MARE Publication Series 11

Nataša Rogelja Alenka Janko Spreizer Fish on the Move Fishing Between Discourses and Borders in the Northern Adriatic MARE Publication Series

Volume 11

Series editors Maarten Bavinck, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands [email protected] Svein Jentoft, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Norway [email protected] The MARE Publication Series is an initiative of the Centre for Maritime Research (MARE). MARE is an interdisciplinary social-science network devoted to studying the use and management of marine resources. It is based jointly at the University of Amsterdam and Wageningen University (www.marecentre.nl). The MARE Publication Series addresses topics of contemporary relevance in the wide field of ‘people and the sea’. It has a global scope and includes contributions from a wide range of social science disciplines as well as from applied sciences. Topics range from fisheries, to integrated management, coastal , and envi- ronmental conservation. The series was previously hosted by Amsterdam Univer- sity Press and joined Springer in 2011. The MARE Publication Series is complemented by the Journal of Maritime Studies (MAST) and the biennial People and the Sea Conferences in Amsterdam.

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/10413 Natasˇa Rogelja • Alenka Janko Spreizer

Fish on the Move Fishing Between Discourses and Borders in the Northern Adriatic Natasˇa Rogelja Alenka Janko Spreizer Slovenian Migration Institute The Faculty of Humanities at the University Research Centre of the Slovenian of Primorska Academy of Sciences and Arts Department of Anthropology and Cultural , Studies Institute of Intercultural Studies , Slovenia

ISSN 2212-6260 ISSN 2212-6279 (electronic) MARE Publication Series ISBN 978-3-319-51895-4 ISBN 978-3-319-51897-8 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-51897-8

Library of Congress Control Number: 2017930196

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Cover illustration: Fish tank – small Mediterranean fish, Cretaquarium, 2012, Courtesy of Natasˇa Rogelja

Printed on acid-free paper

This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland Acknowledgments

Even though writing is always a solitary act, the emergence of anthropological books is definitely not. The text, also as research, is an outcome of ongoing, fiery debates whose outcomes are anything but predictable. In the extended period, the unenviable aim of which was to freeze and fix some of these continuing processes, we would like to thank a number of people who helped us along. First, we would like to acknowledge the patient help of our interlocutors from Koper, , and who shared with us not only their time, food, houses, and boats but also their sharp ideas and playful humor. Without their support, it would be impossible to accomplish this project. Thank you! We would also like to acknowledge the help provided by the Fisheries Office in Izola; the Hunting and Fisheries Sector at the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food of the Republic of Slovenia; the Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia; and the Fisheries Research Institute of Slovenia who shared with us their practical knowledge and gave us access to their data as well as guided us through their methodological and epistemological pathways. We would like to thank Ursˇa Kanjir (ZRC SAZU) for helping us in designing maps of the research area, Jernej Mlekuž (ZRC SAZU) who gave critical comments to the introductory text of this book, and Natasˇa Gregoricˇ Bon (ZRC SAZU) for her scholarly support and her all-round kindness. Inspiring discussions that took place within the project “Ethnographies of Land and Water Routes: A Comparative Approach to (Im)mobility” (J6—6839), led by Natasˇa Gregoricˇ Bon (ZRC SAZU), made us see our ethnographic material in a new light. Our thanks go also to the Springer editors and reviewers of the book who provided a smooth process, lucid and encouraging comments, and technical sup- port. Within this process, we would like to acknowledge the help provided by Maarten Bavinck (University of Amsterdam) and Tom Selwyn (SOAS). Natasˇa Rogelja would also like to extend her personal thanks to her brother Igor Rogelja (SOAS) for his scholarly advice and to her colleague and friend Martina Bofulin (ZRC SAZU) who not only generously shared her knowledge and ideas but also gave support in countless other ways. Also, a great thank you to Ana Jelnikar

v vi Acknowledgments

(ZRC SAZU), our proofreader and Natasˇa’s good friend and colleague who has been so much more than a proofreader. Lastly, to her family, Bosˇtjan, Zˇ iva, Dan, and Zˇ an, who patiently waited for her to close the computer at the end of the day. Alenka Janko Spreizer would like to thank her colleagues at the Institute of Intercultural Studies and at the Faculty of Humanities, Department of Anthropology and Cultural Studies, for sharing their generous comments which were positively invigorating for the writing and rewriting stage of the project. Last but not least, she is grateful to her husband, Mitja Spreizer, for having enormous patience, for spending hours in the company of very different people on the shore and at sea, and for talking through the day and long into the night with our friends. A thank you for having faith and for knowing when it was the right time to give space for quiet writing and when it was right to go to the sea. Contents

1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic ...... 1 1.1 TheWalk...... 4 1.1.1 From Lazaret/Lazaretto to Debeli rticˇ/Punta Grosa . . . . 4 1.1.2 Along the Adriatic Road to Sˇkocjanski zatok ...... 6 1.1.3 The Port of Koper, Old Town and Porporella ...... 9 1.1.4 On the Trace of Porecˇanka/Parenzana from Koper to Izola ...... 11 1.1.5 Izola, the Town of Workers and Fishermen ...... 12 1.1.6 From Marina Izola to San Simon Resort ...... 15 1.1.7 Landscape Park and the Bay of Strunjan . . . . 16 1.1.8 From Fiesa to Piran ...... 18 1.1.9 To Bernardin in Portorož ...... 20 1.1.10 The Bay of Piran ...... 21 1.2 Voices of Discordance ...... 23 References ...... 29

Part I Orientation: NE Adriatic 2 The Field of Ethnological Study Between Borders and Discourses ...... 37 2.1 Geographical Borders and Discourses ...... 38 2.1.1 Many Names for a Small Region ...... 38 2.1.2 Geomorphology of the Gulf of ...... 39 2.2 Biology: From Technological Innovation to Overexploitation ...... 41 2.2.1 Technological Innovation of Industrial Fishing in SFR Yugoslavia ...... 41 2.2.2 Overexploited Fish Populations, Endangered Marine Species and Migratory Fish ...... 43

vii viii Contents

2.3 Disputed Borders and “Extruded Histories” ...... 45 2.3.1 The Dispute ...... 46 2.3.2 Is the Fishing Tradition of the Bay of Piran Really Slovene? ...... 50 2.3.3 “Extruded Histories” ...... 53 2.4 Slovene Marine Fishing: Fragments from the Twentieth and Twenty-First Century ...... 54 2.4.1 Industrial Fishing and Canning Industry in the North-East Adriatic ...... 55 2.4.2 Private and Non-industrial Fishing from WWII Until 1991 ...... 57 References ...... 60

Part II Transformation: Slovene Fishermen After the Separation from SFR Yugoslavia 3 Fishing in Slovenia After 1991 ...... 69 3.1 Nationalization of Fisheries ...... 69 3.1.1 Slovene Ethnological and Amateur Production: Gaps and Silences in Transposing Tradition ...... 70 3.2 Open Letters, Project Applications and Newspapers ...... 75 3.2.1 Does Slovenia Need Fishermen? ...... 75 3.2.2 Reading About Fishermen in Slovene Newspapers . . . . 79 References ...... 82 4 Conversations on the Pier ...... 85 4.1 Mulling over the Mullets ...... 85 4.1.1 The Mullet Fishing After 1991 ...... 87 4.2 Who Is the Real Fisherman? ...... 95 4.2.1 Back to the Future: From Industrial Fishing to Private Fishing ...... 95 References ...... 105

Part III Innovation: Uses of Authenticity in North-Eastern Adriatic Corner 5 Yugoslav and Post-Yugoslav Coastal Tourism ...... 113 5.1 Historical Sketch ...... 115 5.2 After 1991 ...... 122 References ...... 126 6 Fishing for Tourists ...... 129 6.1 Pros and Cons Discussions ...... 132 6.2 Three Ethnographic Narratives ...... 136 6.2.1 A Day off for Coal-Miners and Peasant Women . .... 136 6.2.2 Fishing with Fishermen ...... 139 6.2.3 “When the Sea Is Caught in the Net” ...... 140 References ...... 144 Contents ix

7 How Authentic Is Fishing ? ...... 145 7.1 Theory: Invention, Innovation and Authenticity ...... 148 7.2 People: Fishing Tourism as Innovation ...... 151 7.3 Images: Mediterranean, , the Sea and the Fishing ...... 156 7.3.1 Heterogeneous Constructions ...... 156 7.3.2 Tourist Rhetoric and Fishing ...... 158 7.4 Putting the Pieces together ...... 166 References ...... 168

Part IV Management: Sustainable Development, Projects and Common Fisheries Policy 8 Walk Along the Protected Areas and Navigation with Sustainable Fishermen ...... 177 8.1 Environmentalism in SFR Yugoslavia ...... 179 8.2 “Slovene Fishing Is Totally Sustainable”: A Dialogue with Greenpeace ...... 184 References ...... 188 9 European Books Are Too Big for Us ...... 191 9.1 Project: Heading Towards Europe ...... 193 9.1.1 Fishery Office ...... 193 9.1.2 “Fishing for Projects” ...... 199 References ...... 204 10 Small Fish in a Big World ...... 205 10.1 Mashed-Up Layers ...... 206 10.1.1 What Can We Learn from the Small Example? ...... 210 References ...... 214 Chapter 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic

Abstract The introductory chapter aims to present selected material sites and symbolic markers that inhabit the 47 km of the present-day bilingual Slovenian coastline, stretching from the peninsula of /Milje to the peninsula of Savudrija/Salvore in the northernmost bay of the Mediterranean Sea. Although this distance is short, it is invested with any number of symbolic connotations important for diachronic and synchronic perspective. In the first part authors invite the reader to join them for this short but rather demanding walk located within the geopolitical space of the northeastern part of Istria (shared between Slovenia, and ) that is represented primarily as a border region. The second part of the chapter entitled Voices of Discordance presents the aim and the structure of the book.

Keywords Walking ethnography • Landscape • Istria • Mediterranean • Slovenia • Voices of discordance

The book primarily deals with the small-scale fishing economy along the Slovenian shore, but at the same time it engages extensively with the discourses in which this local economy is embedded. Fishing in the northeastern part of the makes for a substantial economy anchored in many stories. Regional conflicts, wars, the demise of empires and the rise of nation states with ensuing maritime border issues, socialist heritage, transnational and transformational processes in Europe, and the growth of capitalist relations between production and consumption in coastal areas, have all contributed to the specific discourses that have affected this area. In the following pages we will thus address fishing from the economic, political, social and environmental aspects, hoping to present to the reader the development of events in this small corner of the Mediterranean in a loosely chronological order, starting from the second half of the previous century. In doing so we rely mainly on our ethnographic documentation, supplemented with various documentary sources. But let us first invite you for a walk along the coastal landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic. Readings of landscape, following Tom Selwyn, are suggestive windows onto various contours of societies, cultures, histories and politics of the countries and regions that they border on (Selwyn 2012: 169). Navigating this terrain, the introduction aims to present selected material sites and symbolic markers that

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 1 N. Rogelja, A. Janko Spreizer, Fish on the Move, MARE Publication Series 11, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-51897-8_1 2 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic inhabit the 47 km of the present-day bilingual Slovenian coastline, stretching from the peninsula of Muggia/Milje1 to the peninsula of Savudrija/Salvore in the north- ernmost bay of the Mediterranean Sea. Although this distance is short, it is invested with any number of symbolic connotations important for our diachronic and synchronic perspective. Keeping this in mind we would like to invite the reader to join us for this short but rather demanding walk located within the geopolitical space of the northeastern part of Istria (shared between Slovenia, Croatia and Italy) that is represented primarily as a border region. In this endeavour we come in a long line of walkers-cum-writers, most of them stemming from the tradition set by J.J. Rousseau’s canonical text Reveries of a Solitary Walker (1979 [1782]) that influenced numerous English and German Romantic writers and echoed geographically and chronologically far beyond the romantic writings. In literature as well as in research, the twin figure of the walker/writer began to multiply over the ensuing centuries. Needless to say, anthropologists, having the reputation of being amongst the more creative researchers, were not immune to this influence. Some used descriptions of walking as a way of presenting fieldwork sites (Selwyn 2012), while others devoted their research interests to walking as a human practice (Ingold 2011; Ingold and Vergunst 2008; Mauss [1934] 1979) or used walking as a methodological approach (Pink 2010; Anderson 2004; Edensor 2010). Our intent is mostly related to the first approach, aiming to present our fieldwork site from a walker’s perspective, allowing the walker/reader to see and understand various levels of reality embodied in the landscape as proposed by Selwyn (forthcoming 2017). We strive to present a coherence between the material, socio-economic, and ideological levels, the insis- tent themes of identity and relations between self and other, commenting on how knowledge is gathered and produced in this (ibid). In doing so, we do not intend to present separate analytical levels of reality or ‘objective facts’ – if they ever existed – but aim more to ‘follow what is going on, tracing the multiple trails of becoming, wherever they lead’, to borrow from Tim Ingold’s prologue from his book Being Alive (2011: 14 orig. it.). The aim of this introductory walk is thus to equip the reader with a contextual framework that will enable him/her to safely navigate the sea routes along the borders, as well as to walk confidently between the material sites, symbolic features, and to understand the social relations that have generated different discourses of this place throughout its history. The second part of the introduction will then go on to present the aim and the structure of the book. It goes without saying that our understandings, observations and interpretations are tailored within a personal context, both being amateur sailors as well as Slovene female anthropologists. All of this will no doubt inform and guide our steps. But we want to tread carefully. So, let us tell you more about our direction.

1In this introductory stroll the names of the mayor coastal towns and locations will be written in two languages (Italian and Slovene) when first mentioned, as we find ourselves walking in bilingual territory. Subsequently, we will avoid this for brevity’s sake and will use the first official name of the town, as it is in use within the particular state, unless the bilingual version is of direct relevance to the matter at hand. 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic 3

In shaping our observations, we were influenced by various disciplines, mostly anthropology of the Mediterranean, anthropology of tourism and anthropology of landscape. We were drawn to concepts and styles from any number of different authors (Andrews and Roberts 2012; Baskar 2002; Ballinger 2006, 2013; Cocco 2006, 2010a, b, 2013; Driessen 1999; Selwyn 1996a, 2012), while hopefully we succeeded in adding to the discussion something of our own genuine observations that will forward some of these ideas. From 1999 onwards, we have been able to observe with frequency and intensity the social relations emerging between the locals, tourists, students, researchers, and tourist workers as they go about their business along the present-day Slovene coast, paying attention to their construc- tions of place, with all the knots and twists. Taking into account “the whole”, both that which is hidden and that which is exposed (as well as the interplay between the two), we came to conclude that the sea and fishery represent an essential aspect of this place, although one which is not always obvious, but often hidden, problematic and undigested. It is woven into the political disputes linked with the issue of the maritime border, and thus a part of the so-called Slovene ‘national question’;itis part of the everyday realities of the coastal inhabitants but it can also be traced on postcards, as fishing became a part of the global tourist landscape. Apart from charts, books, postcards and ethnography, we, as contemporary cyber tourists also consulted webpages and local information boards available in 2014–2016 to orient ourselves in these liminal landscapes (Andrews and Roberts 2012) or places of discordance (Gregoricˇ Bon 2008), which are inevitably burdened with multiple and in many cases dubious meanings. Geopolitically, the Adriatic constitutes an important part of the Mediterranean and it is constructed as the inner sea within inner seas (Cocco 2006: 9). Due to its small size it is also seen as the sea of intimacy (Matvejevicˇ 1999: 14; Cocco 2006: 8; Ballinger 2013: 423). According to the contemporary nautical charts this part of the North Eastern Adriatic is known as the Golfo di Trieste in the , Tržasˇki zaliv in Slovene or Trsˇcˇanski zaljev in Croatian. The gulf is equally comfortable with all three names and while the town of Trieste lost its previous historical importance within the wider Istrian region, the northernmost Mediterra- nean bay still carries the name of the city that the New York Times compared to a modernist novel – complex, layered and ambiguous, but also forgotten and situated in the quietest corner of Italy (Begley 2011). Within the , we can find two subordinate toponyms: the bay of Koper/Capodistria and the bay of Piran/Pirano, written in smaller letters. If our sight is very sharp we can also notice the bay of Portorož/Portorose (as a subpart of Piran’s bay), written in very small blue letters. We might even take another look at the map and see that there is another bay next to another coastal town called Izola/Isola, but that the town did not get the privilege of having an inlet named after it. Why? Could it be that the bay of Piran is too close to the Croatian border to be left unnamed while Izola lies safely in the middle of these 50 km? Figure 1.1 could it be that Izola is (merely) a town of workers and fishermen? Could it be that other towns have more ‘historical’ importance? And what constitutes that historical importance? Let us leave these questions unanswered for the time being and instead strap up our boots and head off. We will begin 4 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic

Poland Germany Belgium

Czech Republic Ukraine

Slovakia

Austria Hungary Switzerland France · Trieste Slovenia · Croatia · Kozina Muggia

Bosnia and ·Koper Herzegovina Izola· Piran· Italy Smarje v · Montenegro · Seca

· Umag

Fig. 1.1 Map of the Slovenian coast (Designed by Ursˇa Kanjir) at the Italian-Slovene border and continue all the way down to the Croatian-Slovene one, travelling in easy stages, while enjoying the mild temperatures of the late Mediterranean spring, the smell of blossoming almond trees and a bustle of people getting their boats, houses and restaurants ready for the approaching tourist season (Fig. 1.2).

1.1 The Walk

1.1.1 From Lazaret/Lazaretto to Debeli rticˇ/Punta Grosa

Lazaret was a former border crossing on the frontier between the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) and Italy, representing the beginning of the so-called West. During the Venetian Empire, the had several lazarettos, which were a type of hospital or quarantine camp for people infected with leprosy and plague. The name Lazaret symbolizes historical connections with the port of Trieste, but it can also trigger the debate on liminality. Since no method of treatment was known at the time of the Venetian Empire, the main concern was preventing the spread of the disease among the population, so lazarettos were placed at the cities’ margins thus assuming the liminal space between healthy and sick people, between insiders and outsiders. In the time of SFR Yugoslavia, there were two duty-free shops on the Lazaret border pass, where people inevitably 1.1 The Walk 5

Fig. 1.2 Our walking track from Italian-Slovene to Slovene-Croatian border (Designed by Ursˇa Kanjir) stopped to shop when crossing the border. Duty free shops flourished in Yugoslavia during the 1980s, when consumers from the socialist state would in fact often cross the border for the explicit purpose of buying some untaxed luxury goods such as whisky, perfume, cigarettes and chocolates. The border gate ramp was removed in December 2004 when Slovenia became part of the European Union. Close to the border pass, there is a little beach tucked away in the small bay of Sv. Jernej/S. Bartolomeo, which gets quite crowded during the summer, with swimmers and bathers resting and enjoying a stretch of the coast that has not yet been built up, looking at the small boats of the locals and at shellfish farms. According to the fishermen and shellfish growers, the shellfish farms for growing mussels, which are filled up to their utmost capacities, are a recent development that came about through the support of the European Maritime and Fisheries Funds. 6 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic

While the shell farms are considered ecologically sustainable and clean, we might ask how this seascape, full of plastic buoys, is perceived by tourists? Walking southwards along the coastal street called Adriatic Street [Jadranska cesta], we might stop at the cape of Debeli rticˇ. In both languages, the name literally means Little Fat Cape. Debeli rticˇ is located on the geographical border between the Bay of Sv. Jernej and the Bay of Koper, the largest maritime bay in Slovenia. Since 1991, part of the cape has been under protection as a natural monument. Five yellow buoys floating on the water are there to prohibit anchoring, fishing and collecting sea organisms. The prohibitions notwithstanding, the place is rather crowded during the summer as the locals tend to anchor there illegally for bathing. Aside from the protected part, the area consists of one large vineyard belonging to the Vina Koper winery that has a long tradition of growing Cabernet. Debeli rticˇ is also known for its government/public summer resorts, such as the resort of the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Defense and the Slovenian Red Cross Youth and Health Resort Debeli rticˇ. As we can learn from their homepage (Debeli rticˇ 2014), this small youth resort had a long and complicated history that has imprinted itself onto the imagination of postwar generations. A foreign visitor might not have a clear idea about what this memory entails, but consulting the webpage of the health resort Debeli rticˇ, he or she will find black-and-white posters of Yugoslav volunteers building this place back in 1955. This specific past was promoted in the shape of posters and postage stamp for the occasion of celebrating volunteering in 2013 (Fig. 1.3). Aestheticized black-and-white images show volunteers as well as the first visitors (the same volunteers) who came with their suitcases and bags to the resort for the very first time on June 13, 1956. Today this date marks the birthday of this youth resort and is celebrated annually. The poster images can be seen as celebrat- ing solidarity tourism, or to be making connections with the new European volunteering and for some, they might trigger nostalgic, possibly even happy memories of the Yugoslav past, as Grandits and Taylor dared suggest in their edited book Yugoslavia’s Sunny Side (2010). As material objects, holiday homes and union resorts carry all the symbolic associations with the local trade unions’ and solidarity tourism at its hay-day in the socialist era. In today’s world however, holiday homes are available on the market to anyone who is able to pay for them. But what associations do images of past solidarity trigger in the minds of tourists unfamiliar with the Yugoslav ideology of brotherhood and unity?

1.1.2 Along the Adriatic Road to Sˇkocjanski zatok

Continuing along the Adriatic road we reach /Ancarano, a small town situated on the southern slope of the Muggia peninsula. As a tourist site Ankaran started to develop after WWII and local writers, trying to create an image of a place of healing and well-being, once again went for, and dug up, historical sources. They found a solid starting point: records of Bishop Giacommo Filippo Tommasini from 1.1 The Walk 7

Fig. 1.3 Postage stamp issued for the occasion of the solidarity week by The Post of Slovenia

Novigrad/Cittanova, who had said that monks from Venice would once come to Ankaran for relaxation, free fishing on its isolated beaches and for its altogether healthy climate. Keen observers might notice several pubs, restaurant and hotels carrying the name of Oltra. Wikipedia (2016a) will tell you that the region was historically been referred to as Oltra, in Italian meaning across the sea [oltre il mare]. Close by is a well-known Slovenian orthopedic hospital by the name of Valdoltra, still clearly bearing the old name. According to some other sources the name “Vale d’Oltra” or the valley on the other site, is a vestige of the rather vaguely defined Roman and Venetian past, the times of “others”, those who looked at it from the other side of the Adriatic shore. Continuing along the road, we come to the four-starred Adria-Ankaran camping site, which is open throughout the year, and to the Adria-Ankaran Hotel Resort. 8 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic

The Adria-Ankaran Hotel Resort offers hotel accommodation, rooms in villas or new apartments. The resort is situated in the shade of pine trees, only a hundred meters away from the beach. Once, this was the site of holiday homes, where companies made their apartments available to their workers. The camping site is one of the biggest in Slovenia and has 1600 plots, a sports playground, swimming pools and a sandy beach. Although the region is famous for its wine, in the summer months you might prefer a cold beer, produced in a craft brewery nearby. However, you should be aware that beer drinkers are often the subject of criticism and condescension, since local wine producers and fishermen prefer selling local wines such as Malvasia and Refosco to their guests. The beach in the Adria- Ankaran camping site ends with a pier, which in fact represents the final point of the Slovenian Mountain Trail, extending from to Ankaran and stretching across most of the Slovenian mountains. The trail opened in 1953 and is represented as the first trail that connects mountains with the sea. The trail is also a reminder of the characteristic Slovene penchant for hiking. Bearing in mind that numerous Slovene children receive a special mountain-hiking diary in their early youth, we can understand why a check-point for hikers with a stamp is placed at the end of the pier (Wikipedia 2016b). Not far away from the beach, near the former delta of the river Rižana, there is a shell dune, called also “the cemetery of shells”. The dune came into existence when the Port of Koper was being dredged. Later on, the location was proclaimed a point of interest by the Slovene ecological movement Zelena narava [Green nature] (Stepan 2004). They proposed that the shell dune should be maintained as a kind of a buffer enabling a soft transition from the industrial complex of the port of Koper to the tourist settlement of Ankaran. According to the information on the web, there are 234 different species of mollusks to be found there. The ecological movement cast this number as extraordinary, since it effectively means 30% of all the species in the Gulf can be found there. In 2005 the ecologists supported Ankaran’s inhabitants as they protested against the construction of a third pier of the port of Koper in this area, which, in their opinion, would grossly damage their health tourism. The ornithologists, biologists and local inhabitants joined forces on this, with each of them having their own specific reasons for defending the dunes. On World Environmental Day on June 5, 2004 they organized a meeting regarding the shell dunes, and 30 people joined. Their proposal was that the port should expand its confines out towards the sea, and if necessary towards the interiors, to the Sermin hill. This solution is not unproblematic, since in the 1990s, archaeological research conducted there revealed numerous important sites in the area. Following Adriatic Street towards Koper, the road branches off in a number of places, with some paths stopping at the fence of the Port of Koper. On the other side of the fence there are thousands of containers, several cranes and a sea of cars parked at “the second biggest parking pier on the Mediterranean” (Kernc and Gregorcˇicˇ 2015). On the mainland around the hill of Sermin there is a Warehouse Installation Sermin, said to be “the largest and most modern petroleum storage depot in the central and northern Adriatic” (Petrol 2016). What do archaeologists working at Sermin make of this warehouse? Presented with different options for 1.1 The Walk 9 continuing our walk, we decide to turn towards Sˇkocjanski zatok – the green heart of Koper, as its website calls it (Sˇkocjanski zatok 2016). Sˇkocjanski zatok is another nature reserve, a Mediterranean marshland covering an area of 122 ha, and is the largest brackish marshland in Slovenia. Looking at the photos of Sˇkocjanski zatok on the internet you might imagine this to be some expansive, untouched wilderness, but a mere glance from the highway will end the fantasy. The area in fact looks rather sad, squeezed in between the busy road from Ljubljana and Koper’s shopping malls.

