Suchergebnisse

Main description: Ole Sparenberg untersucht aus wirtschafts- und umwelthistorischer Perspektive wie Hochseefischerei und Walfang helfen sollten, ohne Devisenaufwand die Fett- und Eiweißlücke in der deutschen Autarkiewirtschaft zu schließen. Trotz der schon spürbaren Übernutzung vieler Fisch- und Walbestände war eine deutliche Fangmengensteigerung in den 1930er Jahren noch möglich, und die Schwierigkeiten lagen vielmehr beim Absatz. Zwar konnte das Regime, ohne Rücksicht auf die Stimmung in der Bevölkerung nehmen zu müssen, Versorgungsmängel eingestehen und eine Umstellung von Fleisch auf im Binnenland ungewohnte und oft mangelhafte Fischerzeugnisse fordern, aber ein ungenügendes Einzelhandelsnetz, unzureichende Konservierungstechniken und vor allem die fehlende Verbraucherakzeptanz setzten auch unter den Bedingungen des NS-Staates dem Anstieg des Fischverbrauchs enge Grenzen. Während andere Erscheinungen der deutschen Autarkiewirtschaft auch Blockadesicherheit versprachen, waren Hochseefischerei und Walfang auf einen freien Zugang zum Meer angewiesen und konnten daher keinen Beitrag zur Kriegswirtschaft leisten.

"The emergence of the vocational profile "deep-sea fish worker" was directly connected with the construction of the first factory ships. lt was not until the 1960s that these vessels had been developed to a degree that allowed their more extensive utilisation. Accordingly, only then did they require enough workers to justify the introduction of a new vocational profile. Yet this development was delayed in both German states, where two quite different paths were taken towards the goal of furnishing factory ships with qualified processing personnel. As in the area of deck personnel, the West German fishing industry chose to depend on apprenticeship and further qualification on board. The fish-processing combines of the German Democratic Republic, on the other hand, preferred skilled personnel with completed vocational training. Yet the latter regarded the requirements of work on the factory decks of their fishing fleet to be approximately the same as those of the fishing industry on land, thus failing to recognise the necessity of a separate vocational training course. Here the fleet was simply regarded as one of several possible employment opportunities available to those who had completed training in fish processing. The most significant difference, however, was not in the type of vocational training but in the actual makeup of the personnel: in the Federal Republic of Germany, the majority of deep-sea fish workers were Portuguese, while in the GDR this vocation was dominated by women. Thus vocational training in fish processing on board the factory ships, like vocational training on deck, was a direct reflection of the social circumstances of the two German states." (author's abstract)

"Ever since the existence of deep-sea fishing under the German flag there have been repeated efforts to establish the occupation of the deep-sea fisherman as one requiring specialised training. Yet only during the Nazi era and that of the German Democratic Republic were these attempts crowned with success. As is illustrated by the two examples presented here, the non-existence of systematic vocational training in this field is not due to a lack of its necessity but rather to the fact that, particularly in times of labour scarcity, the shipping companies have never been interested in such training if they had the opportunity of finding employees elsewhere. ln periods of centralist, statist political systems, which intensively promoted the fishing industry and set up the fleets on the basis of political will rather than economic orientation, this one-sided interest of the shipping companies was not a factor. In interviews, former crew members have repeatedly expressed the point of view that the kind of vocational training practised in Germany before 1939 or in the Federal Republic of Germany since the end of the war- i.e. pure practical instruction on board - provides a solid basis for the everyday work on the deck of a deep-sea fishing vessel. Yet on the other hand, those who had obtained their training during the Nazi regime or received some form of instruction in coastal fishing were at a distinct advantage on board, being quickly selected for better jobs, for example net- making. In general, the comprehensive introduction of systematic vocational training for deep-sea fishing deck personnel would certainly have been welcome. But without the kind of legal initiative present, for example, in the German Democratic Republic, this aim could never be achieved. As it is, an ordinary seaman can sign onto a fishing vessel; entry into nautical college in order to qualify as an officer or captain is not dependent upon successful completion of training but merely upon time accumulated at sea. Thus there is no motivation for undergoing methodical instruction, particularly in view of the fact that doing so would cause a considerable reduction in earnings during the initial years of employment.
The subject of vocational training in the deep-sea fishing industry has thus remained a direct reflection of the socioeconomic importance of this field in each of the respective political systems in Germany. ln times of economic orientation such training was non-existent and there was no legally established minimum qualification level. During eras of centralised economies, deep-sea fishing was a government priority and thus always accompanied by systematic vocational training for its deck personnel." (author's abstract)