaweed harvesters, though eager to modernize their industry, refused underwater harvesting by divers and the gigantic "floating harvesters" conceived for harvesting Macrocystis; measures which they could not integrate with their way of life.
All management should be conducted for and with the people involved, with respect for and willingness to learn from the traditions which have sustained them.