1.1.3 The Port of Koper, Old Town and Porporella

On the other side of the fence protecting Sˇkocjanski zatok lies the Port of Koper. The cargo and storage state company Port of Koper was established in the 1957, when the area known as Zone B of a temporary post-war Free Territory of Trieste was given to the then SFR Yugoslavia. Zone A, containing the city of Trieste, remained in Italy and was finally accepted as “lost territory”. Here and there however, walking through the streets of Koper, you can still encounter people wearing T-shirts with the faded inscription “Trst je nasˇ” [“Trieste is ours”]. In 1996 the Port of Koper underwent a rigorous privatization and since the late 1990s has been involved mainly in two somewhat conflicting and contradictory endeavors; intensifying the activities in the international transport domain and protecting the environment. As stated on the port’s website, the port started cooperating with the Regional Marine Pollution Emergency Response Centre for the Mediterranean Sea in Malta (REMPEC) and invested substantial funds in environmental issues (Port of Koper 2015). Furthermore, from 2009 onwards, the port has been monitoring the impact of its operations on the environment and has been involved in numerous environmental projects. Aside from that, the company also invests substantial funds in Sˇkocjanski zatok natural reserve, in the restoration of infrastructure, urban infrastructure projects, as well as local sport, culture, medical and humanitarian facilities. Observing the port of Koper from the sea, sailors will notice a tall church tower and two red skyscrapers (Fig. 1.4). One of them is the Tomos skyscraper, named after the factory of motorcycles and nautical engines that also provided numerous apart- ments for its workers in the socialist period. Chatting with locals who are critical of the former socialist regime, we hear about how the red skyscrapers were purposely built in order to obstruct the view of the church from the sea. Others still are proud of their red color, symbolizing the company’s former success and the workers’ welfare. One of the future plans for the port is the construction of a new passenger terminal for cruisers, but until then, passengers are directed towards the terminal in the city center, near the Koper marina, an inner port offering berths for pleasure-trip vessels. On the old pier of the Port of Koper there is a monument dedicated to the tenth anniversary of the departure of the Yugoslav National Army from the territory of Slovenia, which was built in 2001. On the other side of the pier we find an 10 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic

Fig. 1.4 The Fishing port of Koper with tall church tower and two red skyscrapers in the background (Photo Alenka Janko Spreizer) entrance to the fishing port and communal berths. From the panel boards, it becomes clear that the fishermen pier was rebuilt in 2013 with the contribution of European Fishery Fund. At this point, we might want to stray away from the coast, turning instead to the old city of Koper, which was once an island, similar to the neighboring town of Izola. Koper, Capodistria in Italian, got its present name during the Venetian period, when it became Capo d’Istria. We can also learn that Koper belonged to (or was under, as the locals in Istria would often refer to past periods) numerous states, but the period under Venetian rule lasted the longest and is represented as a time of the town’s economic and cultural growth. Apart from the Venetian Empire, several other historical periods are highlighted, such as the time of Napoleon or that of the Habsburg Empire. The symbolical importance of the town is also reflected in the name for the wider littoral area known as Koprsko primorje [Koper Littoral] consisting of the coastal territory and its hinterland. Recently Koper has also been promoted as a university town, as the University of Primorska was established there in 2003. The University is located in the old city center, on the square that, like many other squares in the former territories of SFR Yugoslavia, still carries the name of former Yugoslav president Josip Broz Tito. Tito Square is considered to be the most beautifully preserved Venetian square in the area and is framed on side by the Praetorian Palace, a Venetian Gothic palace from the fifteenth century, and on the other by the Loggia Palace, the only Gothic town loggia in Slovenia, where we can have a cup of coffee with local students. At the square, there is also the cathedral of the City with the Koper Bell Tower that offers a panoramic view from its top. At the corner of the side facade of the Praetorian Palace there is a 1.1 The Walk 11 chiseled plaque with a niche opening, a well-known Venetian “bocca del leone”, where anonymous messages for the mayor were left in the days of Venetian rule (1279–1797) (Slovenia Info 2016). On the facade of the Armerija, there is a monumental stone plate dedicated to the people who fought against the fascist regime. Sat in the comforting shade of the loggia cafe, it’s hard not to wonder how the lion on the nearby facade of the Palace Totto ex Gavardo, a symbol of the Venetian empire, fits alongside the late Yugoslav president Tito and the red star2 that symbolizes solidarity for some and a totalitarian regime for others? After a refreshing coffee, we can return to our designated path and continue walking along the coast, passing the former salt storehouse in the old city port of Porporella. The name Porporella is used today as a name for a sport fishing association that is also a member of the Fisheries Local Action Group consortium based in the nearby town Izola. Along the beach a new promenade was built in 2005/2006 with impressive Washingtonia robusta palm trees, that were imported from California and are widely disliked as a symbol of political extravagance, and as non-autochthonous trees. It is not hard at all to find a local with whom we could discuss these issues for hours. According to the webpage of a political party of Slovenian Istria called Olive tree, the 200+ palm trees that were planted in Koper, have disfigured the cultural heritage and Mediterranean character of the city (Gracˇnar 2012).

1.1.4 On the Trace of Porecˇanka/Parenzana from Koper to Izola

Leaving Koper behind, we continue along the local route from Koper to Izola, which is always full of traffic. Parallel to the noisy motorway, squeezed between the sea and the traffic, there is a pedestrian and bicycle route called the Route of Health and Friendship Parenzana. Parenzana was a former 123-km-long narrow-gauge railway line, connecting 33 places in Istria (between Trieste and Porecˇ/Parenzo) and was recently transformed into a tourist route. Numerous hikers, families, locals and cyclists use this route during the summer. Since the route is not circular but linear, the cyclists’ association Raketa [Rocket] and fishermen who offer panoramic trips and fish picnics, started to develop the idea about transporting the bicycles (and bikers) back by boat to where they had set out. Following the old railway route we soon pass the small port of Moleto. As local heritage enthusiasts might explain, the port was built using funds for the Parenzana railway by a high-ranking official of the company who wanted to have a cozy port near his house. Continuing along the Parenzana for another kilometer or so, we come to a bend in the road which used to be called Giro Carozze but is today known as “at the Rex”.

2Five-pointed red star is an important symbol associated with communist ideology. It was widely used on flags, state emblems, private clubs, monuments etc. within the SFR Yugoslavia. 12 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic

We can learn from the webpages of the gallery Rex (Rex 2016) that this specific bend is named after the former prominent steam boat which won the blue ribbon for being the fastest steam passenger ship crossing the Atlantic from Gibraltar to New York between August 11th and August 18th in 1933, with the average travel speed of 28.29 knots. It is also quite easy to meet locals who know something about the Rex. The ship was owned by the Italian state and after capitulation of Italy in 1943, it was handed over to the German navy. Towards the end of the war, RAF aircraft bombed the ship as it was sailing under a German flag. After burning for 4 days, she rolled to port and sank in the shallow water. Following the war, the ship was broken up and its steel used in the Yugoslav industry, while its giant anchor was hauled to Ljubljana as a trophy and displayed in the city’s central Park Zvezda [Star Park] (spomeniki.blogspot.si 2014). According to a plaque affixed to the anchor’s plinth, it is now a monument commemorating the “return” of the Slove- nian exit to the sea. Many stories existed around the Zvezda anchor or SS Rex herself during the times of socialist Yugoslavia, since the ship was the pride of the Italian fascist regime and later also featured in Federico Fellini’s “Amarcord”, portraying a carnivalesque provincial Italy during the fascist period. If we ask fishermen about the Rex, they will tell you that they occasionally take tourists to the spot when it sunk to look at the shadow of the Rex on their radars. They might even admit many locals have a shipwreck artifact in their homes. And then they will probably offer you another tour, this time along the disputed maritime border between Slovenia and Croatia; but then again, the border excursion is probably interesting only for Slovene tourists.

1.1.5 Izola, the Town of Workers and Fishermen

From the other side of the Viližan bay you can catch a glimpse of the Eastern part of Izola. This area was formerly the most industrial part of the town, nowadays seen mainly as a blight by the locals. Former factories closed down and the place is now labeled as one of the most dilapidated areas of town. We will see the halls and yards of the former Izola Shipyard, where the Yacht Centre is currently located. This is a location where many leisure boats are stored during the winter and where fishermen maintain, repair and, at the end of the fishing season, transform their fishing boats into tourist vessels. Behind the Yacht Centre one will notice taller industrial buildings that are in very bad condition, though possibly still attractive to the urban gaze as industrial heritage. What we might also admire (or dislike) are the remains of the former factories of the fish processing and canning industry. The history of local fish processing and canning is replete with contested stories corresponding to the various political changes throughout. In local memory, the old buildings of the former fish canning industry are still described as belonging to Delamaris, a factory established in 1952. The factory was later sold to several new owners and in 2013 the canning facility actually moved to Pivka, an inland Slovene town, with the fish now mostly imported from Spain (Fig. 1.5). 1.1 The Walk 13

Fig. 1.5 Delamaris sign on the nowadays closed cantina in Izola (Photo Alenka Janko Spreizer)

Behind the dilapidated buildings, we can glimpse the outline of the church of Saint Mauro, from where the legendary “Izola Dove” took flight. The dove is a ubiquitous sight in the town, be it as an ornament on houses, or painted on the decks of numerous older fishing boats. Local legend relates the dove to an event during a Genoese assault on the town. The locals prayed to Saint Mauro and he sent a dove, which cast a dense fog on the town. This made it hard for the invaders to attack. Yet on 23 October 1380, the Genovese army was literally on the town’s doorstep, waiting for a suitable moment to attack. This is when the white dove took flight from the bell tower of St. Mauro’s and headed out towards the open sea. The Genoese spotted the bird and mistakenly assumed it would guide them to shore. They followed it, but the dove took them precisely in the opposite direction, thus saving the town. The story ends with the bird returning to the mainland carrying an olive branch in its beak, symbolizing peace and security. Following the side of the walls of the factory building, we climb up Factory Street [Tovarnisˇka ulica] until we get to the top of the settlement and then descend towards the sea. The round shape of the old town streets still attests to the fact that in the past, Izola was an island. Having entered the town through its “back door”, we are now following the coastal path and approaching the town’s main beach, which gets very crowded in the summer. People come here to do some sport, walk their dogs, go out with children, swim, sunbathe or simply relax. We then pass by a white lighthouse, continue along the shoreline towards the center, noticing several palm trees. They were bought in 2007, when a new mayor was elected. The palms may have survived the strong tramontana wind, and possibly also, unlike in Koper, did not come under several attacks by the arsonists who repeatedly set fire to the city’s palm trees, allegedly because they were not home-grown. From there, the 14 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic view opens onto the former customs pier. Near the pier we find the port authority office that shares its premises with a small fish market called Levante and the Fishing Office, established by the Chamber of Agriculture and Forestry of Slovenia. Choosing to follow the smell of the fish, we enter the nicely decorated fish market, owned by a fishing family who mostly sell their own catch or resale fish from the region, and find ourselves admiring old, slightly aestheticized, black-and-white photographs. We can see the grandfather of the family in a small boat, the grandmother at the fish market, and their great uncle who was the captain of the boat Istranka. We can also learn that back in 1954 the crew of Istranka won an award for the best catch of blue fish for that year. On the other side of the market there is a huge color photograph of their current ship Levante with purse-seines. The Fishing Office is on the second floor of the building, and since 2004, commu- nication between fishermen and state administration is conducted from there. Few doors left there is also the seat of FLAG, a coastal action group The Fisherman established with the aim of forming an effective public-private partnership and draw on European Fishery Funds. A stone’s throw from the building of the port authority lies a renovated fishing pier with a gas station and a well-protected oval-shaped harbor called a mandracˇ/mandracchio, which was renovated in 2011 with European Fishery Funds. In the summer of 2014 the pier triggered a discussion in the local newspa- pers and online news sites on the question whether Izola is still a town of fishermen. Many were critical of the fact that fishermen had to pay the municipality for their berths. It’s also a nice spot to stop for a while and admire the picturesque, round- shaped harbor. There are still some older fishing vessels around from the former Delamaris/Riba fishing fleet – the lucky ones that had not been dismantled in the sustainability program in 2012. There are also some new vessels, three of which bear the inscription stating they had been purchased with the European Fisheries Fund. These are Eco 1, Eco 2 and Nova [New]. Fishermen will tell you that Nova is used only to ferry tourist around and that it is owned by a fishing family that has been involved in combining fishing with tourism for over 15 years now. Eco 1 and Eco 2 are also owned by local fishermen and shellfish growers, and one of the boats has a banner proclaiming “Taste of the sea”. There are also other fishing boats there such as the shell fishing boats Triton and Ana, the trawlers Bonassa, Zlatoperka [Whiting], Jež [Urchin] and Giovanna II, the boat Gaia with a purse-seine, Delfin II [Dolphin II], Sˇkarpena [Scorpionfish] and Meduza [Jelly Fish]. Many of these boats are amphibians, as it were; they are tourist boats or cantinas during the summer and fishing boats during the winter. Local fishermen also tell how the municipality of Izola wanted to include some vintage boats and smaller fishing wooden boats (such as traditional rowing boats for fishing) in the colorful assortment of boats so as to make it even more pretty and attractive. We continue our walk along the sea, passing an ice machine and storage boxes for fishing equipment, reaching Fisher Square [Ribji trg] and continue further to Sunny Embankment [Soncˇno nabrežje], which functions as the town’s promenade. There are numerous bars and restaurants offering their guests a sea views over the port. Along the promenade, you will also see the Port Authorities’ boat and boat of 1.1 The Walk 15

Strunjan Landscape Park. Several new piers are stretching out into the bay offering berths to pleasure vessels. The owners of the local bar could explain that among those who rent the berths, many are from central Slovenia and have no local roots. This fact alone provoked furious reactions a few years ago among the locals who voiced their disapproval in the media, complaining that the municipality offered berths to people from Ljubljana, to the inlanders or ‘frogs’ as they are sometimes pejoratively referred to in these parts (S.I. 2010, personal conversation, May 2014). Continuing our walk, we notice an information board for the Museum Parenzana, run by a local heritage collector. There we can find ship and train models and a permanent exhibition of photographs on fish canning processes taken in 1960 and 1970 in Delamaris. Reaching the other end of the town’s port, you will find some shops and public toilets. Whether buying a refreshing drink or obeying the call of nature, we will once again be exposed to the history of this town. Old photos of fishermen and fishing boats blown up into large posters look out onto the pavement from the Mercator supermarket’s windows alongside information on the working hours of this Slovenian commercial enterprise. Other posters are pasted on the walls and doors of the public toilets. These reminders of the early twentieth century stare at visitors without any explanation. Merely, it seems, for aesthetic pleasure. Many of these photos in fact feature Italian speaking people who most likely left Izola around 1954, when Zone B became part of the SFR Yugoslavia. How might their relatives feel should they come to visit Izola and find their ancestors attached to the walls of the public toilets? What kind of symbolic meanings might this have?

1.1.6 From Marina Izola to San Simon Resort

The route along the coastline leads us to the Marina Izola. On the sea, you will see shining white sailing boats, contrasted by the old buildings of the former Delamaris shipyard on land. One of Delamaris’ buildings has been transformed to a Sailing club Veter [The Wind]. Not far off is another sailing club called Burja [Bora], which has a club bar with a splendid view over the marina. Slightly further on, there is also a local rowing club Argo. On Argo’s websites we can read how the sons of Izola’s fishermen and workers are “excellent rowers”. Back in 1925, they founded their rowing club and soon thereafter won the gold medal in Amsterdam at the Olympic Games in 1928 (Ivanovicˇ 2001). Across the road there are other ruins of the old fish processing plant called Arrigoni (M.C. 2014), latter known as Argo. This area, now owned by a bank through an investment vehicle called Argolina, is known as another degraded area (Vran 2014), but is reported to be attractive for investors because it’s prime seafront land. A tall brick chimney rises above the bare walls of the Arrigoni factory, which were once a part of a majestic building – or so we are told at the Parenzana Museum. Somewhere in these ruins, there is still a large gate equipped with a loud siren that announced the beginning and end of the day’s shift. In the factory’s yard, we see the remains of a former amusement park, 16 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic hinting at past ideas about summer entertainment. Today the memory of Arrigoni is kept alive mainly in names: the Arrigoni summer cinema or the fitness club TVD Partizan – Arrigoni. Along the concrete beach of the Hotel Delfin located at the end of the Marina, we can walk to the San Simon Resort built in the 1970s as a trade union holiday resort with apartments. The paved path at the end of the beach winds under the Belvedere hill, presenting us with a choice of whether climbing the hill or walking under the famous cliffs of Strunjan/Strugnano.

1.1.7 Strunjan Landscape Park and the Bay of Strunjan

Having chosen the path beneath the cliffs, we walk along a wild beach and find ourselves in the Strunjan Landscape Park. There are numerous information boards around, mainly explaining about the regional flora and fauna, the geological features of the region and stating the rules of behavior in the park, which is otherwise free of gates or entrance fees. Walking alone beneath the cliffs for a few kilometers, we are effectively enjoying the longest uninterrupted stretch of a natural coastline in the whole Gulf of Trieste. Observing the information boards, it is clear that for environmentalists, the park is an extremely important piece of land from the geo-morphologic, geologic, petrographic, floristic and faunal perspectives, and we can also see that numerous projects were invested into for researching and protecting this area. The Strunjan cliff is also the largest coastal cliff wall along the Adriatic coast. Scattered along the path are numerous stone sculptures built by naturists or occasional visitors who perhaps felt free for a moment to play like children on the beach. Despite the ban on anchoring we notice some pleasure boats anchored in a few places, with people drinking beer and taking in the view of the cliffs. From the sea, they may spot the white Strunjan Cross, which was built by Krka (a Slovene pharmaceutical company) and a few individuals in 2012 on the 500th anniversary of the apparition of Holy Virgin Mary. Below the cross, a huge stone is located. This spot attracts reiki practitioners or others who believe this place has a special, positive energy. We might feel it too, wondering if it’s the sea? Or is it the late spring vibe? The cross? The megalith? Being told about the positive energy? Having gone through the web archives of local newspapers, it becomes clear that Strunjan has long attracted people in search of spiritual experiences and is also known as a local pilgrimage destination. Until 2013 the Franciscan order was based in Strunjan and took care of the monastery there. It was a Franciscan monk that in 2005 tried to “preserve maritime traditions” by reviving the maritime procession. In the procession, fishermen, who are usually involved also in the tourist business, take pilgrims together with the painting of the Holy Virgin from the Church of Strunjan to Piran and Izola. Leaving the tranquil part of our route behind, we enter the Bay of Strunjan with its shellfish farms. On land, we encounter a salt lagoon Stjuža, a former salt pan, with numerous information panels, telling us about the bird species there as well as about realized environmental projects and funds (Fig. 1.6). One bird especially stands out 1.1 The Walk 17

Fig. 1.6 The lagoon Stjuža (Photo Alenka Janko Spreizer) on these panels, the Mediterranean Shag,3 which is considered an endangered species. Some of these birds, we are told, are tagged with GPS devices and we also learn that volunteers are trained for rescuing the Mediterranean Shag in case of oil spills. Fishery with trawlers is also represented as a potential threat for these birds, and occasionally you will find the local environmental society Morigenos reporting on this issue, blaming the fishermen and their nets. Local shellfish farmers say those black cousins of cormorants are welcome, because they guard the shells from fish- predators. The bay is quite crowded in fact; there are berths for leisure crafts nearby farms, a small port for fishermen, a hotel spa facility of the pharmaceutical company Krka, a camping site and Salinera, a resort and a natural healing center billed as “an oasis of peace and relaxation”. Continuing our walk to the next small bay of Pacug we find a settlement known as Children’s Summer Resort Pacug, a resort which hosted children for the first time in 1962, still for the time of SFR Yugoslavia. Access to the resort is forbidden to unauthorized visitors, but we can proceed with our walk along the beach heading towards the bay of Fiesa, which is close to the city of Piran. There we find two lakes protected as a natural monument in 1989 when they were classified in the inventory of the most important natural heritage in Slovenia; Slovene environmentalists will tell you that beside numerous fish and bird species, the endangered dragonfly has also found its habitat in those lakes. Apart from protected flora and fauna, there is also a camping ground in Fiesa, which has mainly permanent guests that had

3Latin name: Phalacrocorax aristotelis desmarestii. 18 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic probably “inherited” their rental plots for caravans from their parents, who used to spend their vacations there with other Yugoslav comrades.

1.1.8 From Fiesa to Piran

We continue our route from Fiesa to Piran’s natural monument, Cape Madona, where an underwater natural reserve is located. On the surface, it is marked with yellow buoys, telling seafarers motoring is strictly prohibited. On this spot the underwater web camera of the National Institute of Biology and the Marine Biology Station is installed. Not far off there is a diving club called Norik Sub Piran. The cape Madona, locally known as punta in Piran, also marks the boundary between the Bay of Koper and Bay of Piran. Local divers explain that they visit the cape every Christmas, putting a Christmas tree right on its tip. Would that also have been the case in the times of the SFR Yugoslavia? Did Dedek Mraz [Grandpa Frost],4 a secular fictional character analogous to Father Christmas, visit the cape on New Year’s Eve and left a tree there then?, tourists might ask. Chatting a bit more with the locals, you will probably also get to hear a story about a WWII bomb that ran in the local newspaper. The bomb was lying right there at the bottom of the sea near the Punta, waiting to be de-activated for 8 months since March 2014. The bomb allegedly also presented a threat to the fishing farms in the Bay of Piran. Some of these farms are promoting Piran’s sea bass, a fish that is about to compete and, as the local rumor has it, win against the traditional mullet, the migratory fish historically caught during winter in Piran’s bay (Cek 2014). After all, who needs these fish on the move, crossing the disputed maritime border on a daily basis? Continuing along the sea from punta, we can choose to take the road that goes through the old town of Piran. The coastal route will take you past the restaurants, guesthouses, a hostel, and numerous pastry and coffee shops, all the way to the renovated fishing pier situated in the heart of the old town. The renovation was funded by European Fishery Funds. In the old port, shorter vessels are moored. A local fisherman may tell us that in Piran fishing is sustainable, as there are no boats with trawlers in their port. The fishing port is also known for its delicious sea food which is cooked and served on an old fishing boat named Podlanica.5 Among other vessels, there is also the Morigenos boat which belongs to an NGO concerned with the effective protection of the marine environment and biodiversity by way of education, monitoring, raising public awareness, integrating scientific research and human resource development, as well as management of natural resources

4After the demise of the communist regime, two other ‘good men’ reappeared in public: Miklavž [Saint Nicholas] and Božicˇek (usually depicted as Santa Claus), while Dedek Mraz [Grandpa Frost] lost his previous monopoly position. 5A local name for Crysophrys aurata. 1.1 The Walk 19

(Morigenos 2016). Locally Morigenos is however best known as an association for dolphin watching. We continue our walk past the Piran Aquarium, another institu- tion that received funds for its vessel from the number 4 axis of the Operational Programme for the Sustainable Development of Fisheries Areas, set up to improve the quality of life in fishing communities and to ensure assistance at pursuing development objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy of EU, as we can read in the information brochure or on the web page of Coastal Action Group (OAS Ribicˇ 2015). Following the ‘EU funding’ signs, we recognize several other local actors who got support from the same fund: a fisherman who rebuilt an old fishing boat for fishing tourism and the Association Mediteranum who got funds for the expansion of the Shell Museum and publishing a book. Next, we can pause at the renovated semi-circular square paved with white marble named after Giuseppe Tartini, a famous baroque composer and violinist born in Piran. Numerous music events, festivals, summer schools, restaurants and cafe´s bear his name, although Slovene classical musicians might tell you that Piran as a town is happier with popular music. Continuing along the round harbor we pass the Maritime Museum “Sergej Masˇera” (named after a Slovene national hero) whose origins go back to the foundation of the town’s museum in 1954, the year in which the territorial dispute between Italy and Yugoslavia was resolved. The museum visibly aims to present the history of Slovene seamanship, with a substantial collection of material cultural heritage associated with the sea. As observed by Ballinger, in contrast to Trieste’s Civic Maritime Museum and its avoidance of any explicit discussion of national borders or ethnic groups, the stress on a distinctly Slovene maritime heritage is visible in all of Piran’s Maritime Museum exhibits (Ballinger 2006: 28). There, we might notice that the anachronistic label ‘Slovene coast’ is applied in different historical periods (in Roman one for example); we may also notice that the primary focus is on shipbuilding (we can enjoy numerous ship models) but merely a few mentions about fishing. Some material details aside, we are told about a historic vessel cˇupa and Slovene tuna fishing, both in relation with Slovene speaking settlements on the present-day Italian coast near Trieste. As Pamela Ballinger has asked, we need to consider what stories the maritime museums in Istria tell us about the cultural and ethnic differences, particularly in the light of the history of competing nationalist claims to the sea (based in part on the notion of peoples ‘belonging’, or not, to coastal environments) and the massive demographic shifts in the Gulf of Trieste region during the interwar and post-WWII periods (2006: 16). Leaving the museum’s shadows behind we continue along the Piran’s communal harbor observing numerous colorful smaller pleasure boats, port police boats, museum’s vessels that represent Slovene nautical heritage, including the vessel of a former famous Slovene ballet pair Pino and Pia Mlakar, who donated a sailing boat to Piran’s maritime museum. Opposite the customs pier we will see a restau- rant named Sarajevo 1984, one in a chain of Bosnian-themed restaurants with this symbolic name, associated with the 1984 Olympic games, which were held in Sarajevo, but in view of more recent history, it also honors the city of Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BIH), which was besieged in the war of the 20 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic

1990s. This line of restaurants along the coast also serves cˇevapcˇicˇi (grilled mince- meat fingers). Despite being a staple food for Slovenes’ Sunday BBQs for more than a half of century, cˇevapcˇicˇi are still an object of intense negotiation on what is authentic, what is traditional and what is imported. Sated with cˇevapcˇicˇi, we choose to continue towards Portorož only to notice along the way that several other restaurants offer the same grilled items, but also a great variety of fish. We pass the bus station, encountering numerous Slovene tourists from the second biggest city Maribor in NE Slovenia, coming to the coast foradaytrip.Wemaynoticeatallchimneynearby,whichbelongedtothe former soap factory Salvetti. At the end of the 1950s, the factory building was handed over to the state-owned company called Triglav Film, which in the days of SFR Yugoslavia had its technical quarters and a film studio in Piran. Only a few meters further, we find the Marine Biology Station Piran, which has its Oceanographic buoy “Vida”,6 positioned in front of the Punta Piran at 45 320 55,6800 N, and 13 330 1,8900 E, and undertakes numerous maritime research assignments in the area.

1.1.9 To Bernardin in Portorož

Continuing on our tour from Piran to Portorož we follow a tidy promenade route and encounter several salt storehouses, Magazen, Grando and Monfort, promoted as “architectural jewels” of nineteenth century industrial architecture and built between 1820 and 1845. In the Montfort building, there is an art gallery featuring modern art exhibits. Only a few years ago, a ship carrying salt from the nearby salt pans, owned by a food producing company Droga that was established in 1964, would have been docked at the nearby pier. Nowadays we can encounter an old ship named Laho (short for Last Hope) that is used for passenger transportation, panoramic tours, business meetings, etc. Laho’s likes to point out his operation does not present competition for fishermen involved in the tourist business along the Slovene coast as it is oriented towards “higher levels of offer”. Following the coast, we reach Bernardin, a famous tourist complex located to the west of Portorož. The site got its name after St. Bernardin church, which is now in ruins. We can also spot a hotel with the same name, Hotel Bernandin, one of the biggest modern hotels in the area which is part of the Bernardin Group, Resorts & Hotels chain. Their brochure states the chain has prestigious hotels for business and conference related activities but they provide services across all price ranges, from two to five start arrangements, and contribute to the promotion of Slovenian Istria (Bernardin Group 2015).

6In Slovene literature, the name of Vida [Fair] is associated with a young woman who is lured by a handsome foreigner into boarding his ship, joining him on a trip to a far-off foreign land. 1.1 The Walk 21

The town of Portorož is known as the most prestigious tourist town on the present-day Slovene coast and dates back to the time of the Austro Hungarian Empire, when it represented “one of the most important coastal resorts and spas on the Austrian Riviera”, as any tourist brochure will tell you. We will still see several large, higher class hotels in Portorož, some of them were recently resold to a Croatian chain of hotels. Halfway down the coastal promenade, we will see the grandiose building of the former Palace Hotel, which opened in 1910. It was built in 1908 by the Austrian architect Johann Eustacchio, and has since 1983 been listed as a protected cultural monument. Nowadays it is part of an international hotel chain and is known as Kempinski Palace Portorož. In the center of Portorož, which is akin to a long promenade flanked with small modern buildings that emerged at the foot of historical palaces, we may spot several secondary schools and a student dormitory affiliated with the Euro-Mediterranean University of Slovenia established in 2008, with the objective of becoming an international, post-graduate, higher-education and research institution, fully inte- grated in the Euro-Mediterranean Area, as we can read on its homepage (Wikipedia 2015a). Across the road we will spot a building with a sign Splosˇna plovba Portorož, a shipping company that was established in 1954 and began operating with one vessel of 525 dwt. Today it provides transport services at the international market but the majority of ships rarely come to Slovenian ports. Continuing further along the Portorož Riviera there are sandy beaches, with umbrellas and chairs set out and waiting for the summer season to begin. There are also any number of casinos, wine bars, lounge bars and smaller shops with infor- mation desks. At the end of the bay we reach the Marina Portorož, which was the first marina of the present-day Slovene sea. Today it offers over a thousand berths and is known as a safe but expensive port. Walking along the marina piers and wandering through the neighboring camping site Lucija/Lucia we come to the Secˇa/Sezza penninsula. At the top of the hill there is a forma viva sculpture exhibition, where backpackers might roll out their sleeping bags for the night, surrounded by stone sculptures.

1.1.10 The Bay of Piran

Not far away from forma viva there is a famous restaurant Ribicˇ [Fisherman] and a cactus garden, which is also home to a few goats and ponies. Passing the restaurant, we reach the sea and the local fish farm of the Fonda family who grows and promotes the “Piran Seabass”. The Fonda family has a good reputation in the area, though some envious locals might grumble that their sustainable fish farm projects got financed extensively by the European Fishery Funds while the “real” small scale fishermen have been left behind. Their homepage tells us that the fish farm lies in the middle of the fish reserve in the Piran Bay at the southernmost point of the Slovenian sea. To the southeast lies the coast of the Savudrian Cape (Croatia) and to the south and east, the coast of the Secˇovlje/Sicciole salt pans (Slovenia). 22 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic

This part of Piran’s bay (called also Secˇovlje bay as a subsection of the Bay of Piran), otherwise known as the most contested Slovene bay, has a protected fish reserve. It is characterized by a strong sea current and famous for schools of mullet coming in to the bay in the winter. Fishing mullet in the bay is allowed only during the winter period with special permits. For the rest of the time the reserve is used for fish farms and shellfish fields. Historically, from Venetian times onward, the bay belonged to the local community of Piran, a well-known argument that can be traced in national newspapers and the argument used in the negotiations with Croatia over the maritime border. At the end of the bay, there are several canals (home to numerous illegal berths), leading to the Secˇovlje salt fields, the largest Slovenian salt evaporation ponds. At the beginning of 2000, Mobitel, a telecommunication company, bought the salt produc- tion company and promised significant investment and renovation of the traditional technology of salt production. Apart from its cultural importance, the wetland also has an ecological importance as a breeding ground for water birds. Consulting our smart phones, we also notice that the Museum of Salt-Making in Secˇovlje received the Europa Nostra Prize in 2003 (Wikipedia 2015b). Although the salt fields have not been very productive over the last years, they have been successful at marketing a range of salt-based products, selling nicely packaged bundles of Piran’ssaltto tourists as well as exporting it to boutique shops as far as Japan. The salt fields are part of the Secˇovlje Landscape Park, covering the area of about 750 ha, and are situated in the extreme south-western part of Slovenia. The Park is right next to the state border with the Republic of Croatia, the end point of our route. If we want to visit the park, we actually need to cross another disputed part of the border between Slovenia and Croatia. A keen observer may notice peculiar house adorned with Slovene flags that is sitting right in the middle of this contested territory, a farm owned by a well-known Slovenian organic farmer Josˇko Joras. Since 1991, Joras has been represented as an activist in the Slovene media, as a person who is in constant conflict with the Croatian authorities. If our spring walk were to correspond with a political event, local or national elections for example, we would surely be reading about incidents such as Croatian police arresting Joras in the local and national media. Joras became quite famous over the years and today we can easily find him on Wikipedia where we can learn that between 1998 and 2002, Joras was a municipal councilor in Piran, and in the 2004 national elections, he was a candidate for the Slovenian People’s Party. Despite frequent publicity stunts, he failed to gain enough votes for the National Assembly (Wikipedia 2015c). Nevertheless, this “fighter for the southern Slovenian border” is still visible in the Slovene media and on the northern facade of his house, the one facing Slovenia, we see a large banner proclaiming “This too is Slovenia!” (Fig. 1.7). This particular banner on the house, alongside the anachronistic labels “Slovene coast” found in the maritime museum, as well as other symbolic markers that we encountered along the road, are a constant reminder that our walk has taken place in the northeastern part of Istria, an area represented primarily as a border region. 1.2 Voices of Discordance 23

Fig. 1.7 The house of Josˇko Joras (Photo Alenka Janko Spreizer)

1.2 Voices of Discordance

Within this setting, the leitmotif of the book is modest and ambitious at once, aiming to link global, regional, national and local issues on the subject of maritime fishery in order to understand people’s everyday realities along the present-day Slovene coast within the context of processes that have impacted them. One of our first findings based on “ethnographic walks” as well as on the analysis of geograph- ical, biological, environmental, political and other aspects describing the Gulf of Trieste and its commercial fishing is that within these discourses, actors deploy a discordance of opposing concepts. The northernmost bay of the Adriatic Sea is not the real Mediterranean, while present-day Slovene fishery is not the original Slovene fishery, to name just few. The liminal, discordant and sometimes invisible perceptions of the area’s history, and specifically of its maritime fishing, are the underlying motif of the examined sources. Voices of discordance, similarly to the places of discordance described by Gregoricˇ Bon in relation to Himara area in southern Albania (2009), are inevitably burdened with multiple and in many cases dubious meanings. Our task in this story was however to bring together a number of contested elements, orchestrating different levels of reality embodied in the land- scape, embracing also the invisible ones, while at the same time showing that no narrative has the last word. Presenting small boats as carriers of larger stories was soon set at the center of our endeavors while the focus on the fishermen helped us staying afloat. Initially, when we began our fieldwork in this northernmost Mediterranean bay, we had a distinct feeling of confusion. Hearing various voices and at the same time 24 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic having a research subject that few thought was worth paying attention to (maritime fishing in Slovenia), we felt somewhat overwhelmed by and unsure of the topic. It seemed there were too many markers, voices, symbols, borders and stories around the Gulf of Trieste for us to choose only one to begin with. We soon discovered that this heavy terrestrial luggage also stretched out towards the sea. As Pamela Ballinger observed ‘contests to define and possess terrestrial borderlands in the Adriatic region of southeastern Europe have not only extended into the watery realm but also that the sea itself has proven a key element in the construction of symbolic geographies’ (2013: 423). Similarly, as in the Pogoni area (running along the Greek-Albanian border) described by Sarah Green (2005: 6–7), in NE Adriatic there is a continual drawing and redrawing of borders both in polemical debates where the border should be located and in accounts about the history of the region. The question of where the maritime border between Slovenia and Croatia should be located is one such ‘should’ border issue that was polemicized at different levels, linking national, international and local interests in this discordant story. In the bigger picture, all these disputes were recently linked with the decomposition of socialist countries (former SFRY and former Soviet Union) that raise questions in connection with maritime borders within the framework of UNCLOS.7 It became clear to us that local debates related to the Bay of Piran are directly linked with broader international political debates and regulatory regimes that importantly shaped the everyday reality along the present-day Slovene coast. Consequently, by negotiating for example fishing rights over the migratory mullets that come to the disputed Piran’s bay every winter and were traditionally caught by Slovene fishermen, the local realities referring to different levels (material, socio-economic and ideological levels) also had an impact on the everyday international political economy. The border problem between Slovenia and Croatia in the Bay of Piran is still not resolved while numerous politicians, experts, historians and fishermen all continue to contribute their specific cast to that story. And even if reading the UNCLOS solutions looks simple, on the ground of Istria they are patently not. Ecology too is a conglomerate of local and international debates and has to be understood in relation with local specificities (SFRY environmental legacy and previous fishery agreements), as well as within recent internationally grounded ecological care for vulnerable coastal Adriatic areas. The present regulation of coastal systems is for example set in the context of Maritime Spatial Planning as defined in EU Directive 2014/89/EU and thus strongly anchored in transnational regulatory and ideological frameworks. At the same time, as we came to discover, there is also common sense living somewhere on the ground, framing everyday conversations with the ‘big guys’. ‘Is mariculture really a sustainable solution to our (ecological and social) problems?’ is one such question, frequently asked at the grass-roots level, challenging the ideological and regulatory frameworks of the

7The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), also called the Law of the Sea Convention or the Law of the Sea treaty. 1.2 Voices of Discordance 25

EU. Another such question with no easy answer is one we devoted special attention to in the third part of the book: ‘Could fishing tourism really be our future?’ Delving deeper into our fieldwork, things became understandable even as they still remained discordant. We simply embraced the Istrian coast as a place where there was too much of everything and through this prism were able to understand the acrobatic tourist rhetoric that allowed for constant transformations of turbulent conflicts into a richly-layered history. We could also understand the paradox between the promotional Istrian label – multiculturalism, and a nationalist wish to preserve pure cultures framed by clearly defined borders. But instead of all the formal should be or solid historical border lines, Istria has always been, to our knowledge, a place of interconnected paths walked by ordinary people who crossed borders in order to reach their friends, relatives or customers, who smuggled things across the frontier or simply followed the geomorphological corridors cut across by borders. As reflected by Ledinek-Lozej and Rogelja, writing about trade routes in Istria, the need to talk, revisit, write and remember these parallel routes, says something important about the interconnectedness of the whole Istrian peninsula, its people and narratives and about the constant struggle between borders and routes in places where trade routes were a subversion in relation to borders and main roads (Ledinek-Lozej and Rogelja forthcoming 2017). The latest chapter in this long story of Istrian borders was the recent barbed wire fence put up to keep out Syrian migrants, which caught a few animals and produced a heated debate among human rights activists, anti-refugee groups and animal right activists. The invisible and silent majority, though accustomed to such radical cuts, merely observed the situation with disappointment and resignation. In the too much of everything context we as anthropologists were of course curious what the ‘invisible’ everyday tactics of common people amounted to, to use de Certeau’s term (1984). First we did a simple anthropological exercise and discussed words or phrases that were subconsciously repeated among our interloc- utors in their everyday conversations. With this exercise we tried to understand the production of the commonsense world in Bourdieu’s sense of the term, where sayings and trite comments point to the harmonization of agents’ experiences with the world around them and can be seen as individual or collective as well as improvised or programmed reinforcements for particular practices (1977: 80). We agreed that one such improvised or programmed commonsensical phrase that echoed in our field notes was ‘Everybody quarrels around here’ – uttered as it often was with a resigned voice in the introduction or closure of our conversations. Although the story of quarrels was told at various levels of conversation and in different settings (not only referring to fishery and not only in conversations with the fishermen) we also noticed that the everyday tactic of people living in the heart of those quarrels was non-conflictual and definitely avoided confrontation. It was rather to do with ignoring, or at most adapting to changing political circumstances, but always staying out of the spotlight. And even though the content of the chapters presented in the book differs, the story of quarrels and tactics of adapting and avoiding exposure remain the same. 26 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic

Another such commonsensical phrase was in the way people referred to previous and recent political regimes. They told us for example that they were under Yugoslavia, under Slovenia, under EU. That showed us how things constantly changed but the under logic stayed the same. That also somehow pointed to the specific operational logic, to use de Certeau’s term, the one linked with the autonomous ways of using and doing by groups or individuals ‘already being caught in the nets of “discipline”’ (1984: xv). But despite the warm hope that underlines de Certeau’s practices of everyday life that are ‘...subverting representations and laws imposed on people not by rejecting or altering them but by using them with respect to ends and references foreign to the system’ (ibid: xiii), we noticed that the active role of individuals is not always that of subverting or challenging the dominant story but is also in reproducing it. The ground-level realities sometimes boil down to the simple fact that the actors are also reproducing the dominant discourses in order to survive economically. At the same time, this rather simple logic has to be understood in all its complexity, encompassing different layers of conflicts, under- standing various relations with national and international levels, orchestrating voices of discordance into a coherent whole but also taking into account a possi- bility that everyday actions can generate new brushstrokes on the canvas of global economy. As stressed by Hobson and Seabrooke, the relation between everyday international political economy and regulatory or mainstream international political economy has somehow slipped the gaze of conventional work in international political economy (2007: 2). How this complex, layered and ambiguous quarrelling is constituted at different levels and how this situation is lived and experienced by the local fishermen working along the present Slovene coast effectively forms the core of this book. The aim of the book is however neither to diminish the impor- tance of dominant discourses nor to glorify fishermen’s agency, but rather to analyse the relation between different discourses and actors, showing how fisher- men in Slovenia respond to international political economy, how they struggle to survive but also how they generate small changes. As we will see in the final chapter, the autonomy of the state has (or should have) an important role in these endeavours. Within the context of discordance of opposing concepts, we underline the importance of seeing people not as passive recipients of external influences (such influence could be tourist narratives, national ideologies, etc.) but as active agents who are aware of images of themselves, who create and “invent”. We use these local understandings to reflect on analytical models of “authenticity” and “invented traditions” and call these tactics “innovations”. Due to the reason that the analytical concept “invention of tradition” can hold negative connotations for local people, as it juxtaposes invented with genuine traditions, several authors (Theodossopoulus 2013; Sahlins 1999) have proposed to replace “invention” with alternative terms such as revitalization, revival and revaluation. Theodossopoulus stressed that this is particularly important in those analyses that discuss politically vulnerable authen- ticities (2013: 350). With similar arguments Sahlins suggested the term inventive- ness. In his opinion inventiveness recognizes that invention is constructed (retaining a sense of Hobsbawm’s deconstructive irony) yet it is more sensitive to 1.2 Voices of Discordance 27 agency and it does take into account local creative accomplishments (Sahlins 1999). In our case innovations have developed in response to many different impulses such as tourist industry, national narratives, social and economic crisis, or simply in response to various changes that can break the everyday routine. They have acted through many different agents and have been expressed in various forms. As Theodossopoulus pointed out, in local “authentic” adaptations, authen- ticity can be understood as agency and rhetorical flexibility (2013: 350). Innova- tion, attached to the here presented ethnographic case, is closely connected to authenticity, yet it also elaborates other aspects, such as emotions and skills, while leaving out the essentialist meanings of traditional Slovene fishing. These specific local inventions should also be observed within the context of transforma- tion from socialist to post-socialist societies. Observing post-Yugoslav tourism, the introduction of new elements took place in combination with a re-arrangement of previous, already existing forms such as the example of domestic tourism, family economies or the development of holiday camps and holiday homes for workers and members of labour unions. The book is structured around four main topical axes: 1. orientation, 2. transfor- mation, 3. innovation and 4. management, within which several chapters are embedded. The first part (Orientation) discusses concrete ethnographic setting, presenting the interconnected relations between the historical (mainly the recent historical details after the WWII), political, biological and geographic facts and discourses within the region. Within this part, special attention is given to the disputed maritime border between Slovenia and Croatia that re-opened questions of state sovereignty in relation to EU, supranational legislation and local responses. The second part (Transformation) contextualizes fishing with nationalist and political discourses and with concrete political changes after the dissolution of the SFR Yugoslavia. The Chap. 3 describes the situation in the first decade after Slovenia’s independence, referring also to certain written sources dating back to the 2nd half of the twentieth century, bringing to the fore several encompassing discourses important for our discussion: Slovene ethnological and amateur produc- tion, discussions in the local and national newspapers as well as open letters written by fishermen themselves. Following this is a presentation of rudimental ethno- graphic data in the chapter entitled “Conversations on the pier” (Chap. 4), which focuses on the ethnography of the everyday working routine of Slovene maritime fishermen. If the first step is grounded more in the analysis of different written sources, the second step derives in the main from our ethnographic work in the period between 1999 and 2004. The third part (Innovation), the most extensive one, brings to the fore the secondary activities of Slovene fishermen. Special attention is given to one of the adaptive tactics devised by them, one that has been increasingly used after 1991 – combining fishery with tourism. Although we will follow several theoretical debates on authenticity (Selwyn 1996a, b; Bendix 1997; Macdonald 1997; Theodossopoulos 2013), this chapter will neither dwell on the theoretical discussion of authenticity in general, nor will it engage in any extended sense the dilemmas about the use of the concept of authenticity in anthropological analysis. Our more 28 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic focused and modest intent is to present everyday uses of authenticity within the popular and tourist discourses along the present-day Slovene coastline and to highlight the active role of individuals in this process. In particular, we will be interested in the uses of authenticity connected to fishing tourism that was devel- oped due to the economic and other problems within Slovene fishery. Our conten- tion is that different understandings of authenticity attached to the Slovene coastal area can best be understood as holding a key element of innovation. Part III Innovation is divided into three chapters. The Chap. 5 provides the historical frame- work for understanding the specificities of fishing tourism in one of Slovenia’s foremost coastal towns, Izola. The Chap. 6 will outline an ethnography of tourism on fishing boats, providing also an additional link to an ethnographic film Fishing Tourists by Natasˇa Rogelja. This ethnography will underpin the analysis of domestic tourism along the Slovenian coast, understanding it as a specific part of a broader tourist culture that has been on the one hand under-researched in the anthropology of tourism, while on the other it forms a significant part of tourist culture within the NE Adriatic region. The Chap. 7 rounds up the discussion by reflecting on theories and uses of authenticity within the selected local environment, with the emphasis on fishing. Here we will comment on images of the sea, the Mediterranean, the Adriatic, (Slovenian) Istria, fishermen, sea food, and wine as deployed in selected tourist materials, as well as in everyday conversations in given local settings. In the fourth part (Management) we will navigate between sustainable develop- ment issues, projects, policy regulations and people; namely those who fish real fish, those who fish projects, those who study fish but also those who are involved in management of Slovene fisheries at different levels. From the chronological point of view, the chapters within this final part also bring us to the recent events along the present-day Slovene coast over the last decade that, in contrast to the previous periods – the first period being the break-up of SFR Yugoslavia and the second following the dissolution as that of adjustment to the new situation with any number of conflicts – has been characterized with a somehow more organized, stable and novel dimension to Slovene fishery, enriched by the knowledge of how to apply for EU funds, how to organize a dialogue through different mediators (such as through the Fishery Office in Izola) as well as how to position Slovenia as a maritime state within the larger framework of EU. A range of EU-funded development programs and the larger context of EU, although important for the last chapter, shouldn’t however have the last word in this introduction. The EU’s yellow stars, sprinkled as they are all over the NE Adriatic, are undoubtedly an important celestial novelty, but when they touch the ground, they transform, lose their glow and adapt to the given circumstances. Their wish to unify and make people belong, a wish so similar to the previous political and economic entities in Istria, arrives at a compromise as things work out differently down there. Issues of (un)belonging live their own life, not just in Istria, but also generally when observed from the ethnographic perspective. While scientific knowledge, national categories or supranational geo-political and economic divi- sions want to have the last word when it comes to belonging, clear borders or fixed References 29 identities, the ethnographic perspective complicates things by also embracing the blurred pathways of unbelonging8 and contingency. In Istria for example, what is understood to be “Italian”, “Slovene” or “Croatian”, as we will see in the book, has been both separated and connected (or unified) through various structural condi- tions and subjective signifiers. Moreover, the EU episode opened new corridors for cooperation (e.g. joint project application for the European fisheries funds), for potential conflicts (e.g. unresolved maritime border between Slovenia and Croatia), for unpredictable future pathways (e.g. ‘new’ relations between Slovenia and Trieste), or new dialectics between fixed and blurred lines. In the conclusion of the book, we re-open the various fixations and make place for memories, discourses, subjective desires and concerns, materialities, structural bodies and other signifiers that we discovered in our introductory walk. The conclusion of the book thus has to be read together with the introduction as they both reflect on the issues of (un)belonging, creativity and contingency that served as entry points for us in order to understand the ‘on the move’ world of the North Adriatic. They are more theoretical meditations than rigorous theoretical discussion, helping the reader to relax before and after the journey through the shrubby ethnographic landscape.

References

Anderson J (2004) Talking whilst walking: a geographical archaeology of knowledge. The Royal Geographical Institute of British Geographers 36(3):254–261 Andrews H, Roberts L (eds) (2012) Liminal landscapes: travel, experience and spaces in-between. Routledge, London/New York Ballinger P (2006) Lines in the water, peoples on the map: maritime museums and the represen- tation of cultural boundaries in the Upper Adriatic. Narodna umjetnost: hrvatski cˇasopis za etnologiju i folkloristiku 43(1):15–39 Ballinger P (2013) Liquid borderland, inelastic sea. Mapping the Eastern Adriatic. In: Bartov O, Weitz ED (eds) Shatterzone of empires: coexistence and violence in the German, Habsburg, Russian and Ottoman borderlands. Indiana University Press, Bloomington/Indianapolis, pp 423–439 Baskar B (2002) Dvoumni Mediteran: Sˇtudije o regionalnem prekrivanju na vzhodnojadranskem obmocˇju. Zgodovinsko drusˇtvo za južno Primorsko: Znanstveno-raziskovalno sredisˇcˇe Republike Slovenije, Koper Begley A (2011) In a quiet corner of Italy...Trieste. The New York Times, April 29. http://www. nytimes.com/2011/05/01/travel/01trieste-italy.html?_r¼0. Accessed 8 Dec 2015 Bendix R (1997) In search of authenticity: the formation of folklore studies. The University of Wisconsin Press, Wisconsin Bernardin Group (2015) http://www.bernardingroup.si/en/. Accessed 17 Dec 2015

8For more on the notion of unbelonging, see Irit Rogoff (2000). Rogoff stresses that several generations of thinkers have now claimed their stake in the necessary evolution of an active category of ‘unbelonging’ – not as marginality and not as defiant opposition and certainly not as a mode of ‘dropping out’, but as a critical refusal of the terms (ibid: 5). 30 1 An Introductory Stroll Along the Coastal Landscapes of Northeastern Adriatic

Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Cek D (2014) Italijani hitro, nasˇisˇe tuhtajo [Italians are fast, we are still thinking], Primorske novice, 30. 08. 2014. http://www.primorske.si/Novice/Kronika/Italijani-hitro,-nasi-se-tuhtajo. Accessed 17 Dec 2015 Cocco E (2006) Introduction. The adriatic space of identity. Narodna umjetnost: hrvatski cˇasopis za etnologiju i folkloristiku 43(1):7–14 Cocco E (2010a) Performing maritime imperial legacies: tourism and cosmopolitanism in Odessa and Trieste. Anthropolo Noteb 16(1):37–57 Cocco E (2010b) Borderland mimicry: imperial legacies, national stands and regional identity in Croatina Istria after the nineties. Narodna Umjetnost 47(1):7–28 Cocco E (2013) The evolving role of the Adriatic space in the Mediterranean challenges and opportunities, Mediterranean Paper Series. The German Marshall Fund of the United States, Washington, pp iii–11 De Certeau M (1984) The practice of everyday life. University of California Press, Berkley/Los Angeles/London Debeli rticˇ (2014) O nas [About us]. http://www.zdravilisce-debelirtic.org/o-nas. Accessed 17 Dec 2015 Directive 2014/89/EU. Directive of the the European parliament and of the council of 23 July 2014 establishing a framework for maritime spatial planning. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ EN/TXT/PDF/?uri¼CELEX:32014L0089&from¼EN. Accessed 22 Sep 2016 Driessen H (1999) Pre- and post-Braudelian conceptions of Mediterranean area. Narodna Umjetnost 36(1):53–63 Edensor T (2010) Walking in rhythms: place, regulation, style and the flow of experience. Vis Stud 25(1):69–79 Gracˇnar V (2012) Presusˇene koprske palme so simbol politicˇne samopasˇnosti [Koper’s dried-up palm trees are a symbol of political extravagance]. Oljka Stranka slovenske Istre, May 8. http:// www.oljka.org/web/arhiv-novic/arhiv-novic-2012/8-koper/132-presuene-koprske-palme-so- simbol-politine-samopanosti.html. Accessed 10 Feb 2016 Grandits H, Taylor K (eds) (2010) Yugoslavia’s sunny side. a history of tourism in socialism (1950s–1980s). CEU Press, Budapest/New York Green S (2005) Notes from the Balkans: locating marginality and ambiguity on the Greek- Albanian border. Princeton University Press, Princeton/Oxford Gregoricˇ Bon N (2008) Prostori neskladij: etnografija prostora in kraja v vasi Dhe¨rmi/Drimades, Južna Albanija. Založba ZRC, Ljubljana Hobson LM, Seabrooke L (2007) Everyday IPE: revealing everyday forms of change in the world economy. In: Hobson LM, Seabrooke L (eds) Everyday politics of the world economy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–23 Ingold T (2011) Being alive. Essays on movement, knowledge and description. Ashgate, Farnham Ingold T, Vergunst JL (2008) Ways of wallking. Ethnography and practice on foot. Ashgate, Farnham Ivanovicˇ J (2001) Zgodovina izolskega veslanja [The History of Izola Rowing]. http://www. vkargo.si/zgodovina.html. Accessed 15 Dec 2015 Kernc V, Gregorcˇicˇ J (2015) Luka Koper – drugi najvecˇji avtomobilski pomol Sredozemlja [The Port of Koper – the Second Biggest Port for Cars in the Mediterranean]. Planet Siol. Net, 30.08. http://www.siol.net/avtomoto/zanimivosti/reportaze/2015/08/rep_luka_koper_avtomobilski_ pomol.aspx. Accessed 17 Dec 2015 Ledinek-Lozej Sˇ, Rogelja N (2017) Walks through the multi-layered landscape of Sˇavrinka’s Istria: Eggs, Books, Backpacks and Stony Paths. Landscape Reserach, Forthcoming M.C (2014) Od tovarne do muzejskega parka [From the Factory to the Museum Park]. Primorske novice, 14. 03. 2014. http://novice.najdi.si/predogled/novica/281587aef4bbf7038621151a4d fb3afb/Primorske-si/Obala-Kras-in-Notranjska/Od-tovarne-do-muzejskega-parka. Accessed 17 Dec 2015 Macdonald S (1997) A people’s story: herritage, identity and authrenticity. In: Rojek C, Urry J (eds) Touring cultures: transformation of travel and theory. Routledge, London/New York, pp 155–175 References 31

Matvejevicˇ P (1999) Mediteranski brevir. FBZ Ljubljana, Ljubljana Mauss M (1979) Sociology and psychology. Routledge/Kegan Paul, London Morigenos (2016) Home. http://www.morigenos.org/index.php?lang¼2. Accessed 7 Sep 2016 OAS Ribicˇ (2015) Introduction to Axis 4 of the European Fisheries Fund (n.d.). http://www. oasribic.si/en/axis-4. Accessed 17 Dec 2015 Petrol (2016) Skladisˇcˇe instalacija Sermin [Petrol Warehause Sermin]. http://www.petrol.si/za- podjetja/storitve/skladisce-instalacija-sermin. Accessed 7 Sep 2016 Pink S (2010) Doing sensory ethnography. Sage, London Port of Koper (2015) About us. History. http://www.luka-kp.si/eng/about-us/history. Accessed 17 Dec 2015 Rex (2016) http://www.rex-mk.si/rex/index.html. Accessed 21 Jun 2016 Rogoff I (2000) Terra infirma. Geography’s visual culture. Routledge, London/New York Rousseau JJ (1979) Reveries of a solitary walker. Penguin Classic, London S.I (2010) Zorko: Pomola nismo prodali [Zorko: We didn’t sell the pier]. Zˇ urnal 24.si., 12. 10. http://www.zurnal24.si/zorko-pomola-nismo-prodali-clanek-98017. Accessed 17 Dec 2015 Sahlins M (1999) Two or three things that I know about culture. J R Anthropol Inst 5(3):399–421 Selwyn T (1996a) Introduction. In: Selwyn T (ed) The tourist image. Myths and myth making in tourism. Wiley, Chichester, pp 1–32 Selwyn T (1996b) Atmospheric notes from the fields: reflections on myth-collecting tours. In: Selwyn T (ed) The tourist image. Myths and myth making in tourism. Wiley, Chichester, pp 147–162 Selwyn T (2012) Shifting borders and dangerous liminalities: the case of Rye Bay. In: Andrews H, Roberts L (eds) Liminal landscapes: travel, experience and spaces in-between. Routledge, London/New York, pp 169–184 Selwyn T (2017) Encyclopedia of anthropology. Entry on tourism, travel, pilgrimage: anthropo- logical approaches. Wiley-Blackwell, forthcoming, Hoboken Sˇkocjanski zatok (2016) Reserve. http://skocjanski-zatok.org/en/reserve. Accessed 7 Sep 2016 Slovenia Info (2016) Koper, Praetorian Palace. http://www.slovenia.info/en/arhitekturne- znamenitosti/Koper-%28Capodistria%29,-Praetoria.htm?arhitekturne_znamenitosti¼326& lng¼2. Accessed 7 Sep 2016 Spomeniki.blogspot.si (2014) Spomenik sidro [The Monument of Anchor]. http://spomeniki. blogspot.com/2014/02/ljubljana-spomenik-sidro.html. Accessed 17 Dec 2015 Stepan D (2004) Gibanje Zelena narava, Ankaran – opozorilni shod za varovanje sˇkoljcˇne sipine [Green nature movement, Ankaran – alert for the protection of shell dunes]. http://www. oocities.org/sznslovenije/shod-ankaran.html. Accessed 17 Dec 2015 Theodossopoulos D (2013) Laying claim to authenticity: anthropological dilemmas. Anthropol Q 86(2):337–360 Vran J (2014) Ureditev nekdanjega Arga: resnicˇna možnost ali le pobožna želja [Arranging former Arga: real possibility or just wishful thinking?]. http://www.regionalobala.si/novica/ureditev- nekdanjega-arga-resnicna-moznost-ali-le-pobozna-zelja. Accessed 17 Dec 2015 Wikipedia (2015a) Euro-Mediterranean University of Slovenia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Euro-Mediterranean_University_of_Slovenia. Accessed 17 Dec 2015 Wikipedia (2015b) Secˇovlje Salina. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Se%C4%8Dovlje_Salina_Land scape_Park. Accessed 17 Dec 2015 Wikipedia (2015c) Josˇko Joras. https://sl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jo%C5%A1ko_Joras. Accessed 17 Dec 2015 Wikipedia (2016a) Ankaran. http://sl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ankaran. Accessed 7 Sep 2016 Wikipedia (2016b) Slovenska planinska pot [Slovenian Apline path]. http://sl.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Slovenska_planinska_pot. Accessed 7 Sep 2015 Part I Orientation: NE Adriatic

Anthropological research conducted in the Mediterranean area has a long tradition. Numerous controversies related to the anthropology of the Mediterranean are, as observed by Dionigi Albera, implicitly concerned with the notion of “place” and related to questions such as whether the Mediterranean basin is a convenient unit of anthropological study (Albera 1999: 215). Over the years, the Mediterranean came to be represented as an area of anthropological research rather than a cultural area; a field of study, not the object of study (ibid: 227). Albera and Blok put forth the idea of the field of ethnological study saying ...it is possible to conceptualize the Mediterranean area as a field of ethnological study—as a historical formation, as a historically-constituted unit—showing enough differences and similarities for fruitful comparative research (2001: 17). Although this book will not discuss developments in the field of anthropology of the Mediterranean nor explicitly theorize the notion of “place”, our work is neverthe- less anchored in the northernmost bay of the Mediterranean, with all the implica- tions stemming from such an anchorage. The research is set along the shores of Istria (a Mediterranean border region that we might also call a homogeneously heterogeneous place) and as such it borrows concepts and ideas designed in the anthropology of the Mediterranean as well as historical and social anthropology more generally. The field of ethnological study is one such concept and is understood here as a field that constitutes anthropological research and a field where anthropological research is conducted. It is also a context or frame that can assume the plurality of levels for comparison (Baskar 2002: 13). Following Albera and Blok, as a field of ethnological study, the Mediterranean (or any other fieldwork area) can be conceived as a unit of analysis within which we have to phrase our questions and within which we have to answer them (2001: 20). Starting with spatial orientation for example, we might ask where exactly the location of our fieldwork is: where can we place the scenery and the everyday practice of Slovene maritime fishing? Is it the Slovenian Sea or the Slovenian 34 I Orientation: NE Adriatic

Coast? Is it Primorje or Primorska?1 Is it confined to the territorial and/or maritime space of the Republic of Slovenia? Or is it symbolically located elsewhere, along the coast of Trieste in present-day Italy, where the so-called “original” Slovene fishermen used to live? Is it the coast of Istria, or the northeastern part of the Adriatic, or the Mediterranean? Is it the Gulf of Trieste or the Gulf of Venice? The bays of Koper and Piran? As a micro region within the Mediterranean (Baskar 2002: 11), Istria is concep- tualized as a multicultural, multiethnic and multilingual region. It is a border zone, where people construct multiple pure and hybrid identities (Ballinger 2012). On the basis of the questions posed above, we cannot ignore the problem of ethnographic boundaries associated with the determination and demarcation of regional borders and native regional identities. It has to be emphasized that the native identifications are not endogenous and do not generate locally in isolation from other social and cultural processes (cf. Baskar 2002). In the present case, the native representations of fisheries, the identification of fishermen with regional affiliations and the demar- cation between neighboring populations and groups are informed by various scien- tific fields, political ambitions, administrative speech, and multiple popular representations and discourses. Therefore, we intend to show that in the academic discourse of geographers, historians, anthropologists, ethnologists and biologists, several categories are used at the same time to denote the location of Slovenian fishery, and that this is standard practice in academic writing and in everyday discussions. However, the usage of these discourses reflect specific historical moments and ideological contexts, with certain political purposes. Each denoting is placed in its context in its own way and, one might say, imbued with specific ideological content, which should not be overlooked from the perspective of anthropology. In this part, we explore some of the geographic, historical and biological discourses present in our fieldwork location. While at times factographically dense, the inclusion of what the reader may think is a challenging amount of data was a conscious decision; the expressions, names, and local detail in many ways enrich the ensuing ethnography. First, we explain the geographical naming of the region; second, we discuss biological approaches to fishing in the area; third, we reflect on the contested and/or “extruded”2 histories; finally, we present fragments of the recent history of Slovene fishery. Reflecting on these discourses, we explore several political and symbolic borders which are important for Slovene fishery. We show that borders and discourses map people onto specific terrains, such as stereotypical associations of Italians with the urban sites of the coastal towns, while Slavs (Slovenes and Croats) are associated with the rural interior (Ballinger 2006, 2012). Our field of ethnological study is thus delimited by the national borders on land and sea, but is simultaneously much wider as people constantly place themselves

1Local expression for the littoral; used also as a formal geographic name of the region. 2This term was proposed by Pamela Ballinger (2012). I Orientation: NE Adriatic 35 within different discourses and refer to other periods and other places as stretching “their place” and “their identity” across narrow national time-place units. Much of this shifting and stretching is connected with the political history of the area. The political and symbolic borders in the Gulf of Trieste shifted throughout its past, when the territory of Istria belonged to several states such as the Serenissima or the , Austrian states, the , the , the State of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (later renamed to the Kingdom of Yugo- slavia), the Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia (FPRY), the Socialist Feder- ative Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) and the Republic of Slovenia. Changes in the political and social orders, legal systems and economic approaches had numerous consequences for both small coastal fishery and industrial fishery in the Gulf of Trieste. Our central foci are on the following periods: (a) the establishment of fishing industry (Austro-Hungarian period and The Kingdom of Italy; (b) post- WWII era; (c) the break-up of SFR Yugoslavia and independence of Slovenia in 1991; (d) the period after 2004, when Slovenia becomes an EU member. This shifting and stretching of borders and identities means our field of ethno- logical study is elaborated in synchronous and diachronic perspectives. The syn- chronous perspective covers fishing within the national borders of present-day Slovenia, referring to this as fisheries in Slovenia. Simultaneously, it also covers the space beyond national borders, referring to the symbolic ethnic borders of Sloveneness along the Karst coast on the Italian side of the border around Trieste (Lisjak 2010, 2013), where we can find »original« Slovene fisheries. Our study also includes a diachronic perspective referring to different political regimes from the past in those points that give today’s fisheries a specific meaning. It reflects discourses partly captured in the time of Empires (the Venetian, the Austro- Hungarian and the Yugoslav) and their legacy, which are today utilized by different “heritage projects” shaping a new specific history of this area. Usually, these heritage discourses furnish arguments as to why certain areas belong to certain people; for example, the argument that the Bay of Piran belongs to people from Piran and not Croats, because this was the case already under Venetian rule. Apart from such accentuated debates, we also included invisible aspects of history in our ethnological field of research. Simplified and unproblematic popular history accounts often fail to provide insight on the exodus of the Italian speaking com- munity that lived in Slovene coastal towns – the fact that after the WWII people from Koper, Izola and Piran “migrated”, “went away” or were “expelled”. Both diachronic and synchronic perspectives, as well as invisible histories, should be highlighted as they importantly constitute our field of ethnological study.

References

Albera D (1999) The Mediterranean as an anthropological laboratory. Anales de la Fundacion Joaquin Costa 16:215–232 Albera D, Blok A (2001) Introduction: the Mediterranean as a field of ethnological study. A retrospective. In: Albera D, Blok A, Bromberger C (eds) L’anthropologie de la Me´diterrane´e. Maisonneuve et Larose, Paris, pp 15–37 36 I Orientation: NE Adriatic

Ballinger P (2006) Lines in the water, peoples on the map: maritime museums and the represen- tation of cultural boundaries in the Upper Adriatic. Narodna umjetnost: hrvatski cˇasopis za etnologiju i folkloristiku 43(1):15–39 Ballinger P (2012) Entangled or ‘extruded’ histories? displacement, national refugees, and repa- triation after the Second World War. J Refug Stud 25(3):366–386 Baskar B (2002) Dvoumni Mediteran: Sˇtudije o regionalnem prekrivanju na vzhodnojadranskem obmocˇju. Zgodovinsko drusˇtvo za južno Primorsko: Znanstveno-raziskovalno sredisˇcˇe Republike Slovenije, Koper Lisjak BV (2010) Tržasˇko morje: krasˇka obala, mesto in vasi: prezrti del zgodovine Slovencev. Libris, Koper Lisjak BV (2013) Ozgodovini in dedisˇcˇini slovenskega morskega ribisˇtva: Ribisˇki muzej tržasˇkega primorja. Slovenski etnografski muzej; Križ: Ribisˇki muzej tržasˇkega primorja, Ljubljana Chapter 2 The Field of Ethnological Study Between Borders and Discourses

Abstract In this chapter we explore some of the geographic, historical and bio- logical discourses present in our fieldwork location. First, we explain the geograph- ical naming of the region; second, we discuss biological approaches to fishing in the area; third, we reflect on contested and/or “extruded histories”; finally, we present fragments of the recent history of Slovene fishery. Reflecting on these discourses, we explore several political and symbolic borders which are important for Slovene fishery. We show that the understanding of borders and discourses maps people onto specific terrains, such as the stereotypical associations of Italians with the urban sites of coastal towns, while Slavs (Slovenes and Croats) are associated with the rural interior.

Keywords Gulf of Trieste • Disputed borders • Extruded histories • The field of ethnological study • Marine biology in NE Adriatic • Geographical naming of the region

In this chapter we explore some of the geographic, historical and biological discourses present in our fieldwork location. First, we explain the geographical naming of the region; second, we discuss biological approaches to fishing in the area; third, we reflect on contested and/or “extruded histories”; finally, we present fragments of the recent history of Slovene fishery. Reflecting on these discourses, we explore several political and symbolic borders which are important for Slovene fishery. We show that the understanding of borders and discourses maps people onto specific terrains, such as the stereotypical associations of Italians with the urban sites of coastal towns, while Slavs (Slovenes and Croats) are associated with the rural interior.

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 37 N. Rogelja, A. Janko Spreizer, Fish on the Move, MARE Publication Series 11, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-51897-8_2 38 2 The Field of Ethnological Study Between Borders and Discourses

2.1 Geographical Borders and Discourses

2.1.1 Many Names for a Small Region

In defining the present-day Slovene coastal zone, we cannot bypass the discussions of regional geographers who were interested in defining and naming the coastal regions within the context of the new state borders of Slovenia. Gams (1991) published an analysis of geographical names and pointed out as a distinctive feature of the Slovene coastal region the fact that this region holds numerous names, such as Obala [Coast], Koprsko, Koprsko Primorje [Koper’s Littoral], Koprska pokrajina [Koper country], Primorje [Littoral], Slovenska Istra [Slovenian Istria], Istrska Slovenija [Istrian Slovenia], Sˇavrini, Sˇavrinska brda, Sˇavrinsko gricˇevje [Sˇavrini hills], Obmorska regija [Coastal region] and Koprska regija [Koper region] (Gams 1991: 7). The need for a common denomination of the coastal region appeared after WWII, when in 1954 the temporary Zone B of the Free Territory of Trieste, with the seat in Koper, was dissolved. After that, the region was called the Koper district, but different names were also used for the area (Gams, ibid.), such as the Coastal-Karst region in the context of regional planning from 1960, or simply Obala [The Coast] (Gams 1991: 8). For geographers, the term Obala is legitimate because the area is located on the shores of the Gulf of Trieste and has maritime traffic, maritime tourism and maritime fishery. At the same time the use of the term is complicated by other names and frames. Which Coast is this? Slovenian? Istrian? The coast of the Slovene Mediterranean? Melik (1960) for example uses the term Primorje (lit. “by-the-sea”), avoiding adjectives such as Istrian or Mediterranean in his canonical work on the Slovenian coastal region. The name was developed from the previous term Primorska that was in use before WWI and referred to a broader macro-region that included other territories such as inland mountainous parts. Although the term Primorje refers more narrowly to the Slovene coastal area, both terms nevertheless refer to the sea. Some geographers (Bohinec, for example) have been using the name Slovenian Istria for this region from the 1950s onwards (Gams 1991: 8). Others contest the use of this name because Istria’s boundaries often shifted as it changed hands since the and the establishment of the Illyrian Provinces (Marin 1991, 1992). Under Austro-Hungarian rule in the period from 1822 up till 1918, Istria’s northern border was for example drawn in Muggia and Ricmanje (near Trieste), while its eastern border followed the watershed of the Brkini hills (Javornik 1990: 180–181). Today, the borders have again been redrawn, and people from Brkini are not generally seen as Istrian anymore. Geographers propose the northern part of the Slavnik mountain chain and the Cˇ icˇarija plateau as “the most natural borders” of the peninsula (Gams 1991: 8), meaning present-day Istria is significantly smaller than its historical counterpart (cf. Marin 1991). Some geographers also question the term Slovenian Istria since this is a territory inhabited by Slovenian, Croatian and Italian populations, suggesting instead a nationally more neutral name such as Istrian Slovenia (Zˇ umer 1990). 2.1 Geographical Borders and Discourses 39

Slovene geographers often compare the Slovenian coast with the Mediterranean at large (Bricelj 2004: 21; Orožen Adamicˇ 2004: 12), but do not provide an evaluation in conjunction with the Adriatic Sea. Such comparisons may be of interest to scholars, yet the significant discomfort in using the term Mediterranean Slovenia is a trait which merits further analysis here. For the area of Melik’s Primorje, several geographers use the term “sub-Mediterranean Slovenia” (Gams 1991: 9), with certain recent Slovene geographers considering the entire Upper Adriatic a sub-Mediterranean zone (Ogrin 1993: 25–34). Although Istria is gener- ally (in tourist and anthropological discourses) considered to be a part of the Mediterranean, competing views suggest our research field may be situated on the borders of the Mediterranean, that it may not actually even be the “true” Mediterranean, but lies (relying on geographical and botanical research of climate and flora) in the sub-Mediterranean zone (Gams and Vrisˇer 1998; Ogrin 1993; Wraber 1993: 41).1 The label “sub-Mediterranean”,2 which in geographical litera- ture also refers to the northeastern part of the Gulf of Trieste, could be construed as having a dismissive connotation that suggests an “inferior” type of Mediterranean (Rogelja 2006; cf. Baskar 2002: 25). Although geographical literature reflects the discomfort with the use of terms “Mediterranean” or “Mediterranean Slovenia” (Gams 2000: 56), popular literature and tourist brochures on the other hand highlight the Mediterranean qualities of the area. Anthropologists also use the term Mediterranean without any misgivings.3 An additional peculiarity emphasized in the works of geographers is the notion of the border zone, where three different prevailing eco-regions of Europe come into contact: The Alps, the Mediterranean and the Dinarides (Bricelj 2004), with the specificity of vegetation or climate within the region due to this contact. Following these sources, we could conclude that the numerous borders are somehow “naturally” part of this polynomial, many-sided and three-parted region.

2.1.2 Geomorphology of the Gulf of Trieste

Geographer Milan Orožen Adamicˇ focuses on the Gulf of Trieste as a constructed natural-geographical unit, a particular type of natural geographical landscape characterized as a meso-region (Orožen Adamicˇ 2002: 145). This meso-region

1We will not go into a discussion about the boundaries and borders of the Mediterranean in Slovenia. For more information, review Baskar (1993, 2002); Rotar (1993). 2It could be said that the adjective sub-Mediterranean within physical geography (flora, fauna, climate) is a fully legitimate code, while the adjective Mediterranean, especially outside of geography, is often used for ideological purposes. 3We could observe that while discussions among previous generations of Slovene physical geographers reveal a discomfort in the use of the term Mediterranean, younger geographers study the spatial cognition of the Mediterranean in Slovenia, and the inconsistencies between perceptions and physical definitions (Staut et al. 2007). 40 2 The Field of Ethnological Study Between Borders and Discourses and its shores are also the setting where the fishing communities of Izola, Piran and Koper are geographically located. The gulf is described as the northernmost bay of the Adriatic and thus the Mediterranean, and is characterized by geographers as a shallow, marginal part of the Mediterranean Sea (Orožen Adamicˇ 2002: 144; Klemencˇicˇ 2013). In terms of its geomorphology, The Gulf of Trieste is usually treated as a separate (independent) natural (or physical) geographical unit that includes both marine and coastal parts as well as the hinterland. The marine part is described as relatively uniform, while descriptions of the coastal parts and the hinterland emphasize their diversity. One of the geomorphologic characteristics of the Gulf of Trieste is the shallow sea; the average depth is around 16.4 m, with only some parts of the bay deeper than 25 m. The maximum depth in the Slovenian part of the gulf is 37.5 m, off the Cape Madona in Piran. Because of these characteristics, the total amount of water in the bay is surprisingly small: 11 km3. According to the Orožen Adamicˇ, this is less water than one would find in many larger lakes. The most characteristic winds in the gulf are bora [locally: burja] and sirocco [locally: jugo], that mostly blow in the cold half of the year. Bora is the strongest of the two and prevails in February, bringing clear conditions; sirocco on the other hand brings warmer, wet weather. In the warm half of the year, local winds such as mornik [locally: maestral] and nocˇnik – [locally: burin] blow; the former occurs during the day, blowing from the sea to the land and greatly mitigates the summer heat, while the latter is a refreshing wind blowing at night from the mainland towards the sea (Gams and Vrisˇer 1998). Biologists also discuss the sea of the Gulf of Trieste as a coherent natural environment or habitat which among other things also affects the dynamics of its living marine resources and fisheries. According to biological research, factors that especially affect marine organisms are salinity, temperature and oxygen content in the water. As Miroslav Zei wrote, these factors only slightly change depending on the geographical dimension and vary more according to depth, time of the year, the proximity of the mouth of the rivers, eutrophication, and the like (1996: 356). One of the characteristics of the fish in the Gulf of Trieste is their extensive migration and seasonal, annual and secular fluctuations (Zei 1996).4 Due to the specifics mentioned, fluctuations in water temperature are significant (Orožen Adamicˇ 2002: 144). The bottom of the Gulf of Trieste consists of various marine sediments, mostly sludge (Orožen Adamicˇ 2004: 12). The sea temperature in the Gulf is the lowest in February (8–9 C), and the highest in August (24 C),

4Apart from mullet there are numerous other species important for Slovene maritime fishery. One of the most important group of fish are Clupeidae (small pelagic fish such as sardines, sprats, anchovies and herrings) which account for two thirds of the fish production in the Mediterranean, and represent 93% of the total marine catch in Slovenia (Zei 1977: 182; Marcˇeta 2001: 24). Apart from Clupeidae, another important group of fish in the Gulf of Trieste are the Scombridae, which include mackerel and tuna. For industrial fishing using trawlers in deep waters, several other fish are important such as Gaddidaes, Sparidaes and others. In small coastal fishing, significant and economically important species in the Gulf of Trieste (according to Zei’s diagram) include cartilaginous fish, picarels, common sole, cuttlefish and squid (1996: 360). 2.2 Biology: From Technological Innovation to Overexploitation 41 with the average temperature from June to October hovering above 21 C. The lowest ever sea temperature in Koper was 1.6 C (10th February 1956), and the highest was 28.6 C (2nd August 1958). The Gulf of Trieste furthermore has a high average salinity, higher than the salinity of oceans. Flows are weak and run along the Slovenian coast towards the north and northeast, and return along the Italian coast to the southern Adriatic. Tides are mixed; in one lunar day, there are exchanges of two high and two low tides. High tides and floods from the sea are frequent in late autumn and in the first half of winter. Waves depend on the winds, the highest waves build during the tramontana northerly wind and can reach up to 3 m (Ogrin and Plut 2009). Three different coastal sides which wrap the Gulf of Trieste are described by geographers as the limestone, karst and Istrian sides (Orožen Adamicˇ 2004: 11). The latter refers to a sedimentary flysch landscape of the eastern part of the Gulf, which stretches from Trieste to the cape of the Savudrija peninsula, and is often co-terminus with the national territory of Slovenia facing the gulf. The latter area is therefore seen as “naturally” different to the “Italian” limestone and karst parts and the sediments of the Socˇa river – for geographers, political borders reflect natural ones. As Bricelj wrote: “[S]lovenia’s state frontier on the Coast almost coincides with the flysch landscape of the eastern part of the Gulf of Trieste (2004: 7).” The Istrian, eastern, or “Slovenian” part of the Gulf of Trieste is characterized by the transformation/exchange of marl [lapor] and sandstone [pesˇcˇenjak] in steep cliffs and plains at the mouths of the rivers Rižana, Badasˇevica and Dragonja (cf. Bricelj 2004: 7).

2.2 Biology: From Technological Innovation to Overexploitation

2.2.1 Technological Innovation of Industrial Fishing in SFR Yugoslavia

Contributions published in the period of SFR Yugoslavia before 1980 reflect the tendency – characteristic of the socialist context in general – towards certain ideologically-driven conclusions leading to a positive evaluation of industry. Dur- ing this period, the past was evaluated negatively, with fishery before WWII dismissed as an economical branch that used inefficient and backward technology, and was dependent on chance (Rogelja 2006). For example, Miroslav Zei in his 1957 paper “Morsko ribisˇtvo v Slovenskem Primorju” [Marine Fisheries in the Slovenian Littoral] positively evaluates the efficiency of Yugoslav fishing industry compared with previous periods. He reflects on the increased productivity and proposes the introduction of tuna-fishing perches and hydroplanes in the south Adriatic, Kvarner and in Dalmatian waters, where Slovene industrial fishing fleets were fishing from the 1950s on. The latter innovation could, according to Zei, 42 2 The Field of Ethnological Study Between Borders and Discourses

Fig. 2.1 Graph showing “fishing value” and “fishing effort” (Zei 1984) include engaging the navy to provide support with trained pilots that could quickly and effectively help locating large shoals of fish. Fishing would thus “become more rational, fishermen would not go fishing only in a randomly chosen area, but would go straight to areas rich in sardines” (Zei 1957: 84). The subject of overfishing was mentioned in only one paragraph, where Zei stated overfishing in the Adriatic is not yet a problem (ibid). This attitude is similarly present in his other articles, where he describes the ocean as “an inexhaustible mine of various elements”, positively evaluating data attesting to the increase in the Mediterranean catch after WWII from 18,000 tons in 1947 to 70,000 tons in 1975 (1977: 180). According to Zei, this success is explained by the introduction of better technology and the scientific monitoring of rational fishing. He also notes that in the Mediterranean, in the post- war period, industrial fishing of small pelagic fish such as sardines has grown rapidly, while the fishing of deep-water fish and coastal fisheries stagnated. Written in a similar style as the 1957 article, Zei’s 1977 paper still constructs the sea as an “inexhaustible mine”, but the author does devote more attention to the problem of overfishing. He lists overfished benthic fish in the western Mediterranean (Balearic, Sicilian, Marseille regions) and estimates that fishing in the central Mediterranean (where he places the Ionian and the Adriatic Sea) is near its optimal limit (ibid: 184). The optimal limit is determined by the curve of the “fish value” in relation with the “fishing effort”. As fishing effort is increased, its cost increases and the catch grows, but only to the biological maximum. After this point, the phenomenon called overfishing appears and profits begin to decrease regardless of effort. The diagram featuring the curve of overfishing can be found in almost all of Zei’s articles and illustrates the discussions on economic and biological problems of fisheries within the applied fishing biology of the SFR Yugoslavia (Fig. 2.1). Zei also highlights some of the hidden components which make an accurate calculation difficult: inaccurate statistics in the framework of private coastal fishing both in terms of catches and the number of fishing vessels actually operating (in 1980s, biologists received data on the catch mostly from the formal fish market, 2.2 Biology: From Technological Innovation to Overexploitation 43 but accounting for other markets – informal, cross-border, etc. – catches were probably much higher); variation of catch between individual boats, which in Zei’s view can also be the result of skills and composition of fishing crews and skippers; inaccurate data about the duration of fishing and the number of tugs with trawling fishing nets, which significantly alter the component of fishing effort (1984: 135). Taking all of this into account, the calculation could become perilously incomplete, as Estellie M. Smith’s comments on linear models: They are looking for the old, familiar ‘A+B¼ C’ linear regularity in space-time dimensions of the system where linear logic would suggest that they find it: relationships between fishing mortality, stock size, spawning biomass, recruitment, predator-prey inter- actions etc. Occasionally they get lucky and stumble across a strange attractor. More often, though, they are fruitlessly creating and probing fractal dimensions that contain only aperiodic noise: chaos. They are simply using the wrong tool for the job; rather like trying to eat soup with a fork (1991: 95). Self-regulating mechanisms protecting fish populations (although highlighted by anthropologists elsewhere) are in the case of the Gulf of Trieste only partly useful because the individuals and communities along the Gulf of Trieste are included in several state regulatory frameworks (two before 1991 – Italy and SFR Yugoslavia). When Zei compares data on catches between E and W Adriatic in the 1970s, he finds that the Italian fishing fleet caught six times more than the Yugoslav fishing fleet (1977). In his observations, he stresses that the Yugoslav business sector should invest more effort towards changing this ratio: [W]hat is disappointing in this is the fact that we have been saying for twenty years that we need to protect fish stock, while our neighbor make progress in a geometric climb. [...] The fact that our neighbor catches what we are supposed to catch should sober our businessmen to strongly invest in fishing activity, starting with the fish in the sea and ending with the consumer, otherwise we will only stand by and watch our neighbor harvest our sea with a more numerous and powerful fishing fleet (1977: 186, 190). The article reflects the spirit of the time and reports on the crisis of the Yugoslav marine fisheries through the parameters of the lack of profitability and inefficient investment in marine fishery, but it also brings in information about multiple political regimes that regulated its fishery and sometimes “the same shoal of fish” differently. Apart from the number of regulatory regimes attached to a relatively small area (The Upper Adriatic Sea), the other implicit theme of these writings is the view of the sea as a non-exhaustive source. At the time, the Adriatic Sea was still not perceived as overfished, but this perspective changed in following years.

2.2.2 Overexploited Fish Populations, Endangered Marine Species and Migratory Fish

In the following years, the appeal for the cooperation between different parties using the same gulf has become accentuated, giving more importance to the protection of the sea and the issue of overfishing. Judging by work written from 44 2 The Field of Ethnological Study Between Borders and Discourses the 1980s onwards, biologists started to emphasize the importance of mariculture and the hypothetical introduction of fry from hatcheries into the sea (Zei 1977, 1983, 1984, 1996, personal conversation in 1999). These works discuss overexploited and under-exploited fish populations as well as the problem of endangered marine species. While applied marine biology primarily saw its mission as the scientific guiding of efforts towards a more efficient industrial fishing throughout most of the SFR Yugoslavia period, its role changed to constant monitoring of fish populations and scientifically based mariculture during the 1980s and 1990s. In articles and interviews published after 1980s, Slovene biologists Miroslav Zei, JožeSˇtirn and Alesˇ Bolje also became very critical of state policy on fisheries (e.g. the inappropriate introduction of mariculture and inadequate laws). Interestingly, they also commented on the prevailing continental mentality, as Sˇtirn put it: The continental mindset in Slovenia has been a major obstacle earlier when we had the whole sea. Now, when we have such a small sea, this continental mindset is a real poison (Sˇtirn in Sˇuligoj 1994). Furthermore, they expressed the need for a more developed applied marine biol- ogy,5 emphasized the importance of mariculture for the future and talked about the importance of introducing quotas (especially Sˇtirn). Biological research and related fishing regulation became closely connected with preventive measures and so-called monitoring. Following on from such thinking, Sˇtirn and Bolje introduced measures limiting industrial fishing with trawlers by the Droga company to the period from 15th February to 15th September (Zei 1996: 360). In more recent articles and interviews of the above-mentioned Slovene biolo- gists, their attitude towards Slovene fishermen is relatively positive. Due to the small size of the Slovene fishing fleet, mutual familiarity between fishermen and biologists is a fact that should not be overlooked from an anthropological perspec- tive. When Slovene biologists refer to fishermen, they sometimes use personal names or family names (personal conversation with Slovene biologists, April 2015). This creates a specific situation where biologists “understand” fishermen and vice versa, and where community self-regulating mechanisms could be explored further. Fishermen are seen as well-trained and a “personification of the Dalmatian fisherman and Slovenian ingenuity and organization” (Sˇtirn in: Sˇuligoj 1994). Apart from these positive images, biologists also highlight the relative unimportance of Slovene marine fishing for the national economy, but underline its relevance for the local economy and traditions (Marcˇeta 2001: 28). According to the biologists’ findings, the shallow waters of the Gulf of Trieste and its fish population are threatened not so much because of overfishing, as they are endangered because of pollution. In a gulf around which over 400,000 people

5In Slovenia the Marine Biology Station from Piran and The Fishery Research Institute of Slovenia are the main research institutions for monitoring maritime fishery and performing research on marine environment. 2.3 Disputed Borders and “Extruded Histories” 45 live, pollution is influenced by numerous factors. According to the report “Kakovost morja in kontrola onesnaženja s kopnega”, [Sea quality and control of pollution from the land], which was conducted by the Marine Biology Station Piran and the National Institute of Biology in 2003, the sea surrounding the Slovenian coast has several sources of pollution. Analyses of sediment samples, shellfish and river inflows have shown that the main factors of pollution are chemical pollution in estuaries, underwater discharges of sewage, and pollution from shipping in the vicinity of the Port of Koper. Among the most polluted rivers which flow into this part of the sea is the Rižana river, where high levels of bacteria of fecal origin were found alongside industrially polluted water from the Koper treatment plant. Beside the pollution from the Rižana, the area surrounding the Koper marina (where one of the measuring stations was located), and maritime traffic in the Port of Koper also contributed to the pollution. If we add the shallowness of the bay and marine pollution by sewage from the Po River (this analysis was not taken into account) to the report’s conclusions, the pollution levels of the sea are substantial.6

2.3 Disputed Borders and “Extruded Histories”

The Gulf of Trieste is today divided between three nation states; Croatia, Italy and Slovenia. The maritime border between Italy and Yugoslavia was established by the Treaty of Osimo, which came into the force in 1977. Since that time, approximately two-thirds of the Gulf of Trieste has belonged to Italy, while a third belonging to the SFR Yugoslavia. The land border between Croatia and Slovenia in the context of the former SFR Yugoslavia was set in 1956 with legislation amending the Law on the areas of counties and municipalities in the People’s Republic of Slovenia (Marin 1992: 170; UR LRS 13/56). After Slovenia declared independence in 1991, the maritime border between Croatia and Slovenia remained undefined and is in 2016 still a matter of an international dispute. The main point of contention is whether the maritime border line runs along the border of the cadastral register or along a line that runs from the mouth of the Dragonja River into the sea and towards the middle of the bay. Although the political dispute around the maritime border between the two

6Following the Sea directive (2008/56/ES) and initial assessment as proposed in the Marine Environment Management Plan (MEMP), experts undertook an analysis of the characteristics, pressures and impacts on marine waters in Slovene maritime waters. They identified the predom- inant pressures and impact causing the degradation of marine environment. On the basis of this analysis experts determined the characteristics of good marine environmental status. According to criteria and methodological standards on good environmental status as proposed by the Commis- sion decision (2010/477/ES), some descriptions were taken as indicators of good environmental status. In the case of Slovenia the level of TBT is too high, the status of common sole, sardine and anchovy is overfished, micro plastic particles were present; and the noise level is relatively high (Peterlin et al. 2014). 46 2 The Field of Ethnological Study Between Borders and Discourses

Slovenian waters

disputed

corridor

Croatian waters International waters

Cartography: Urša Kanjir Source: Ministry of Infrastructure of the Republic of Slovenia © ZRC SAZU

Fig. 2.2 The research area with numerous lines showing restrictions, limitations and borders (Designed by Ursˇa Kanjir) countries is seen as a problem that emerged after Slovenia gained independence in 1991, it was apparent already in the context of Yugoslavia, as Slovene historian Darja Mihelicˇ (1987, 1998, 2008) explained. Mihelicˇ stated that in the past, the practice of silent disagreement was already evident in relation to certain disputed areas near today’s border (1998: 16). The Bay of Piran with its fishery resources, which are of special importance for Slovene maritime fishery, is one such disputed area as we will see in the following sections (Fig. 2.2).

2.3.1 The Dispute

Over the course of the twentieth century, the NE Adriatic has witnessed continual drawing and redrawing of borders both in polemical debates as to where the borders should be located and in the various competing accounts of the history of the region. The question where the maritime border between Slovenia and Croatia should be located was polemicized at different levels, linking national, international and local interests and discourses, while against the bigger picture, all these disputes got recently linked with the decomposition of the socialist countries (former SFRY and former Soviet Union), raising questions in connection with the maritime borders within the framework of UNCLOS. As observed by Arnaut (2002), the territorial 2.3 Disputed Borders and “Extruded Histories” 47 sea delimitation, while one of the most intensely debated issues prior to WWII, has largely been delegated to the sidelines of ocean and coastal law and has come to light only recently, since the break-up of the Soviet Union and the former Yugo- slavia. While the land boundaries between the republics of these federal states had mostly been solved, the sea delimitations had not been accomplished. As further observed by Arnaut, “...despite of its relatively small size, the former Yugoslavia has produced some of the most contested territorial sea delimitation problems in recent history” (ibid: 23). The border dispute and delimitation in the and the Gulf of Trieste has been one according to Arnaut, the most controversial bilateral issue between the two countries ever since their independence in 1991. Over the course of the last 25 years, prime ministers of Slovenia and Croatia proposed several agreements, such as Drnovsˇek-Racˇan Agreement (2001), Jansˇa- Sanader Agreement (2007) and Pahor-Kosor Agreement (2009), but those agree- ments never came to any realization. The dispute was internationalized after unsuccessful bilateral negotiations, and in 2009 the conflict became the subject of international arbitration. In order to understand the recent dispute over the maritime border brief historical sketch of the territorial dispute on the land and sea is in order. After WWII, Yugoslav Army claimed the territory of Istria together with the town of Trieste. Since the Soviet Allies did not support Tito’s further Yugoslav expansionism, Trieste and its hinterland became a subject of a longstanding dispute (Boeckh 2014: 25). The Free Territory of Trieste (FTT) was established in 1946, and the dispute was in later years solved with international arbitration. FTT was established by the UN and then divided among the allied Anglo-American govern- ment (Zone A) and the Yugoslav authorities (Zone B), and was under co-management until 1954. After 1954 Zone B (where numerous Italian speaking inhabitants lived) was assigned to Yugoslavia and divided between Slovenia and Croatia, while Zone A with the multi-ethnic Trieste’s hinterland (where many Slovene speaking inhabitants lived) remained on the Italian side of the border (Josipovicˇ 2012). In the following years there were some additional negotiations concerning specific parts of the border at sea and on the land between Italy and Yugoslavia and finally, the involved parties signed the Treaty of Osimo in 1975 (Arnaut 2014: 146). The Treaty of Osimo came into force in April 1977 (Blake and Topalovic´ 1996: 16). It defined the border at the sea in the Gulf of Trieste as consisting of four segments that connect five points.7 At that time both the states (SFRY and Italy) had different opinions considering the equidistance and straight baseline. However, as a result of the compromise, a line between the two alterna- tives was reached and was described as “the partial effect of the straight baselines” (Charney and Alexander 1993: 1642, in Blake and Topalovic´ 1996: 17). The main problem was the fishing interests of both states. The conflict was resolved with the agreement in Rome, which came into force on 16th June 1986, establishing the joint

7For contemporary dispute, point 5 coincides with point 1 of the 1968 Italian-Yugoslav continental shelf boundary agreement (Blake and Topalovic´ 1996: 16), and lies approx. 300 m offshore the terminus of the former SFR Yugoslav-Italian border on the Adriatic coast. 48 2 The Field of Ethnological Study Between Borders and Discourses

fishing zone. Over the following years, the Osimo agreement (in accordance with the rules of succession) became one of the essential obligations for the delimitation of Slovenia and Croatia. On 25th June 1991 both Slovenia and Croatia claimed independence and sover- eignty from SFR Yugoslavia. Following the break-up of the former SFRY the Croatian-Slovene border came into dispute concerning the maritime and land delimitation, and the uti possedi juris principle was applied for the border delim- itation. The arbitration commission of the conference on Yugoslavia, established by EC, proposed in accordance with this principle that former administrative limits should become frontiers protected by international law. New maritime delimitations were drawn according to the international law and The United Nation Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) (Arnaut 2014: 147). Following article 15 of the UNCLOS the states should agree on the territorial sea between the states. In a case of disagreement, the states must not extend its territorial sea beyond the median line:

Where the coasts of two States are opposite or adjacent to each other, neither of the two States is entitled, failing agreement between them to the contrary, to extend its territorial sea beyond the median line every point of which is equidistant from the nearest points on the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial seas of each of the two States is measured. The above provision does not apply, however, where it is necessary by reason of historic title or other special circumstances to delimit the territorial seas of the two States in a way which is at variance therewith (emphasis added by authors, UNCLOS 1982).

In 2001, Drnovsˇek–Racˇan agreement proposed a solution that the Slovene territo- rial sea should cover approx. 113 km2 or 70% of the Bay of Piran. The solution was not in accordance with the equidistance principle, but rather based on a claim that historic and other special circumstances exist. The agreement established a “high sea corridor” and following this solution, the Croatian territorial sea would be crossed by this corridor, while Croatia would retain a triangle bordering on the corridor, Slovenian and Italian territorial seas. This proposal was considered by international experts to be innovative and unprecedented (cf. Arnaut 2002, 2014), and as such capable of satisfying Slovenian claims to the direct access to high sea and Croatian demand of retaining the territorial sea boundary with Italy. The agreement was supported by the Slovene historians and ethnologists who saw the possibility for a solution in the article 15 of referring to “reason of historic title or other special circumstances”.8 To understand the maritime border dispute it has to be noted that decisions regarding the land border are very important for the delimitation of the base point

8Some experts with more extreme views insist on Croatian historical debt to the Slovenians, appealing that in the Adriatic region the compromise was in favour of former SFR Yugoslavia, while in the north, the Rapallo border line exceeded the London line to the detriment of the Slovene ethnic territory and a great number of Slovenes came under the jurisdiction of Italy. According to this interpretation, the Rapallo compromise concerning the border was above all paid by the Slovenes (Kacin Wohinz 1999 in Krnel Umek 2005: 26). 2.3 Disputed Borders and “Extruded Histories” 49 for the maritime border (Sancin 2010: 102). Both states officially claimed9 the territory near Dragonja River (or the St. Odorick canal, new regulated river bed), on the bases of different sets of evidence. The Slovene state was making claims to the land with four hamlets (Bužini/Bužin, Mlini, Sˇkodelin/Sˇkudelin and Sˇkrile/Sˇkrilje) because this part of the land belonged to the Slovene community of Piran III in accordance with the cadastral evidence. If this proposal had been accepted, then those hamlets would have been on the other side of the Bay of Piran and the bay could have been undivided.10 The Croatian claims relied on the administrative evidence, and considered this part of land as de facto under Croatian jurisdiction (Blake and Topalovic´ 1996: 28).11 Through the integrity of the Bay of Piran, the state of Slovenia could also claim the right to connect its territorial sea with the international waters (ibid). According to some arguments made by the Slovene border expert commission, the Bay of Piran should also be integrated rather than divided due to its ecological vulnerability. On the other side, “Croatia claims a right to territorial contact with the territorial sea of Italy and requests an equidistant line to be applied for the maritime delimitation in the bay” (Sancin 2010: 97). Addi- tional arguments are that Slovenia is an “unprivileged state” with no direct access to High Seas and without an option to declare exclusive economic zone (Sˇkrk 2004: 496–497).

2.3.1.1 Borders and Fishing Agreements

Due to currents and the depth of water, the eastern side of the bay was traditionally known as being a more productive fishing area. Consequently, from the year 1946 to 1973, SFR Yugoslavia and Italy concluded six agreements, providing rights for Italian fishermen to fish in specified areas of the Yugoslav territorial waters in return for financial compensation (Sersic 1993 in Blake and Topalovic´ 1996: 3). In the year 1983 Italy and SFR Yugoslavia signed the agreement of a common fishing zone which straddled the territorial sea boundary in the Gulf on Trieste and was inherited by the new states (ibid). In 1995 Slovenia and Croatia signed an

9There were also two other unofficial claims. Radical extreme claims demanded the border to be established along the former border of the FTT on the Mirna River, and the more moderate claims saw the border as being 2–3 km south of the River Dragonja, containing the communities of Savudrija and Kasˇtel and based on the historical limits of the Koper district from 1910, when this territory was a part of Austrian Monarchy. According to this division, the Bay of Piran would be considered as internal waters, as in SFR Yugoslavia (Blake and Topalovic´ 1996: 25–27). 10In April 1993, the Government of Slovenia declared Memorandum on the Bay of Piran, where the state argued for police control and jurisdiction over the entire bay. Following the standpoint of the Croatian government they demanded the border on the River Dragonja (St. Odorick canal) insisting on the principle of the equidistance. 11This land dispute is still the subject of negotiations. Beside some parts in Istria, the states also have other points of dispute along the border which still remain unresolved but are less relevant for this discussion. 50 2 The Field of Ethnological Study Between Borders and Discourses agreement allowing Slovene fishermen to go into Croatian territorial waters for fishing and they may catch up to 1500 tonnes of fish. In 2002 Slovenia and Croatia accepted the agreement on border traffic and cooperation.12 According to this agreement Slovene fishermen could go fishing up along the Istrian coast to Vrsar in Croatian territorial sea, and Croatian fishermen could go fishing in the Slovenian Sea. The agreement was signed and implemented in 2002. Later Slovenia agreed that the part of the agreement which defines fishing rights will not be implemented until the question of state border is resolved. In October 2003 Croatian Parliament Proclaimed an Ecological-Fishing Protec- tion Zone in the Adriatic (Sˇkrk 2004; Bojinovicˇ Fenko and Sˇabicˇ 2014: 59). After this, in June 2004, Slovenia and Italy threatened to veto the EU decision that would give Croatia the status of a candidate country on the basis of it being a unilateral decision and not an agreement acceptable for all three parties. The proclamation of the zone was to come into force in 2004. The main intention was to address the danger of pollution coming from the oil-tankers headed for Trieste and Koper, while the proposed Zone would significantly reduce the possibilities for Italian fishermen to fish in the Adriatic. For Slovenian scholars of international relations, the zone was perceived as a possible precedent for the delineation of the sea border between Slovenia and Croatia, which was yet to be finalized. The Croatian parlia- ment then delayed the proclamation of the zone until the new partnership on fisheries agreement between Croatia and the EU was accepted. The following day, both Slovenian and Italian representatives in the European Council welcomed the decision by the Croatian parliament and expressed their full support for Croatia to become a candidate for the EU membership (Roter and Bojinovic´ 2005: 452). After Croatia entered the EU, the border conflict and the problem of ecological fishing zone still remain unresolved. Nevertheless, in 2015 a joint control started and despite the unresolved border issues, Slovene, Croatian and Italian fishing inspectors survey fisheries in the Gulf of Trieste with joint efforts and in accordance with the Common Fisheries Policy.

2.3.2 Is the Fishing Tradition of the Bay of Piran Really Slovene?

A history of fishing rights in the Bay of Piran is interesting from two angles. First, the border in the Bay of Piran is part of a contemporary political discourse between the two states. This discourse strongly involves fishermen even though they are not always happy to be at “the frontlines of the conflict”, as one of them put

12“The Law on Ratification of the Agreement between the Republic of Slovenia and the Republic of Croatia on Border Traffic and Cooperation (Official Gazette of RS – International Treaties, no. 20/01)” regulates the economic cooperation between the states in the border zone and, alongside other issues, it regulates maritime fishing in the Adriatic. 2.3 Disputed Borders and “Extruded Histories” 51 it. Secondly, the fishing of mullet and other fish in the Bay of Piran still represents a significant source of incomes for people engaged in commercial fishing in the region. One of the first written historical sources cited by Mihelicˇ reported about the tradition of fishing rights in the Bay of Piran, which dates back to the sixth century (1998: 7). Historical sources indicate that the city communes of Trieste, Milje, Koper, Izola, Piran and Umag gradually acquired the right to free use of the majority of coastal waters in the area of western Istria. This remained the case after the establishment of the supremacy of the Republic of Venice in the middle of the thirteenth century. The Most Serene Republic ruled the coastal towns on the western side of Istria from 1279 (Izola and Koper) or 1283 (Piran) until the end of the Republic in 1797 (Marin 1991: 136), during which time the Serenissima did not intervene directly in the ownership and use of waters of these town communes. Historically, Piran had the major part of what is now the fishing reserve of Secˇovlje bay at its disposal. Archive records mention communal fishing grounds in several locations (such as Strunjan, Fazan, Paderna and others) which were leased out by the commune in an annual auction to leaseholders, called mergatores (Mihelicˇ 1998: 9). The lease entitled (and required) them to fish and to give fishing rights to the fishermen in the part of the communal fishing areas they leased, but were themselves under the control of supervisor, called mari piscatorum. As sources on the fourteenth century testify, the exclusive leasehold period was limited, with fishing areas open to everyone only between 1st April and 29th September (Saint Michael’s Day). During other periods of the year (which is when mullets gather in the bay), fishing was permitted only to leaseholders (ibid: 10). The Napoleonic wars (1803–1815) and ensuing French occupation of the area resulted in a few short-term developments in the context of fishing rights: the freedom of fishing was introduced, the fishing rights of urban communes and landlords abrogated, and a tax on the sale of fish abolished. After the end of the French domination however, the previous city and landholders’ rights were re-established (ibid: 14). With the return of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy the “old situation” was thus reestablished until the 1830s, when the province of the defined fishing rights in more detail – the sea was declared as “free”, while the coastal strip (one mile from the coast) was made available for use by the local fishing popula- tion. After the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, the western part of Istria came under the Kingdom of Italy’s control and fishing regulations were once again placed under the domain of municipalities (ibid: 14). After WWII, the Bay of Piran was included in Zone B of the Free Territory of Trieste, and was as such assigned to Yugoslavia in 1954, coming thus under Yugoslav laws. The General Law on Marine Fisheries, adopted on 21st January 1950 by the Federal Council and the Council of Nations of the People’s Assembly of the Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia, provided for a 4-mile coastal strip reserved exclusively for fishing 52 2 The Field of Ethnological Study Between Borders and Discourses by Yugoslav fishermen where foreign citizens13 were not allowed to fish. Fishing within this strip was undertaken by companies, cooperatives and individual fisher- men. In order to rationalize fishing and protect of the fish stock and the environ- ment, the pertinent ministry was also allowed to suspend fishing entirely or prohibit certain fishing techniques in the zone for a certain period (Articles 4, 6, 17). The provisions of this Law were to be applied in all federal republics of Yugoslavia until the individual republics issued their own laws on sea fishing (Article 31). The fishing reserve in the Bay of Piran that includes territory disputed by Croatia was for example established in 1962 by the Secretariat of the Executive Council of Agri- culture and Forestry with the consent of the Secretary of State for the Interior of the People’s Republic of Slovenia. Based on this fact, we can observe that the Bay of Piran and the reserve were at the time considered to be under the authority of the People’s Republic of Slovenia. According to a federal directive regulating the reserve, its direct management was assigned to the competent authority in Piran (Mihelicˇ 1998: 14). The 1965 Yugoslav Law on Marine Fisheries was fundamental in providing the legal framework within which the PR of Slovenia in 1967 adopted its own Law on Marine Fisheries. In the same year then, the Socialist Republic of Slovenia was “in charge” of the Bay of Piran, which was treated as a whole and under its jurisdiction. In economic terms, the federal state entrusted the decisions around the reserve and the bay to Piran’s municipal authorities (Mihelicˇ 1998: 15). We could say that Slovenia (within SFR Yugoslavia), appropriated this reserve by relying on the notion of “tradition” based on historical resources. The historical records on the tradition of mullet fishing in the bay and Piran’s fishing rights in the area are at present still used as an argument supporting the claim that the sea border between the Republic of Croatia and the Republic of Slovenia should be set in favor of Slovenia and the Piran municipality (Mihelicˇ 1987: 9–11; Mihelicˇ 1998: 7–18), and that the Bay of Piran should not be divided down the middle. The question to whom the Bay of Piran belongs gained additional importance because it affects the open access of Slovenia to international waters. In summary, the principle argument used by Slovenia in maritime border negotiations with Croatia stems from historical sources which evidenced traditional (fishing) rights in the terrestrial and maritime space (Mihelicˇ 1998). This position of course follows the logic of nationalist expansion on the basis of historically reconstructed data about areas of fishery rights. What this narrative does not address however are the diverse political boundaries and multicultural, multilingual and multiethnic identities of the area as documented by Italian and Austrian ethnogra- phers (cf. Ballinger 2012).

13In the context of Slovenia after 1991, this has changed. The competent staff at the Ministry explained that the status of an independent entrepreneur fisherman in Slovenia may be granted to a foreign citizen as a gesture of “our” tolerance and openness (personal interview, May 1999). 2.3 Disputed Borders and “Extruded Histories” 53

2.3.3 “Extruded Histories”

As Pamela Ballinger wrote, borders are on one hand considered as a place of hybridity and heresy, while simultaneously also being perceived as a place of purity and orthodoxy in defensive discourses (1998, 2004, 2012). If the articulation of the maritime border between Slovenia and Croatia constitutes one example of a contemporary political dispute oscillating between hybridity and purity, the exodus of the ethnic Italian population following WWII is another such example. Both are closely related with maritime fishery along the NE Adriatic; the maritime border issue closely affects the everyday practice of Slovene fishermen, while the so-called Italian exodus mostly relates to Italian-speaking local fishermen who left the coastal towns of Piran, Izola, and Koper en masse following the war. The Italian exodus is perhaps one of the most salient events triggered by the border settlement after WWII. According to The Treaty of Peace with Italy in 1947, the southern part of Venezia Giulia, the , which up to then was a part of the Italian state, was transferred to SFR Yugoslavia. In 1954, an additional part of the Julian March, which had until then been administered as the Free Territory of Trieste, was awarded to Yugoslavia (Ballinger 2012: 373) and resulted in the final massive migration of Italian-speaking inhabitants, most of whom were local fish- ermen. The exodus took place in the years from 1943 to 1954 when, according to Pamela Ballinger, between 200,000 and 350,000 Italian-speaking inhabitants left their homes and moved to the northern side of the so-called Morgan’s Blue Line, which delimited zone A of the Free Territory of Trieste from its zone B (ibid: 52). In Piran, the percentage of Italian speaking people fell from 90 to 15% (Pletikosic´ 1995: 21). In coastal towns such as these, where the Italian speaking people traditionally lived in previous centuries (cf. Wolff 2001), the decline was more dramatic than in the hinterland. The coastal urban areas of Dalmatia and Istria were historically the centers of the Latin-speaking population, representing “Latin- speaking cultural islands” perceived in opposition with the rural Slavic hinterlands (Ballinger 2004: 35). With the onset of nationalism in the nineteenth century, these social/class/linguistic differentiations were merged into ethno-national identifica- tions (Ballinger 1998: 56). Already during the Austro-Hungarian monarchy in the period between 1848 and 1860, political reforms set out to reduce the administra- tive power of the Italian-speaking population in the Dalmatian cities, prompting them to either adapt to the new reality or migrate to Zadar and Istria (ibid: 56). Ethnographic data collected by Ballinger (1998, 2004) shows how Italian- speaking inhabitants of Istrian towns, after Italy’s capitulation in 1943, were putting off their departure until the very last moment, in the hope that the zone B of the Free Territory of Trieste would be awarded to Italy. That never happened, triggering a second exodus after 1954 that was larger in scope and is also called “the great exodus”. Others left their homes later due to the negative experiences with the fishing cooperatives in SFR Yugoslavia, because of the closing of Italian schools and the introduction of a new monetary unit, the yugolira, which plunged many into poverty (1998: 61). Some retellings of exodus in Ballinger’s ethnography (2004) 54 2 The Field of Ethnological Study Between Borders and Discourses were triggered with the collapse of SFR Yugoslavia and violent “ethnic cleansing” in the Balkans in the 1990s. These events brought to light narratives of “Balkan barbarism”, as Ballinger explained: The violence of the Yugoslav breakup appeared to some to offer powerful proof of the Balkan barbarism and cruelty described by Italian exiles, who claim to have been perse- cuted for the “sole crime of being Italian”. Though contemporary accounts of the Istrian exodus today find a new space and audience and employ new vocabulary (“ethnic cleans- ing” in place of the older term “denationalization”), they display remarkable continuity with narratives produced at the time of the events (1943–54), accounts which in turn built on irredentist discourses from the Hapsburg and fascist eras (2004: 38–39). The “original” inhabitants of Piran, Koper and Izola were over the following years replaced with people coming from inland, but also with families who lived further south along what is now the Croatian part of Istria (from and Fažana for example, according to our ethnographic data). These relocated to the newly “empty” towns and either started or continued (in the case of people coming from Croatian coastal towns) with fishing activity and thus became Yugoslav/Slovene maritime fishermen. On the other hand, villages with the “autochthonous” Slovene-speaking popu- lation along the Carst coast north of Trieste were assigned to the state of Italy and numerous Slovene-speaking fishermen thus started to fish in the “Italian sea”. Later on, with the establishment of an independent Slovene state, several ethnologists and popular writers started to pay attention to these fishermen and organize their discussion in terms of originality and Slovene maritime identity, but also in relation with national and ethnic boundaries within the Gulf of Trieste. We will examine these discussions in more detail in the second part of this book.

2.4 Slovene Marine Fishing: Fragments from the Twentieth and Twenty-First Century

Among coastal industries, commercial fishing experienced the greatest changes due to political upheavals and the exodus after WWII. Figures for 1911 show that in Izola, there were 900 fishermen and 14,000 standing fishing nets, while in Rovinj, there were only 600 fishermen registered in the same year. To illustrate the size Izola’s fishery, in one of the strongest fishing centers along the East Adriatic Sea, in Komiža (on the island of Vis in today’s Croatia), there were 1500 registered fishermen (Zei 1957: 82). According to documents dating from 1927, cited by ethnologist Vanda Bezek, the number of fishermen dropped due to the war, so that in 1927, there were 750 registred fisherman in Izola, with 180 fishing boats between them (1979, Part IV 1. Vol.: XXIII). Following the First World War, the 1920 Treaty of Rapallo, signed on 12th November by the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (SCS) and the Kingdom of Italy, set the border between the two countries, with towns such as Izola and Piran falling under Italian sovereignty. In Izola in 1931, the number of people 2.4 Slovene Marine Fishing: Fragments from the Twentieth and Twenty-First Century 55 engaged in fishing once again rose to 22% of the population: among 9435 inhab- itants, as many as 2130 were engaged in fishing (Tome Marinac 1994: 112). According to Miroslav Zei, there were more than one hundred larger motor boats and many rowing and sailing boats in Koper, Izola and Piran on the dawn of WWII (1957: 81). After the war, the numbers of bigger fishing boats along the Slovene coast decreased with the exception of Piran, where the Ribicˇ [Fisherman] fishing company was located (ibid: 82). Slovene ethnologist and historian Nadja Tercˇon wrote how the decline in the number of motor boats along the Slovene coast could also be linked to the fear that this territory would be assigned to Italy (1990). Due to this, some companies evacuated their bigger boats to Dalmatia. The company Riba allegedly worked only with five ships in 1947. Even a superficial glance at the statistics (number of fishermen, fishing boats...) is sufficient to understand the huge changes that the fishing sector went through after both World Wars. However, we should note that the catch statistics for that area cannot give us a complete picture of fishery since the catch after WWII increased with the introduction of new technologies. Zei for example provides data on the Mediterranean, where the catch in the 1947 was 18,000 tons of fish and in 1977 rose to 70,000 tons (1977: 180). For this discussion, the most indicative statistics are on population migration to and from the area after WWII, as well as data on the economic activity of the population. The figure cited by Bogdana Tome Marinac on the population of the municipality of Izola, shows that in 1944 there were 10,909 inhabitants, while in 1959 the municipality only had 5799 people (Tome Marinac 1994: 112). As stated by various researchers, numer- ous migration flows were registered in coastal towns which had the largest percent- age of Italian-speaking inhabitants (Pletikosic´ 1995: 21; Gombacˇ 2005; Hrobat Virloget et al. 2015), with those that relocated to Italy mainly being merchants, artisans and fishermen (Tercˇon 1990). Fishermen were in particular affected by the introduction of a “social sector”14 approach in fishery, where boats were for example pooled as common property. Statistics from 1957 by the Municipality of Izola show that there were 198 fishermen registered in the social sector, and only nine in the private. Only a year prior, Izola had 131 permanent fishermen and 70 seasonal fishermen operating in the private sector (ibid).

2.4.1 Industrial Fishing and Canning Industry in the North- East Adriatic

Industrial and individual fishery co-existed along the coast of the Gulf of Trieste ever since the formation of the first major industrial fishing fleets took place around

14The social sector is closely linked with the idea of socialist self-management. It was set up after state property became common or social property; the management of the company was then given over to the worker collectives. 56 2 The Field of Ethnological Study Between Borders and Discourses

1938, in the time of Fascist Italy.15 The fish processing industry however already appeared under Austrian rule. At the end of the nineteenth century, fish processing factories appeared in Koper and Izola (Tercˇon 1990: 123). In 1879, the Socie´te´ ge´ne´rale franc¸aise CA built the first factory for processing fish, meat and garden vegetables in Izola (ibid: 123), followed in 1881 by the Austrian company Warhanek that set up the Arrigoni (latter known as Argo) factory. Subsequently, a further six smaller factories were set up: Degrassi, Troian, Noerdlinger, Delise, D’Agostini and Societa Italiana (ibid. 125). During WWI, most of the fish canning factories were either shut down or requisitioned for the war effort. After the war, under the rule of the Kingdom of Italy, fishery once again flourished (ibid). In 1938, the factory Ampelea (established in the 1930s as a subsidiary of Socie´te´ ge´ne´rale franc¸aise CA) from Izola constructed a shipyard and established its own fishing fleet. A year later the company already had 32 ships. Fishermen recruited to work on these ships were mainly locals from Izola (ibid: 124). The company Riba Isola was established in 1948 and first operated as a joint- stock company (from 1948 up to 1954), with the fleets of Riba and Istria Pesca combined with Arrigoni’s fleet. As stated by Nadja Tercˇon, all of Riba’s fishermen were Italian-speaking inhabitants who began to leave the territory after 1954, at which time the company lost many employees. The emigration of Italian-speaking residents badly affected companies such as Istria Pesca and Riba due to staff shortages (ibid: 126). On the other hand, Yugoslav citizens began to inhabit these towns, coming both from the Slovene hinterland as well as from other Yugoslav republics, with a considerable number coming from Dalmatia (ibid). The state- owned company Riba Izola started to operate in 1954, and a year earlier the Ribicˇ company from Piran picked up the long tradition of industrial fishery. Both Yugoslav companies were operating efficiently in the coming years, recruiting staff from the new Fishing School in Piran, established in 1951. As stated by Vladimir Kodricˇ in the Slovenian maritime almanac, the Fishing School in Piran enrolled 19 male students in its first year (2 from Piran, 1 from Izola, 4 from Koper, 11 from Sežana and 1 from Trieste). In the following years, it accepted students from Celje, Buzet, Ljubljana, Brežice, and from Dalmatia and Bosnia. The shortage of able fishermen in the 1950s came up in ethnographic data, particularly in stories of young novice captains that were employed immediately after schooling and had

15In maritime anthropology, one can find documented divisions such as: small/large scale fishery, private and communal fisheries, private and industrial fisheries, coastal and offshore, etc. In this case, the most visible division is that between private and industrial fishing. Industrial fishing before WWII was privately-owned, nationalized following the war and from 1950s the now state- owned companies were then transferred to workers and their self-management units and were considered social property. The denomination “industrial fishery” refers mainly to the tradition of larger fishing boats and fleets as well as the fish processing industry. It has to be stressed that larger “industrial” fleets and fish processing factories were present in Izola from the nineteenth century on and employed large numbers of workers. In addition, the division between private and industrial fishing was, according to our ethnographic documentation, present among fishermen until the fleets of Delamaris and Riba were dismantled. From then on, differentiation occurs mainly according to what fishing gear is used. 2.4 Slovene Marine Fishing: Fragments from the Twentieth and Twenty-First Century 57 to command a crew of much older workers/fishermen (personal conversation, April 1999). Though based in Piran, the Ribicˇ company was also fishing in Dalmatia and held for this purpose several warehouses along the E Adriatic coast (Mali Losˇinj, Kali, Supetarska Draga) where they used to fish. An archival document of the company even reported on the defection of a ship which presumably left for Italy while fishing in Dalmatia (Tercˇon 1990: 128). From 1957, when the fishing cooperative in Piran merged with Ribicˇ, the company was in charge of managing the fishing reserve in the Bay of Piran (Tercˇon 1990: 127). Despite these prospects, the company was dissolved in 1959 following a ruling by the District Commercial Court in Koper and had part of its assets transferred to Riba Izola (ibid: 128). This was also the year when the Delamaris Izola canning factory was established. The additional management changes that occurred in the following years were the result of setting up a combined business system (combining fishery and fish processing), at whose head was Holding Delamaris p. o. Izola.16 The final transformation of the companies happened in 1997 with the privatization process, when the holding company was broken up into four companies: Delamaris canning industry d. d., Riba d. o. o., Delmar d. o. o. and Frigomar d. o. o. (Lisjak 1999). Riba d.o.o was the company engaged in maritime commercial fishing, but in the local vernacular the name Delamaris is still in use for the entire former industrial fishing fleet.

2.4.2 Private and Non-industrial Fishing from WWII Until 199117

Before the establishment of fishing fleets attached to fish processing factories, fishing in the area was private and non-industrial. Fishermen were artisans, with some of them also owning fishing boats. Boat owners had employees (fishermen) on their staff who were, according to our ethnographic information, in a very disad- vantageous economic situation. According to Vanda Bezek, there were an average of 5–6 employees on each boat, with the owners of the boats (padrons) keeping the lion’s share of the profits before distributing the rest among the crew. In 1935, just before the formation of the Ampelea factory fishing fleet, there were 550 fishermen and 97 fishing boats in Izola (Bezek 1979: 122). The appearance of the industrial fleets improved the situation of the individual fishermen working for the padrons after 1939, as new employment opportunities opened up on boats belonging to

16Operating within this framework were the following companies: Delmar d.o.o., Frigomar d.o.o., Delsar d.o.o., Lera d.o.o. and Riba d.o.o. 17The history of small coastal or private fishing in this area is quite difficult to capture in literature and archives, and consequently we rely primarily on individual data from literature and our ethnographic research as well as that of other authors. The ethnographic documentation is used here as additional information and not as the main source of information. 58 2 The Field of Ethnological Study Between Borders and Discourses

Ampelea and Arrigoni in Izola. According to Bogdana Tome Marinac, in this period, some of the private boats were sold-off to the new industrial fishing fleets (1994: 113). Before the end of WWII, several fishermen had also set up their own fishing cooperatives whose main purpose was to negotiate better prices for fish. In Izola for example, the Consorzio per Pescatori cooperative secured contracts with industrial fleets. The cooperative was dissolved in 1946 by the District People’s Committee of Koper (ibid: 114). After 1954, the number of fishermen in Izola fell precipitously, from 201 in 1956 to a mere nine registered fishermen a year later (ibid: 115). According to Ballinger, some of the main reasons behind the Italian- speaking population’s departure can be found precisely in their negative experi- ences with cooperatives, as well as the fluctuating value of the yugolira (1998: 61). According to our ethnographic data, a crucial issue was that the owners of fishing boats were forced to join the newly established cooperative enterprises and make their boats available to the cooperatives.18 Additionally, the boat owners had to work with crews from the cooperative which they didn’t choose for themselves and many of them disagreed with such a system. One of the interviewees from Piran told us the story of her uncle: For example, I have an uncle who now lives in Trieste. He’s very hard-working man. He had his boat and he knew exactly who he wants on his crew. And then these co-operatives after the war, everyone was supposed to join cooperatives. There were no private operators, this was the basic problem. And a cooperative, what was the cooperative, it was common property, and he could not choose his crew. He said that he will not work in any cooperative and will not cooperate with bums. Because he was able to get up at 4 o’clock in the morning. He didn’t like the idea of common property. Because his family was struggling for a long time to come to that boat and he was not prepared to give his vessel to the cooperative. He had a boat of his nono’s [grandfather] (personal conversation, April, 1999). As further explained by a daughter of an Italian-speaking fisherman who remained in Piran, the fishermen who left for Italy were mainly boat owners, but not all of them were Italians. According to our ethnographic data, decisions on whether to leave were informed not by ethnic considerations but also by economic motivation. In this new politico-economic situation, the boat owners could neither work as private fishermen, nor could they work with a crew of their choosing. According to catch statistics from 1979, the private fishing sector along the present-day Slovene coast slowly recovered after the Italian exodus (Tome Marinac 1994: 115). Some of the private fishermen cooperated with companies such as Riba and Ribicˇ and were able to sell their entre catch to these companies. A similar system had been preserved until 201419 where numerous fishermen (mostly those using trawling nets who caught fish in bigger quantities) sold their entire catch to the Delmar company.

18Fishing cooperatives within SFR Yugoslavia were different from those in the previous Italian political regime. SFR Yugoslavia cooperatives envisaged the property of fishermen being included in the cooperative. 19In September 2014 the last fish factory in Izola closed and moved to inland town Pivka. 2.4 Slovene Marine Fishing: Fragments from the Twentieth and Twenty-First Century 59

Contemporary statistics on marine fishing are mainly focused on small coastal fishing: in 2012, 91% of all vessels were less than 12 m long. The Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia (Rogelja 2006) reports that in 2003 there were 144 active persons, of which 132 were employed in commercial fishing and 12 in mariculture. Of the 132 persons employed in commercial fishing, 81 had a full-time job, and 51 persons declared fishery as seasonal or casual work. According to ethnographic data, around 50 fishermen could be described as small coastal private fishermen who were (formally) engaged in commercial fishing as their sole and principal occupation. The number correlates with the number of fishermen who, in the years after 1991, participated in mullet fishing in the Bay of Piran, which was aimed only at small coastal fishermen at the time. In the same year, there were 116 vessels registered for commercial fishing in Slovenia, which means that the number of fishermen and fishing boats was close to 1:1. Nevertheless, the figure also corresponds with ethnographic data where we observed pairs of fishermen fishing on the same boat (mostly two brothers, a father and a son, two co-owners, usually already friends...) and individuals fishing alone. Smaller boats with nets dominated in 2003, with a typical example being a boat owned by one person who carries out commercial fishing and is occasionally assisted by one (illegal) employee, according to our ethnographic data. Marine fishing in Slovenia is nowadays dominated by the male population; only two women are formally employed in fishing, with a few more engaged in fishery informally. According to the Slovene Institute for Fishery’s statistics for April 2005, 84% of vessels were below 12 m (in Piran, 100% of vessels are under 12 m). In total, there are 125 vessels registered for marine commercial fishing in Slovenia: 35 in Izola, 38 in Koper and 52 in Piran. The main fishing gear in Slovenia is the floating net (there are 101 of those nets, of which 50 are in Piran), bottom trawls (16), as well as purse seines (6). In the same year, two vessels owned by the Riba company operated with pelagic trawls. According to SORS data for 2004, the catch of small pelagic fish represented 90% of all fish caught by fishermen operating off the Slovenian coast (Rogelja 2006). In 2003, the figure was lower, at 79% (most likely due to the reduced number of vessels in Riba). If we assume that Riba’s fishermen are specialized for the catch of pelagic fish, then we may conclude that at least 20% of the catch in that year was down to private fishermen and mariculture. Data for December 2003 however shows the fishermen caught more white fish20 (29 tons) than pelagic fish (27 tons). We should also take into account the fact that in December 2003, fishermen caught large quantities of mullet coming to the Bay of Piran during the winter period. Nevertheless, maritime fishing and aquaculture represents only a tiny fraction of the gross domestic product, less than 0.014% (FAO-AdriaMed project 2016). According to data from the National Assembly, the annual fish production in the RS is about 4000 tons in the whole fishing sector, and

20White fish is a common local name used for fish such as gilthead seabream, common sole, flounder, seabass whiting, common sharks, mullet, flounder, small silverside, gurnard, sea bass etc. Pelagic fish, on the other hand are sardines, anchovy, mullets, mackerel... 60 2 The Field of Ethnological Study Between Borders and Discourses the annual export around 2000 tons (mainly fish products, and only a small amount of fresh fish), while Slovenia annually imported 8000–9000 tons of fish and fish products, which ranks the country relatively high in importing fish. Political changes also influenced the official status of people engaged in com- mercial fishing along the Slovene coast. In 1980s Yugoslavia, fishing was identified as a developing sector and fishermen were exempt from taxes. After Slovenia gained independence however, the Companies Act of 1994 changed the fishermen’s status to that of entrepreneur. Arguments against this change were voiced among others by ethnologists such as Janez Bogataj. In his opinion, the issue of fishery is associated with the identity of the Slovenian coast and from this viewpoint, it is pointless to link it with the tax category of independent entrepreneur. With the acceptance of the amended law on marine fisheries in 1999, the status of Slovene fishermen was temporarily equated with the status of farmer, and they were officially assigned a status of a “fisherman-farmer”. According to this law, maritime fishermen were entitled to health and pension insurance as farmers only if they achieved a certain level of income set by the Minister of Agriculture. According to our ethnographic documentation, marine fisherman felt wary about this designation because fishermen and farmers face entirely different problems in their daily work and should in their view be considered separately. Their status changed again in the following years and fishermen can nowadays have a status of independent entre- preneurs or can establish their own limited company. If the criticism of equating fishermen with farmers focused mainly on different working methods, difference in terms of income etc., the equation of fishermen with independent entrepreneurs or limited companies brought to the fore a different discomfort. For the fishermen, it was rather odd to see themselves listed in official national records alongside lawyers, architects and other professionals with whom they have little in common. Once again, they found themselves on the margins, either invisible or at best seen through the wrong lens. As we will see in the following chapters, it was not until a notion of sustainable fishing and sustainable fishermen took root, that their public image somewhat improved.

References

Arnaut D (2002) Stormy waters on the way to the high seas: the case of the territorial sea delimitation between Croatia and Slovenia. Ocean Coast Law J 8(1):21–70 Arnaut D (2014) Adriatic blues: delimiting the former Yugoslavia’s final frontier. In: Schofield C, Lee S, Kwon MS (eds) The limits of maritime jurisdiction. Martinus Nijhoff, Boston/Leiden, pp 145–173 Ballinger P (1998) Remembering the Istrian exodus: memory in a trans-state context. In: Baskar B, Brumen B (eds) Mediterranean ethnological summer School 2. Insˇtitut za medkulturne raziskave, Ljubljana, pp 51–70 Ballinger P (2004) “Authentic hybrids” in the Balkan borderlands. Curr Anthropol 45(1):31–60 Ballinger P (2012) Entangled or ‘extruded’ histories? displacement, national refugees, and repa- triation after the Second World War. J Refug Stud 25(3):366–386 References 61

Baskar B (1993) Mare Nostrum. Cˇ KZ – Mediteran v Sloveniji XXI(158–159):7–11 Baskar B (2002) Dvoumni Mediteran: Sˇtudije o regionalnem prekrivanju na vzhodnojadranskem obmocˇju. Zgodovinsko drusˇtvo za južno Primorsko: Znanstveno-raziskovalno sredisˇcˇe Republike Slovenije, Koper Bezek V (1979) Analiticˇni inventar fonda obcˇine Izola. Pokrajinski arhiv Koper, Koper Blake GH, Topalovic´ D (1996) The maritime boundaries of the Adriatic Sea. Maritime Briefings 1 (8). University of Durham, International Boundaries Research Unit, Durham. https://www.dur. ac.uk/ibru/publications/view/?id¼231. Accessed 21 July 2016 Boeckh K (2014) Allies are forever (until they are no more): Yugoslavia’s multivectoral foreign policy during Titoism. In: Keil S, Stahl B (eds) The foreign policies of post-Yugoslav states. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp 18–43 Bojinovicˇ Fenko A, Sˇabicˇ Z (2014) From the Balkans to Central Europe and back. In: Keil S, Stahl B (eds) The foreign policies of post-Yugoslav states. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp 47–68 Bricelj M (2004) Jadransko morje. Evropsko morje pod pritiski. Geografski obzornik 51(2):18–21 Charney JJ, Alexander LM (1993) International maritime boundaries, vol 2. Martins Nijhoff, Dodrecht FAO-AdriaMed Project (2016) Country fishery information Slovenia. http://www.faoadriamed. org/pdf/CountryP/SLOCProfile06.pdf. Accessed 11 Feb 2016 Gams I (1991) Analiza imen za obalno regijo. Anali Koprskega primorja in bližnjih pokrajin – Annali del Litorale capodistriano e delle regioni vicine I(1):7–12 Gams I (2000) Stanje v (prirodno) geografski regionalizaciji Slovenije. Geografski vestnik 72-1:53–60 Gams I, Vrisˇer I (1998) Uvod v geografijo. Oddelek za Geografijo FF Univerze v Ljubljani, Ljubljana Gombacˇ J (2005) Esuli ali optanti?: zgodovinski primer v lucˇi sodobne teorije. Založba ZRC, Ljubljana Hrobat Virloget K, Goussef C, Corni G (2015) At home but foreginers. Population transfers in 20th century Istria. Univerzitetna založba Annales, Koper Javornik M (ed) (1990) Enciklopedija Slovenije, vol IV. Mladinska knjiga, Ljubljana Josipovicˇ D (2012) Slovenian-Croatian boundary: backgrounds of boundary-making and bound- ary-breaking in Istria regarding the contemporary boundary dispute. Geoadria 17(1):25–43 Kakovost morja in kontrola onesnaženja s kopnega. Porocˇilo za leto 2003 (Report for 2003). Nacionalni insˇtitut za biologijo in Morska biolosˇka postaja Piran, Izvajalec Klemencˇicˇ M (2013) Maritime boundaries and geographical names in the Adriatic Sea. http:// gsdemo194.giantsoft.co.kr/files/2013_19th/07.pdf. Accessed 9 Feb 2016 Krnel-Umek D (2005) Slovenians on the Adriatic. In: Krnel-Umek D (ed) The Slovenian-Croatian border in Istria: past and present. Ljudska cˇebela, Ljubljana, pp 15–36 Lisjak BV (1999) Delamaris 1879–1999: 120 let iz morja v konzervo. Delamaris, Izola Marcˇeta B (2001) Status of Slovene research and fishery on small pelagics. ADRIAMED Tech Doc 3:24–29. http://www.faoadriamed.org/pdf/publications/td3/web-td-3-MA.pdf. Accessed 9 Feb 2011 Marin L (1991) Upravna in teritorialna razdelitev Slovenske Istre v zadnjih treh stoletjih. Anali Koprskega primorja in bližnjih pokrajin – Annali del Litorale capodistriano e delle regioni vicine I(1):135–148 Marin L (1992) Upravna in teritorialna razdelitev slovenske Istre v zadnjih treh stoletjih – II. del Anali Koprskega primorja in bližnjih pokrajin – Annali del Litorale capodistriano e delle regioni vicine II(2):159–174 Melik A (1960) Slovensko Primorje. Slovenska matica, Ljubljana Mihelicˇ D (1987) Ribolov na srednjevesˇkem piranskem podrocˇju. Arhivi X:9–11 Mihelicˇ D (1998) Piranski zaliv: K tradiciji ribolova in ribolovnih pravic. Annales VII(14):7–18 Mihelicˇ D (2008) Sredinske meje v Piranskem zalivu nikoli ni bilo. Delo archive (Oktobre 23). http://www.delo.si/clanek/69647. Accessed 5 Jan 2016 62 2 The Field of Ethnological Study Between Borders and Discourses

Ogrin D (1993) (Sub)mediteransko podnebje v Sloveniji. Cˇ KZ – Mediteran v Sloveniji XXI (158–159):25–34 Ogrin D, Plut D (2009) Aplikativna fizicˇna geografija Slovenije. Znanstvena založba Filozofske fakultete, Ljubljana Orožen Adamicˇ M (2002) Geomorfolosˇke znacˇilnosti Tržasˇkega zaliva in obrobja. Dela 18:143–155 Orožen Adamicˇ M (2004) Tržasˇki zaliv in nekatere njegove geomorfolosˇke posebnosti. In: Bricelj M (ed) Zavarovana obmocˇja in njihov pomen za turizem. Univerza na Primorskem, Koper, pp 10–13 Peterlin M et al (2014) Trajnostno živeti z morjem. Insˇtitut za vode Republike Slovenije, Ljubljana Pletikosicˇ I (1995) Prostorski ucˇinki migracij v Piranu. Oddelek za geografijo FF Univerze v Ljubljani, Ljubljana Rogelja N (2006) Ribicˇi pripovedujejo. Založba Annales, Koper Rotar B (1993) Kje je Mediteran? Cˇ KZ – Mediteran v Sloveniji XXI(158–159):15–24 Roter P, Bojinovic´ A (2005) Croatia and the European Union: a troubled relationship. Mediterr Polit 10(3):447–454 Sancin V (2010) Slovenia-Croatia border dispute: from “Drnovsˇek-Racˇan” to “Pahor-Kosor” agreement. Eur Perspect 2(2):93–111 Sˇkrk M (2004) Pomorski zakonik Republike Slovenije v lucˇi mendarodnega prava. In: X dnevi javnega prava. Portorož, 14–16 Junij, 493–521. Insˇtitut za javno upravo, Ljubljana. http:// www.pf.uni-lj.si/media/skrk.m.skrk.pomorski.zakonik.rs.v.luci.mednarodnega.prava.10. dnevi.javnega.prava.2004.pdf. Accessed 21 July 2016 Staut M, Kovacˇicˇ G, Ogrin D (2007) The spatial cognition of Mediterranean in Slovenia: (In) consistency between perception and physical definitions. Acta Geographica Slovenica 47 (1):105–131 Sˇuligoj B (1994) Slovenija ni majhna, ker ima morje. Delo, Sobotna priloga, Septembre 17 Tercˇon N (1990) Razvoj industrijskega ribisˇtva na slovenski obali v letih 1945–1959. Kronika cˇasopis za slovensko krajevno zgodovino 37(1/2):123–134 Tome Marinac (1994) Etnolosˇka topografija slovenskega etnicˇnega zemlja: 20. stoletje. Obcˇina Izola. ZIFF, Ljubljana UNCLOS (1982) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982. http:// www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm. Accessed 21 July 2016 Wolff L (2001) Venice and the Slavs. The discovery of Dalmatia in the age of enlightenment. Stanford University Press, Stanford Wraber T (1993) Sredozemsko rastlinstvo na Slovenskem. Cˇ KZ XXI(158–159):35–44 Zakon o ratifikaciji Sporazuma med Republiko Slovenijo in Republiko Hrvasˇko o obmejnem prometu in sodelovanju. Uradni list RS 63 MP 20/2001. Ljubljana. [The Law on Ratification of the Agreement between the Republic of Slovenia and the Republic of Croatia on Border Traffic and Cooperation (Official Gazette of RS – International Treaties, no. 20/01]. http://www.pisrs. si/Pis.web/pregledPredpisa?id¼ZAKO4502. Accessed 21 July 2016 Zei M (1957) Morsko ribisˇtvo v Slovenskem Primorju. Geografski obzornik IV(4):81–84 Zei M (1977) Stanje jadranskega ribolova s posebnim ozirom na nasˇe ribisˇke probleme. Slovensko morje in zaledje 1:179–190 Zei M (1983) Svetovni problemi morskega ribisˇtva. Proteus 45(7):263–266 Zei M (1984) Problemi in stanje slovenskega morskega ribolova. Slovensko morje in zaledje 6–7:131–141 Zei M (1996) Ribe severnega Jadrana. In: Gregori J et al (eds) Narava Slovenije, stanje in perspektive. Drusˇtvo ekologov Slovenije, Ljubljana, pp 356–361 Zˇ umer J (1990) Recentni razvoj klifov na obalah Istrske Slovenije. Geomorfologija in geoekologija. Zbornik referatov 5. znanstvenega posvetovanja geomorfologov Jugoslavije, Ljubljana, pp 143–147 Part II Transformation: Slovene Fishermen After the Separation from SFR Yugoslavia

When today fishermen between the peninsulas of Muggia and Savudrija speak about their profession and about the ways they manage to survive, what they communicate is on the one hand informed directly by their practical experiences gained from working at the sea but on the other it is in constant reference with impinging discourses – produced by scientists, politicians, enthusiasts, tourism operators, journalists or created in everyday conversations – that are either directly or indirectly commenting and judging this activity. In the particular case of Slovene fisheries these surrounding discourses are inextricably connected to Slovenia’s independence in 1991, its accession to the EU, and the subsequent redefinitions of space, history and identity, which in turn changed the relationship with the (Slovene) sea and fishing. This is further reflected in the present-day attitudes towards Croatian fishermen, in discourses on authenticity produced by tourist rhetoric as well as in some more “remote” imaginaries connected to the sea – the sea as both a physical and symbolic space where fishermen perform their work. This conglomerate of discourses is dynamic by nature, as it both confirms and co-creates the practical experiences and vice versa. In fact, change is an integral part of this dialogue and relationship. It can be brought about by practical experience or by representations thereof. Attitudes towards Croatian fishermen can be defined (or changed), say, by a concrete encounter at the sea, someone stealing nets, or by a public discussion over coffee in a local cafe´. A discourse interprets a certain practice while the practice is an interpretation of social life. As Dutch anthropol- ogist Antonius Robben observed, a practice is acknowledged as interpretation only if certain routines collapse (1989). Examining economic change in a Brazilian fishing village, he furthermore observes that modes of production are material, but they are also a part of conceptual and normative models. If new modes of production destabilize community norms, people work to create a better fit between their everyday experiences and their worldviews. As further observed by Burke and Shear, this initiates a process of experimentation, negotiation, and change that cannot be predicted only by capitalist logic or relations (2014). Even though fishermen understand the “economic” and “non-economic” spheres as being sepa- rate, the rupture of routine brings to the fore the awareness of practice as 64 II Transformation: Slovene Fishermen After the Separation from SFR Yugoslavia interpretation. In this specific situation the “non-economic” spheres (the imagi- naries of the sea, the fishermen, etc.) can compensate for the “crisis situation” and offer help in order to change economic routines. As we will see in the following chapters a process of experimentation, negoti- ation and innovation are exactly the processes that apply to the case of Slovene fisheries. This would include for instance comprehending privileges for mullet1 fishing in the Piran bay (these were heavily discussed after 1991 as the privilege of private fishermen while in the period of SFR Yugoslavia this specific type of fishing was in domain of Delamaris and Riba state company) or innovative ways of surviving as Slovene fishermen and understanding who the fishermen are and what they can (or can’t) do as fishermen (when certain groups of fishermen started to engage in fishing tourism due to the changed political situation).2 The Chap. 3 “Fishing in Slovenia after 1991” describes the situation in the first decade after Slovenia’s independence, referring also to certain written sources dating back to the 2nd half of the twentieth century, bringing to the fore several encompassing discourses important for our discussion: Slovene ethnological and amateur produc- tion, discussions from the local and national newspapers as well as open letters written by fishermen themselves. These representations are gathered in Chap. 3 under the section “Nationalization of fisheries”. Following this is a presentation of rudimental ethnographic data in the Chap. 4 entitled “Conversations on the pier”, which focuses on the ethnography of the everyday working routine of Slovene maritime fishermen. If the first step is more grounded in the analysis of different written sources, the second step derives from ethnographic work in the period between 1999 and 2004. From a broader perspective, the collapse of SFR Yugoslavia and USS Russia corresponds to the process of transformation from the socialist/communist states to post-socialist societies, but it also corresponds to the processes of enlargement of new political entities, primarily the EU. Slovenia partook in both processes; it was part of the SFRY, it became internationally recognized as independent in 1992 and officially entered the EU in 2004. As a new EU member and as a newly-born state, Slovenia strove for legal sovereignty, national independence3 from its former entity, accustoming at the same time to the new situation (EU integration, supra- national legal systems, etc.). Questions of legal sovereignty (sovereignty as defined by law) and actual autonomy of the state as well as the agency of EU citizens (Slovene fishermen in our case) became in the meantime a topical issue not only in Slovenia but also in other parts of the EU. With regard to Slovene fisheries, we will reflect on the intersection of the “new state sovereignty” and citizens’ experiences thereof, trying to analyse how fishermen understood these changing configurations

1The mullet is a migratory fish species aggregating every winter in the Bay of Piran (more about mullets in Chap. 4). 2The example of fishing tourism will be further discussed in the third part of this book. 3After the break-up of SFRY the notion of national independence had a strong positive connotation in popular discourse. II Transformation: Slovene Fishermen After the Separation from SFR Yugoslavia 65 of state power, how they experienced Europe, understood their past fishing expe- riences within the former socialist state and how they put their own agentive capacities to use. Processes such as the privatization of formerly collective means of production or change of political entities and the introduction of supranational legal systems influenced not only the everyday material conditions of our interloc- utors but also the notion of state sovereignty as well as the relation between citizens and the state. In the case of Slovenia, the notion of sovereign surveillance of the territory (the land, the sea and the air) went hand in hand with the delimitation of national borders on the sea. That in turn had a strong impact on fishing territories (see the Chap. 1). It was noted that in the case of the Bay of Piran and its contested borders, sovereignty of the state became as liquid as water, its definitiveness and stability depending on the mood of various actors. Likewise, with the Slovene example, sovereignty too will prove itself to be no more reliable a category (as we will see even more clearly in the concluding chapters of this book). It became fragmented and dependent on supranational legal systems, on the flexibility and inventive tactics of individuals (within and outside of state institutions) and on unpredictable relations between all the actors; as such it became a fluid category oscillating between its numerous facets – from de iura to de facto sovereignty. Apart from the discussion on “contextualised economy” (economy of fishing in the context of national, regional, ethnic, cultural and social borders and discourses), the ethnographic part reveals also the individuals’ decisions within certain eco- nomic practices (conditioned by a specific personal situations, possibilities, limita- tions and starting points) and it offers a perspective on the interaction between individual’s (economic) decisions, arguments and convictions and the encompassing discourses specific to the post-1991 ‘transformation’ period. The various starting points of different stakeholders (fishermen, biologists, ethnologists, veterinaries, state officials and administrators, environmentalists...), at times conflicting, at times converging, condition different worldviews. Following the observations made by anthropologists dealing with management processes in fish- eries (Wiber 2002; Smith 1990, Kooiman et al. 2005; Bavinck et al. 2005), the cooperation between these different stakeholders seems at times “almost impossi- ble”. From the economic, survival point of view the fishermen hold a position without a regular salary while other stakeholders involved (biologists, state administrators...) usually have their salary assured regardless of their momentary decisions. Furthermore, the negotiating position between different stakeholders is quite unbalanced; the gap in the knowledge of the language appropriate for the negotiation processes as well as acquaintance with the legal side of things between different parties involved is substantial. The ethnographic material reveals also radically different views between the views of the fishermen, environmentalists, veterinaries or biologists on “nature”, in which fishermen usually perceive pro- cesses in nature as being unpredictable (the sudden appearance of jellyfish or tuna in the last two years), complicated and dynamic. They also understand them holistically, taking into account – all possible influential factors from the weather to political gestures and human mistakes. Scientists, environmentalists and admin- istrators on the other hand usually perceive nature partially. As observed by Estellie 66 II Transformation: Slovene Fishermen After the Separation from SFR Yugoslavia

Smith these different views on nature significantly inhibit a successful dialogue. While scientists (in Smith case the biologists) abide by the linear approach, fishermen’s knowledge of the marine environment is distinctly non-linear (1990, 1995). The difference in their views cannot be interpreted through the opposition between theory and practice but must be understood from the perspective that acknowledge in each side a specific knowledge (theory) and behaviour connected with this theory (practice). Different positions do not appear only between fisher- men and scientists but they also appear among fishermen themselves, as for example between those with passive or active technology, as well as among the scientists themselves. A group of fishermen working along the present-day Slovene coast, as will be evident, is fragmented in any number of ways.4 Differentiations are formed according to family background, fishing technology or/and other measures of proper/improper fisherman/fishing and are defined through different views on fishing, production, nature, history... Observing these differentiations one can ascertain that all the subjects involved refer to the same physical environment yet, due to their experience, social status or personal characteristics, they some- times see solutions, in very different ways. Social positions of the participants involved can be seen to constituting themselves as conflicting and divergent. Nevertheless the views of the participants involved should be understood as unique in their enunciation and should accordingly be contextualized with the moment of speaking that is in itself conditioned also by the interlocutors involved and with the encompassing imaginaries.5 By analysing the tactics of fishermen – their efforts to solve problems that arise after 1991 and their written applications for mullet fishing addressed to local municipalities – it was possible to observe the use of representations of the fisheries in Slovenia (referring to the present-day fisheries in Slovenia) and the Slovenian fisheries (referring to “the original” Slovene fisheries in the present-day Italian territory). These representations are furthermore related to various political and other relevant public meanings of Mediterranean-ness anti-Ljubljana sentiments, sea imaginaries, national identity, and origins of Slovene maritime fishing... Negative feelings towards Ljubljana and the need to distinguish oneself from the continentals (by which the butt of critique is mainly the central administration who, in their view, does not care for maritime culture and acts through the top-down model) were common as well was the tendency to avoid the “historical burden” and understand their own world as part of a maritime culture that is in their case also closely linked to the rural hinterland. At the same time the ethno-national argu- ments for the preservation of the Slovene fishing tradition (observed mostly in applications for mullet fishing) and evocations of the millenarian tradition of

4Groups are not rigidly defined but are conditioned by the context and are in this sense changeable and fluid. 5Imaginaries as socially transmitted representational assemblages that interact with people’s personal imaginings and that are used as meaning-making and world-shaping devices (Salazar and Graburn 2014: 1; Salazar 2012). More about the use of images in interactive fisheries governance see Kooiman et al. (2005). II Transformation: Slovene Fishermen After the Separation from SFR Yugoslavia 67

Slovenes living by the sea, were also stressed. Apart from the national arguments, the Mediterranean also featured frequently in the applications and open letters as a positive auto-stereotype that on the one hand crossed national borders but on the other, through notions of Mediterrranean-ness, highlighted the importance of fish- ery preservation in order to establish the Mediterranean character of Slovenia. The Western European sea imaginary (Corbin 1994; Raban 1993) and the relation between the sea and the fishermen is only partially relevant for the presented case,6 as the relation to the sea had developed through different historical contexts and delimitations. Fishermen use the sea either to explain the importance of preservation of Slovene maritime tradition, or they refer to the sea in their expla- nation why they stubbornly insist on continuing their profession despite all the problems they face. The first accent has to be put down to the “new” attitudes towards the Slovene sea and the second can be understood in the context of contemporary transnational discourses that are significantly co-creating everyday realities as well as inform individual decision. As Appadurai has stressed, one of the characteristics of “the global ethnoscapes” is that they are constituted through diasporic public spheres that make it impossible to fully equate a group of people with the location (1996). Following this line of argument, we observed that everyone – fishermen, scientists, politicians, anthropologists – had watched the Hollywood production movie “The perfect storm” in which the fishermen and the sea are presented in a highly stereotyped manner with tropes of danger, courage, struggle... In one of our informal meetings with the fishermen we discussed this “Hollywood depiction” while the fishermen developed the discussion in several ways; they laughed and confirmed the falsity of the big waves but at the same time they confirmed the hard work and felt good about the movie positively contextualising their profession and their courage. Such positive images coming from transnational flows are especially relevant in the case of the fishermen in Slovenia who are exposed to various negative stereotypes (such as being vagrants, marginals, fake fishermen and in some cases even ethnically described with the pejorative connotation as Bosanci7) and contrasted with the genuine picture of “Slovene fishermen” from the other side of the border (in present-day Italy) or with “Italian fishermen” before the exodus from Koper, Izola and Piran after the WWII.

6In the context of Western European history, the sea imaginary reveals different casts of historical and cultural traditions that are not relevant or are only partially relevant for the case presented (colonial expansion, Romantic period literature, Dutch maritime painting...) (see more Corbin 1994, Raban 1993). 7In the period of the SFR Yugoslavia manual workers from Bosnia and other parts of SFR Yugoslavia came to Slovenia to work at the building sites. Due to several reasons, such as the fact that the majority of these workers were not highly educated, the negative image of Bosnians developed in Slovenia and entered many popular jokes that are still present today. Regardless of the fact that some workers came from Serbia, Macedonia or other Yugoslav republics, they were all called Bosanci. 68 II Transformation: Slovene Fishermen After the Separation from SFR Yugoslavia

References

Appadurai A (1996) Modernity at large: cultural dimensions of globalization. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis Bavinck M et al (2005) Interactive fisheries governance: a guide to better practice. MARE, Amsterdam Burke BJ, Shear BW (2014) Introduction: engaged scholarship for non-capitalist political ecolo- gies. J Polit Ecol 21(6–11):127–144 Corbin A (1994 [1988]) The lure of the sea. The discovery of the seaside in the Western World. University of California Press, Berkeley/Los Angeles Kooiman J, Bavinck M, Jentoft S, Pullin R (2005) Fish for life: interactive governance for fisheries. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam Raban J (1993) The Oxford book of the sea. Oxford University Press, Oxford Robben AC (1989) Sons of the sea goddess: economic practice and discursive conflict in Brazil. Columbia University Press, New York Salazar N (2012) Tourism imaginaries: a conceptual approach. Ann Tour Res 39(2):863–882 Salazar N, Graburn N (2014) Towards an anthropology of tourism imaginaries. In: Salazar N, Graburn N (eds) Tourism imaginaries. Anthropological approaches. Berghahm, New York/ Oxford, pp 1–28 Smith E (1990) Chaos in fisheries management. MAST Marit Anthropol Stud 3(2):1–13 Smith E (1995) Kaos, konsenz in zdrava pamet. Cˇ KZ XXIII(176):225–234 Wiber M (2002) Messy collaborations: methodological issues in social science research for fisheries community based management. Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology Working Papers, Halle/Saale Chapter 3 Fishing in Slovenia After 1991

Abstract In this chapter we will follow media discussions, ethnological and amateur production and other public debates, each contributing to the establishment of a link between maritime fishery and the newly-born national state. In Sect. 3.1 we will present the image of fishermen in Slovenia in a dialogue with the image of “original” Slovene fishermen along the Karst coast of the Trieste bay (on the present-day Italian territory) through the analysis of ethnological and amateur production as well as following newspaper articles and open letters of fishermen. In Sect. 3.2 we discuss the image of Slovene fisherman as presented in fishermen’s open letters and Slovene newspaper articles.

Keywords Nationalization of Slovene fisheries • Slovene fishermen • Fishermen in Slovenia • Slovene ethnic territory • The Gulf of Trieste

In this section we will follow media discussions, ethnological and amateur produc- tion and other public debates, each contributing to the establishment of a link between maritime fishery and the newly-born national state. In Sect. 3.1 we will present the image of fishermen in Slovenia in a dialogue with the image of “original” Slovene fishermen along the Karst coast of the Trieste bay (on the present-day Italian territory) through the analysis of ethnological and amateur production as well as following newspaper articles and open letters of fishermen. In Sect. 3.2 we discuss the image of Slovene fisherman as presented in fishermen’s open letters and Slovene newspaper articles.

3.1 Nationalization of Fisheries

Although fisheries does not have the economic importance comparable to that of steel or paper industry, it is nonetheless for many fishermen the means with which they support their families. What is even more important is the fact that fishermen present an essential and indispensable element of the cultural identity of the Slovenian littoral (Sˇuligoj1 1994a:3).

1Boris Sˇuligoj is a Slovene local reporter writing about maritime fisheries in Slovene national newspapers.

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 69 N. Rogelja, A. Janko Spreizer, Fish on the Move, MARE Publication Series 11, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-51897-8_3 70 3 Fishing in Slovenia After 1991

Our first ethnographic period (1999–2004) was characterized by various symbolic uses of fishing, mostly in relation to national, cultural and political intentions. As, for example the placing of an old wooden fishing boat in the vicinity of the customhouse in Dragonja on the Slovene-Croatian border, the “symbolic fishing” of the Slovene politician Anton Rop in the contested area between Slovenian and Croatian waters, summer dresses decorations in the shop windows of one of Slovene store Nama in Ljubljana, featuring a boat, nets and photos showing today’s fishermen in Slovenia and offering fishing holidays with Izola’sfisher- men. All of these examples show that one of the key modes in which fishing was articulated in Slovenia after 1991 was inextricably linked with the national discourse.

3.1.1 Slovene Ethnological and Amateur Production: Gaps and Silences in Transposing Tradition

As Bojan Baskar correctly noted, the Gulf of Trieste received much attention from the discipline of history, especially in terms of the controversy of topics such as refugees from Istria and the like, while it received much less attention within the anthropological forum (2002: 42). Due to an overwrought history of conflict and divisions, what is dubbed “undigested history” that has character- ized the historical and political developments along the coast of the Trieste gulf, the absence of anthropological studies, as Baskar and Ballinger further stress, is somehow understandable (Ballinger 2003;Baskar2002). At the same time one can notice that the debate around the Slovene maritime fishing is more histor- ically then anthropologically oriented; moreover, a historical curiosity with orientation in material culture is somehow expected from the researcher dealing with this topic. Personally, we were frequently advised (by fishermen, researchers at the museum, biologists, etc.) to devote our attention to the history of the Slovene maritime fishing (mainly material culture) instead of focusing on those “few marginal beings left behind”, as one of our interlocutors, a local inhabitant, had put it. It was also never clear whether we should conduct a survey among the Italian families from Piran who left after WWII or whether we should take up the villages between Trieste and the mouth of the river Timava; never- theless, numerous interlocutors agreed that the “real Slovenian fishing” is beyond the present-day Slovenian state borders. We could note that the two expressions “Slovenian fishing” and “fishing in Slovenia” contained two different perspectives: the latter related to the present-day situation (and the future), while the former encompassing the past and flirting with the present-day Karst coast on the Italian side. The missing parts of these two perspectives (the latter is without the past and the former without the future) are ignored in 3.1 Nationalization of Fisheries 71 the construction of the “national story”, while both perspectives are – in the course of the “transposing tradition effect” – conjoined into a non-problematized whole. A similar lack of social anthropological research as Baskar observed, can be traced on the Italian side within the scientific and research institutions of the border region of Friuli – Venezia Giulia where one can find traditional folklorists and ethnologists, but also skillful social historians delaing with the area (Baskar 2002: 43). Museum of Trieste’s Littoral, which brought out an interesting study by BrunoVolpi Lisjak on the history of Slovene fishing at the Gulf of Trieste in 2004, is one such institution. Nine years earlier, Lisjak published another book, which also discusses the “original” Slovene fishing near Trieste (Lisjak 1995, 2004, 2013). Both his works can be defined as “typical” for this area in terms of controversy, disputes and “undigested history”, reflecting interethnic relations in the perspective of ethno-genesis. What defines this research dealing with Slovene fishing along the coast of the Gulf of Trieste – traceable both in the works of amateur and popular science writers such as Lisjak as well as within certain works of Slovene ethnologists – is the peculiar involvement of these discussions in the ethno-genesis construct of the Slovene people, and the positioning of the debate within the framework of “Slovenian ethnic territory”. Consequently, this comes across in the fact that the Slovenian-speaking authors writing about fishing will almost invariably ignore the period before the exodus from Istria after World War II that took place within the present-day Slovenian coastal towns. Instead they will focus on the Slovenian-speaking fishermen living on today’s Italian coast, linking them to the concept of “Slovenian ethnic territory”, which becomes a “natural” part of the research agenda (Novak 1960; Jelincˇicˇ 1967). Such transposing of the Slovene fishing tradition—and social anthropologists might harbour some hope that the construct of the national narrative (and its related conflicts) would be deconstructed for the broader public—remains completely overlooked within cer- tain ethnological, journalistic, and popular discussions.

3.1.1.1 Ethnological Topography of the Slovenian Ethnic Territory (ETSEO) Project

Before discussing Lisjak’s books and responses to his work, we must briefly reflect on the various anthropological approaches to nationalism and ethnicity and on the concept of “Slovenian ethnic territory”, which underpin the framework within which we can understand discussions on Slovene fisheries/fisheries in Slovenia. Here we will deploy the set of well-known ideas about nationalism, amongst which are those of Gellner (1983) and Hobsbawm (1983), their ideas on invented tradi- tions, as well as Anderson’s discussions on imagined communities (1995, 1998). In this regard, anthropological theories of nationalism and ethnicity are especially useful for understanding the development of European ethnology and its subfield, and more so because of the specific situation in which we conduct our discussion where anthropology is closely—and peculiarly—intertwined with ethnology (either because (Slovene) ethnology is a part of the curriculum for anthropology students in 72 3 Fishing in Slovenia After 1991

Slovenia, or because anthropologists shape their distinctive identity in relation to ethnology). As a discipline European ethnology was born in the nineteenth century, and was a product of European romantic nationalism and Herder’s Volkgeist. The initial goal of European ethnology and folklore studies was therefore to record and rescue the national folk cultures (the idealized peasant or rural culture). Such an ideological project brought to the fore the idea of the national character (Lofgren€ 1989: 5), original cultures, ethno-genesis constructions, etc., ideas that were rehashed in several variations throughout the twentieth century. In the second half of the twentieth century, several Slovene anthropologists and ethnologists coped critically with such pioneering experiments and inventions of national folk culture, while some other projects (including the rather influential project “Ethno- logical topography of the Slovenian ethnic territory (ETSEO)” discussed below) didn’t. The idea of the Slovene ethnic territory that essentially characterised certain periods in Slovene ethnology could be followed through the project ETSEO. The initial phase of the project began around the 1950s of the twentieth century while one could recognize its echo in a much broader time scale. The project, as well as its wide repercussions, is especially important for understanding both angles of our discussion; fisheries in Slovenia and Slovene fisheries. The project ETSEO devel- oped further through the principal ethnological research task known as “The Lifestyle of Slovenes in the twentieth century” and continued throughout the 90s of the twentieth century. It was conceptualized in the form of four consecutive steps. By using ETSEO Questionnaires – that supposedly cover the most relevant research fields related to the Slovene ethnological production – the ETSEO Topog- raphies would follow with the intention to register and document “the cultural elements of ethnological character in terms of their provenance” (Kremensˇek 1974: 189). This work would be upgraded into the ETSEO Monographs and in the final step into ETSEO Syntheses.2 In the background of the ETSEO Questionnaires one can recognize various ideologically grounded paths. Apart from the division of the supposedly separate parts of the social, spiritual and material culture, the cultural repertoire is already anticipated beforehand. Related to such a clearly-defined cultural repertoire is the next specificity of this project – the focus on the Slovene ethnic territory and its associated units that are predetermined and completely non-problematized, as stated in the introductory volume of ETSEO Questionnaires. The Ethnological topography of the Slovene ethnic territory (ETSEO) starts from the premise of a space inhabited by members of the Slovenian ethnic groups. This includes the framework of the Republic of Slovenia as well as the areas beyond the borders inhabited

2The final aim of the ETSEO project (the project was first proposed in 1974 to the Research Community of Slovenia (RSS)) was to be the comparison of syntheses, while the main idea lying behind this project was the unification of the research projects by using ETSEO questionnaires. In other words, drawing the same sources was supposed to lead towards successful comparing. The background of such a four-step design (leading through questionnaires, topographies, monographs and syntheses) claims the starting point to be the “natural view” (of Slovenes) while the aim of the project can be recognised as the theorization thereof. 3.1 Nationalization of Fisheries 73

by Slovenes. Finally, we must add to these also more or less compact Slovenian emigrant colonies. Following our fundamental belief that all periods pertaining to the development of an ethnos are of ethnological interest, it is understandable that we are also interested in places that were later denationalized (Kremensˇek 1976: 1). Such a formulation clearly reveals the main research focus, that of “the Slovene ethnos”. Such intertwining of the political and ethnological discourses on ethnicity can explain the gaps and silences in transposing the Slovene fishing tradition (including the curious connection stemming from the ethno-genetic perspective, according to which the Slovene speaking fishermen from Trieste area should be the direct ancestors of present-day fishermen in Slovenia). Referential cultural pecu- liarities – as understood within the ETSEO project as well as within some other central and Eastern European ethnological traditions – could be described, as observed by Slovene anthropologist Irena Sˇumi, as a specific projection of a fundamental continuity of the Slovenian ethnos as preserved in different historical formations (Sˇumi 2000: 38). Furthermore, ETSEO is situated within the primordial context and is as such part of a nation building project while similarities with the political discourse can be easily traced.3 As stressed by Irena Sˇumi, the relevant issues for ETSEO are solely those considered historical, indigenous, and primor- dial, as well as those recognized by the Slovenian state (Sˇumi 2000: 118). Given these observations, the intertwining of political and certain aspects of ethnological discourse on the subject of Slovene fisheries becomes somehow understandable. Let us discus this further in relation to Lisjak’s works, reviews written by Slovene ethnologists and newspaper articles.

3.1.1.2 “More History for More Self-Confidence”4

Lisjak’s first book entitled “Slovene Maritime Fisheries from Trieste to Timavo through the centuries” was published in 1995. Given the numerous presentations, reviews and newspaper articles that emerged in the wake of the book’s publication the work was met with the wide response. The author of the book, a former ship’s captain and an important amateur researcher on maritime cultures in NE Adriatic region, Bruno Volpi Lisjak, wrote in his introduction: This book is the outcome of archival research and fieldwork. Its purpose is to give the reader a historical overview of the centuries along the coastal strip from Trieste to Timavo and to record a part of the history of the Slovenian nation, which has not yet been written. [...] In other words, it is to do with the life and history of Slovene fishermen. (1995) The work was well-received in the Slovene media as well as within Slovene ethnology. Book reviews and interviews with the author followed in various, even diversely-profiled Slovene newspapers (Val, Mladina, Gea, Nasˇa žena, Primorski

3Primordial context in the sense of dividing humankind into originally separate, uncrossably different and bounded cultures. 4The title of the newspaper article talking about the book of Bruno Volpi Lisjak (Vidic 1996). 74 3 Fishing in Slovenia After 1991 dnevnik) with titles such as “More history for more self-confidence” (Vidic 1996), “Roaring Slovene sea” (Gorjup Posinkovicˇ 1996). Apart from prominent media visibility the work received a good deal of attention also within the Slovene ethnological scientific journals such as Traditiones, while in the years to come the author also published his own articles in various academic ethnological publica- tions in Slovenia. Notwithstanding the interesting and well-documented data that characterizes the works of Bruno Volpi Lisjak, our intention is to highlight the striking similarity between the ethnological and amateur production and to stress that these two discourses – attached to the case of Slovene fisheries – strongly corresponded with political discourse on the border issues within NE Adriatic. In 2004 Lisjak published his second book “Cˇ upa, the first Slovene vessel and wooden canoes. Contributions to ethnology and to the questions of ethnogenesis of Slo- venes” – that was placed even more confidently within the field of ethnology. In the period between the publications of the two books Lisjak spoke several times on the national as well as the local television. On these TV chat programmes, speakers mostly reflected on the history of the Slovene fisheries but they also raised issues connected with the maritime border between Slovenia and Croatia. The importance of the solution of the “maritime border problems” was presented in the light of the preservation of the long-lasting tradition of Slovene fisheries. Both Lisjak’s books are important contributions for understanding fishing techniques, tools and boats used in the Karst part of the Gulf of Trieste, but what is of more significance for our debate is how certain aspects of his ethnological discourse uncritically emphasized another component of Lisjak’s work – a primordially oriented concept, which is essentially linked to the nation building project of Slovenianess and as such deeply intertwined with the political discourse. In his second book Lisjak pays great attention exactly to those primordially oriented contexts; he gives a detailed description of the general usage of dugout boats (worldwide and in Europe); his study traces the origins of Slovenes in Russia (on the book cover one can find the schematically drawn arrow that connects Novgorod and Trieste); he compares different dugout boats to distinguish a typically Slovenian one, namely ‘the first Slovene vessel’; and finally he follows the development of the lake dugout boat into maritime dugout as well as the etymology of the word cˇupa.5 In doing so, he passes through the material evidence to the discussion of the ethnogenesis of Slovenes. In comparison to his first book, fishery here is of secondary importance, presented only in the final part of the book as the tangible manifestation of the outlined ethnogenesis narrative. The author himself described the transformation of his interests underwent in the course of writing this book: It was somehow necessary to extend the ethnological research, which was initially confined only to the maritime affairs, into the historical field of ethnogenesis. This was not foreseen, because I believe that the researcher, if he wants to do a good job, should keep within the boundaries of his expertise. However, since I found the discovered data to be of interest both to the experts as well as the wider public, I decided to go ahead with this publication. (2004: 23)

5A local expression for the dugout boat. 3.2 Open Letters, Project Applications and Newspapers 75

Again, the book was met with a wide response among the Slovene ethnologists but also by the general public, the reason also being the topical issues surrounding the maritime border between Slovenia and Croatia. One can explain the success of Lisjak’s books also in view of “finding a new maritime identity” after the indepen- dence of Slovenia in 1991 or, as the director of the Slovene ethnographic museum (SEM) (where the vessel cˇupa will occupy a permanent place) wrote: Gusts of Slovene wind blowing from across the border, have brought to the continental capital of the young mother country of Slovenia an exhibition (a past visiting exhibition at SEM entitled The scent of the Sea) alongside seeds of enlightenment; these have been watered by the personal engagement of Bruno ever since he started his work. Even as he was sailing across the oceans of the world, as he once wrote, he was persecuted by the thought of how narrow-minded Slovenes are, who appreciate the sea only for swimming. Bruno decided to radically change such a mindset. With his work he has always wanted to impact the way everyone in the motherland, but especially statesmen, politicians, econo- mists and experts, thinks about the sea, so that would finally understand what wealth and greatness the sea and the coast represent. Furthermore, he wants to remind us that for long centuries we, the Slovenes, had our own sea right here in the Trieste region. (Smerdel 2004: 16) Both forewords in Lisjak’s second book, written by a Slovene ethnologist and Slovene historian respectively, highlight the contemporary conflicts between Slovenia and Croatia; they discuss the Slovene ethnic minority in Trieste and contextualise the town of Trieste within the political discourse on the loss of the Slovene territory. As written in one of the forewords: “...today a great majority of Slovene youth doesn’t know that the real Slovene sea is actually between Trieste and the river Timavo” on the present-day Italian territory (Granda 2004: 20). Such and similar views place Lisjak’s book firmly within the framework of our initial debate, to do with “undigested history”, as Bojan Baskar (2002) has argued, and point to the underlying discursive matrix within which fisherys in Slovenia is framed – a nationalistic one. According to the Slovene historian Stane Granda, Lisjak’s approach set on spreading enlightenment on Slovene historical presence along the Adriatic coast, seems relatively painless since he does it via the study of an old maritime vessel (ibid). The central Granda’s comment which explains the popularity of Lisjak’s books in Slovenia, is as follows: His approach seems felicitous as he explains ethnic issues through the presentation of an old vessel. In this way he draws people’s attention to ethnic, political or other issues that otherwise would not be of interest for the majority of Slovenes and by doing so he explains who is indigenous and who is a newcomer. (Granda 2004: 20)

3.2 Open Letters, Project Applications and Newspapers

3.2.1 Does Slovenia Need Fishermen?

Just as the politicians, scientists, environmentalists and amateur researchers use/transform/reflect/manipulate the symbolic meanings of fishing, also fishermen 76 3 Fishing in Slovenia After 1991 themselves cooperate actively with those images and manipulate them according to the given situation. Fishermen’s arguments – part of a wider discursive field attached to the understanding of fisheries in Slovenia and Slovene fisheries – can be gleaned most clearly from their open letters to politicians and in applications for the annual mullet fishing addressed to municipal public institutions. In these documents fishermen argue their position; they highlight the importance of mari- time fisheries in Slovenia; they speak about (non)genuine fisheries and fishermen and describe their understanding of the mullet fishing in the Bay of Piran. Letters and fishermen’s arguments that were addressed to public institutions should be read in the context of the efforts to regulate fisheries policy in the newly created country after the dissolution of the SFR Yugoslavia. It should be furthermore noted that the arguments were designed in order to achieve a very specific goal – a concession to catch mullet or to improve the situation of fishermen (their legal status), and as such designed to provide affection/aversion to a particular aspect of the dominant public discourse. In this sense, the content of the letters should not be regarded as the prevailing everyday discussion among the fishermen on the subject but as part of context-bound narratives. In an open letter to the then Slovenian Prime Minister Janez Drnovsˇek, dated on 23 January 1995, the fishermen rhetorically asked: Does Slovenia even need fishermen? They answered as follows: Direct economic importance of our activities for the country is of course negligible. The quantities of fish that are caught are significantly lower than those imported into the country. On the other hand, we supply local restaurants with fresh fish, which importers cannot, and thereby add an important element to the tourist package. Directly related to tourism is also the significant presence of professional fishermen in the coastal area, which helps maintain the cultural identity as well as add to the richness of the overall character of these places. Furthermore, the state might also consider taking into account the security and the defence aspect of the presence of Slovenian fishermen in our waters. Fishermen live with the sea day in and night out; we know it, and we see everything happening out there. Our permanent presence on the sea could be incomparably more effective for the security and defense than the large and expensive police and military ships. (fieldwork archive of Natasˇa Rogelja) Fishermen (publically) discussed fishery also as an element of the Slovene identity and as a part of the tourist landscape, while referring to the arguments of the popular Slovenian ethnologist Janez Bogataj with which they were quite familiar. When attempts were made to formalize fishing under the status of free- lance entrepreneurship Bogataj publicly commented, pointing at a considerable lack of understanding of the phenomenon of fisheries along the Slovenian coast and stressing the fact that maritime fishery is also related to the Slovene identity (Sˇuligoj 1994a, b). Such statements reveal a direct connection between the encompassing contexts and individual actors within these contexts, using their arguments in a creative and situational manner. Apart from underlining the idea of fishing being an important part of the tourist offer or landscape, the fishermen also stressed the importance of fisheries for potentially tackling maritime border issues – this time to their advantage. Namely it was very common that in the times of fierce conflicts between Croatia and Slovenia over the sea border, the headlines 3.2 Open Letters, Project Applications and Newspapers 77 in Slovene newspapers such as “Fishermen – fighters for the southern border” (Rogelja 2006: 165) saddled fishermen with a role in the political conflict. The fishermen, on the other hand, often felt the media and politicians were taking advantage of them, since they did not see themselves as benefiting from such labels and felt they were rather stigmatized by them. Due to several “incidents” at the sea border in the summer of 1995 (conflicts with Croatian police in the “disputed” area etc.) fishermen addressed another open letter to the then Slovenian Prime Minister, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and to the Minister of the Interior which was also published in the journal Prijatelj [Friend] (Bratok 1995). The article following the open letter presented comprehensive views of three fishermen, including the president of the fishery units of the trade union of Slovenian Farmers. What all of them emphasized were the problems with the Croatian police at the maritime border in the “disputed area” who would implement provisions according to the Croatian law even though the maritime borderline had not been officially set yet. They also appealed to the Slovene authorities to protect them in such circumstances and expressed disappointment over the previous actions of Slovene maritime police unit. Although fishermen do follow certain dominant dis- cursive accents developed within Slovene media in their letter (they claim the right over the disputed area and present it as unquestionablyy Slovene territory, they speak of Croatian authorities as being radical nationalists, etc.) they also voice additional ideas for resolving their predicament. They, for example, expressed a wish to start regulate the various Slovene fishery issues without the focus all the time being on the “border issue problem” as they find such attitude extremely harmful for their activity. Fishermen would like, as they wrote in an open letter, “...to be able to carry out our work unhindered, which is our constitutional right” (Bratok 1995:39). Apart from the above mentioned issues, the article also gives several additional accents. One of the subtitles in the article, “Is Slovenia a Mediterranean country?” (ibid), is at the same time a question posed to the fishermen, to which fishermen answer as follows: All tourist centres consider agrotourism as a bestseller for 2000. People don’t need just food, lodging, the sun and the sea. In a Mediterranean culture, we need to see the fisherman as well; the eye of a foreigner is set on seeing a Mediterranean country, which necessarily includes seeing fishermen. We are supposed to be these fishermen, but Slovene fishery is unfortunately being systematically destroyed. (Bratok 1995) Just as the fishermen repeatedly emphasize the inadequate attitude of the Slovenian state to the fishermen and the sea, they also stress the inappropriateness of the attitude of the Slovenian government (and the “continental” capital of Ljubljana) to the “Mediterranean character of Slovenia”, as one of the fishermen had said. Such statements can be contextualized within the more general, and rather hostile, sentiments against Ljubljana emerging from within present-day Slovenian territory (see Baskar 2002: 49) It can also be understood in terms of a dialogue with the Mediterranean imaginary6 within which fishing is placed. In this context, the Mediterranean is used as a positive auto-stereotype, similar to Herzfeld’s notion of

6For more on tourist representations in connection with fishing, see part three of this book. 78 3 Fishing in Slovenia After 1991 the Mediterranean, which can be also used for regional cooperation as a positive auto-stereotype that goes beyond national borders (2001: 666). Following this line of thought that places fishermen within the Mediterranean landscape, it can be observed that fishermen draw on both argumentations, the national and the regional or transnational, so as to articulate their place and their importance. Symbolic uses of fishing attached to the national contexts also occurred in subsidy applications for mullet fishing in the Bay of Piran.7 In the winter of 1995/1996 we chanced upon one of the most symbolically loaded application for mullet fishing when all the Slovene fishermen applied for the call and not just Piran’s fishermen, who live in the direct vicinity of this bay and who would traditionally perform this activity. For these applicants fishing for mullet was no longer defined as a local privilege of Piran’s fishermen but as a privilege of all Slovene small-scale, private fishermen. The application8 begins as follows: “Tra- ditional hunting for mullet is a centuries-old right of private fishermen”. Its argu- mentation was set in a moral context describing the positive efforts of Slovene fishermen who were joining forces in order to solve their problematic economic situation after 1991. Such efforts were contrasted with ineffective Slovenian poli- tics focusing on conflicts rather than on solutions. Furthermore, the text is loaded with symbolic uses of fisheries, which involve both positive and negative stereo- types and reflect on the marginalized position of Slovene small coastal fishermen: “We fishermen are human beings; we are not some savage, uncontrollable individ- uals who need to be pushed to the margins of the society”. In the application signed off by 53 fishermen, the question of who qualifies as a real fisherman and who should not catch mullets is also raised, among the latter being “poachers, retired afternoon fishermen and new companies that have no connection with Slovene fishermen”. In accordance with the moral and egalitarian note of the letter, they furthermore explained about their wish to have the earnings from the catch

7Bay of Piran is an established geographical name that refers to the largest bay in the Gulf of Trieste at the extreme north end of the Adriatic Sea. In the period following the collapse of SFR Yugoslavia, an additional name Bay of Savudrija appeared. As Slovene geographers Kladnik and Pipan wrote on the problematic treatment of geographic names within this area: “After the collapse of Yugoslavia and the emergence of independent countries demarcated along the borders of the former Yugoslav republics, the previously undemarcated body of water between Slovenia and Croatia became the focus of a border dispute between the two countries. One of the basic principles of proper treatment of geographical names is not to change established and widely used names. The name Bay of Piran’ (Sln. Piranski zaliv, Cro. Piranski zaljev) is derived from the Italian name Vallone di Pirano Bay of Piran’, which replaced the Italian name Valle di Sicciole Bay of Secˇovlje (as well as Ital. Valle di Siciole, Sln. Secˇoveljski zaliv) a century and half ago. This in turn was established towards the end of the eighteenth century, replacing the Italian name Largon Broad or Golfo Largone Broad Bay. Since 2000 there have been Croatian attempts to establish the completely new name Bay of Savudrija (Cro. Savudrijska vala, Sln. Savudrijski zaliv)” (2008: 58). 8Applications and open letters are part of the fieldwork archive (1999–2004). 3.2 Open Letters, Project Applications and Newspapers 79 distributed in equal shares. “Our proposal is a socially-just division, reached by consensus by all the participants involved in the catch, which is the only fair solution at this moment, when we are forgotten by everyone.” The fishermen also stressed the importance of fishermen as environmentalists as well as the cultural and national importance of fishermen for Slovenia. The application closes off with another, rather strong sentence: “The sword of justice hangs over the fate of the indigenous population. We expect a fair judgment so that we can offer our descen- dants what was the right of our ancestors”. Although several symbolic connotations come through the application, following our interviews with various responsible persons at the then Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food, the national symbolic of unified Slovene fishermen reaped the greatest success. However, the Ministry assumed a rather patronizing attitude. Following the successful catch of mullets in the winter of 1996, one of the staff responsible at the Ministry commented: “This year for the first time I changed... the 800 year-long tradition ... and for the first time this year I introduced the system that all fishermen from Koper, Izola and Piran fished mullets together. How nice it was to see them all go for a drink together afterwards ...”.

3.2.2 Reading About Fishermen in Slovene Newspapers

Based on a review of fifty newspaper articles on Slovene maritime fishery (covering the period from 1991 to 2002), which were published in Slovene newspapers Delo, Primorske novice, Prijatelj, Mladina and Mandracˇ, one can extract several domi- nant themes that emerge in relation to fisheries in Slovenia; the maritime border issues and mullets fishing in the Bay of Piran were however the most frequent topics occurring in relation to Slovene fisheries. Before looking at some of the newspaper articles, it is worth first pausing over an interview with one Slovene fisherman from Piran and with his observation on reporters and newspapers. Look, the problem here is the border. If you didn’t have fishermen here, would you even have a clue what was happening here at the border? And even you personally, no offence, do you really care where the border is set? [...] You couldn’t care less, why? Because in the summer you come for a vacation to swim in the sea, could be Slovene, Croatian or Italian... No boundaries for you. But we, we have a problem. Why? Because there is a difference to economic exploitation of the sea and in all of that. Because we use the seabed and all the riches that are in the sea. That’s it! And that’s what it’s about. [...] Look, I was there many times (at the contested maritime space) because I wouldn’t yield, but sometimes I could see there was no point in rushing headlong into danger. And they (referring to the Slovene state) failed me. You are all alone out there, you understand? [...] And newspaper reporters, they need a title, something that reads well...there’s not 10 % of truth in what they write about fishermen. Because I really wanted the truth and twice I got into a row with the reporter because I said something and he wrote something else. And then he says, so what...and he also writes exactly what the state wants. And then I said why bother asking me then. Well then I have nothing to write, he says. Write true, I said, because I stand behind these words. Because you put my name in the article, didn’t you? (personal conversation, October, 2000). 80 3 Fishing in Slovenia After 1991

As stated in the above excerpt the maritime sea border issues are closely connected with the everyday life and work of Slovene fishermen (mostly from Piran) but at the same time the border is also part of political interests of Slovene state as it closes/opens the access of Slovenia to the open sea waters.9 As seen from the newspaper articles, both accents (the everyday working perspective of fisher- men and the political discourses over the sea border) apparently merged into one coherent story while certain accents such as the attitude of Slovene fishermen towards Croatian fishermen—the core of the conflict between the fishermen— have receded into the background of the cover story. Namely, the fishermen explained the conflicts with Croatian fishermen mostly in terms of problems they had with the Croatian police or with a handful of extreme Croatian fishermen who in their views are not to be taken as a representative image of all Croatian fishermen. Newspaper articles on the other hand many times resorted to using charged language, such as “problems between Slovene and Croatian fishermen” with which Slovene fishermen actually disagreed, pointing instead to a more complex situation, explaining about their previous common fishing efforts with Croatian fishermen to whom they many times referred to as colleagues.10 The issue of maritime border between Slovenia and Croatia in dialogue with Slovene fishery was presented in newspaper articles from various perspectives, one of them stating how this issue prevents and restricts the possibility of earnest fishermen’s work. For the most part, however, fishing features in connection with reports on the Slovenian-Croatian political meetings, with article titles explicitly informing the reader about the direct connection between the political issues and Slovene fishery. Headlines, such as, “Eventually a truce between Ljubljana and Zagreb. All fishermen are allowed to fish in the territory between Vrsar and Ankaran” (Zˇ erjavicˇ 2002) or “Incidents at Sea – Empty nets and two police boats” (Sˇuligoj 2002b) are just two examples of this. Furthermore, the articles erroneously conflated the border problem with the problem of all Slovenian fishermen, while ethnography clearly shows that it is mostly fishermen from Piran who are directly exposed to these issues and even within Piran itself there are only a few fishermen who use a certain kind of fishing technology, namely passive fishing gears, within the contested area who are thus directly involved. Articles further highlight the difference between Slovene and Croatian fisher- men, where Slovene fishermen are described as victims responding to the “corrupt” provocation of Croatian fishermen (Sˇuligoj 2002b). Hence it follows, reading these articles, that Croatian fishermen are deliberately creating incidents while Slovenian fishermen are trying to do their job. Such asymmetry is furthermore reflected in an article entitled “The Slovenian-Croatian asymmetry” where the reporter wrote how

9According to Croatia, the border between the two countries runs along the median line in the Bay of Piran and then perpendicular to the middle of the line closing the Bay of Piran and up to the Osimo border. 10Such attitudes may change over the time as the national borders cut more deeply into the everyday lives of the people from the both sides of the border. 3.2 Open Letters, Project Applications and Newspapers 81 the “...difference between Slovenia and Croatia is too big, the boundary between the two states too deep for the conflict to be resolved in a simple Slovenian (or European) way – with plain diplomatic communication” (Sˇuligoj 2002a). Judging from the newspaper discourses and excerpts from political meetings quoted in these articles it seems that both political sides, Croatian and Slovene, take their fishermen to be “the responsible ones”, and accuse the other side. As the Croatian Minister of Foreign Affairs had said: “Our fishermen behave responsibly and we expect the same attitude from your fishermen as well” (Sˇuligoj 2002a, b). In his article “Fishermen without the sea” Boris Sˇuligoj, sympathised with fishermen, citing a number of fishermen’s visions in dealing with fishing issues in Slovenia and Europe. Despite the journalists’ critical attitude towards the political authorities (Slovene and Croatian) and his wish to preserve Slovene fishing as well as Slovene maritime/Mediterranean identity his arguments are again coupled with the political agenda on maritime border between Slovenia and Croatia, drawing a moral as follows – maritime border should be moved according to the Slovenian solution in order to retain what is a significant part of Slovenian cultural heritage – Slovenian maritime fishery (Sˇuligoj 2001). Although the political and media discourses deliberately involve fishermen in their discourse on the border (fishing adds to this problem a social note) one can also observe quite a different, negative percep- tion on fishermen as well. In such articles fishermen alone are the ones responsible for the inability to find a solution to the maritime border issues. “Each fishing incident makes arrangements of prime ministers and governments more difficult” (Zˇ erjavicˇ 2002). Fishermen on the other hand responded quite furiously to such statements. The issue of the preservation of Slovene fishing heritage and Mediterranean identity of Slovenia is furthermore highlighted in the articles that are focused on the mullet fishing in the Bay of Piran. This subject was especially prominent in the year of 1999. Namely in March that year, the Croatian Ministry of Agriculture granted a right to mullet fishing (in the part of Portorož Fisheries Reserve within the Piran’s bay) to the Croatian fishery cooperative Sargus from Umag. Slovenian journalists identified this gesture as provocation on the part of Croatia and saw it as antago- nistic to the millennial (Slovenian) tradition of mullet fishing in the Bay of Piran (Sˇuligoj 1999a, b;Sˇuligoj and Potocˇnik 1999a, b). Interestingly enough, the gesture of Slovenian fishermen who joined the Croatian group of fishermen was evaluated in Slovene newspapersas highly negative and controversial, though from the prac- tical point of view it was a rational decision. Namely the fisherman who joined his Croatian colleagues was that year, when two Slovene groups of fishermen applied for the municipality call, not within the group of Slovenian fishermen who was granted a right to mullet fishing in the Portorož Fisheries Reserve. We could hypothetically assume that in the case of the two Slovenian groups such shifting of the crew members from one group to another would not be seen as problematic. Indeed, it can be said that such a symbolic understanding of the mullet fishing as a “Slovenian” tradition in a way restricts the economic tactics of individuals. Looking at the articles on mullet fishing, it transpires that fishermen’s quarrels are again in the focus of reporters’ attention – mostly following the period from 82 3 Fishing in Slovenia After 1991

1997 on, when the two groups of Slovenian fishermen (instead of one) applied for the call. In one of the main Slovenian journals Delo, descriptions of controversies between fishermen were rather critical towards the fishermen and are said to cast bad light on the state of Slovenia, as can be seen from one of the titles – “Fishing quarrels. Shame on the country” (Sˇuligoj 1999b). In a more critical and left-oriented Slovenian magazine Mladina, on the other hand, the fishing quarrels took the form of a stiff critique of certain Slovenian political parties allegedly supporting different fishing groups which had applied for mullet fishing. However, not unlike in the other articles on Slovene fishing which came out in this period, the articles on mullet fishing also overwhelmingly stressed the connection between the preserva- tion of Slovene fishing and the political border issues in the Bay of Piran, saying that the tradition of Slovenian mullet fishing should be continued – if not for economic reasons then surely from the point of view of heritage protection, namely, as one of the articles concluded: “...fishermen are an essential and indispensable element of the cultural identity of the Slovenian coast” (Sˇuligoj 1994a, b). In the following years, fishermen took this point seriously and ironically at the same time, as they acknowledged and twisted it in their own innovative way as we will see in the next chapters.

References

Ballinger P (2003) History in exile: memory and identity at the borders of the Balkans. Princeton University Press, Princeton Baskar B (2002) Dvoumni Mediteran: Sˇtudije o regionalnem prekrivanju na vzhodnojadranskem obmocˇju. Zgodovinsko drusˇtvo za južno Primorsko: Znanstveno-raziskovalno sredisˇcˇe Republike Slovenije, Koper Bratok T (1995) Slovenski ribicˇisoživljenjsko ogroženi. Prijatelj 3(26):39 Ernest, G. (1983). Nations and nationalism. New Perspectives on the Past. Cornell University Press, Ithaca Gorjup Posinkovicˇ V (1996) Bucˇi morje slovensko. Mag, February 2 Granda S (2004) Predgovor zgodovinarja: Cˇ upa – simbol slovenstva v Tržasˇkem zalivu. In: Lisjak BV (ed) Cˇ upa prvo slovensko plovilo in drevaki: Prispevek k etnologiji in vprasˇanju etnogeneze Slovencev. Mladika, Trst Hobsbawm E (1983) Mass-producing traditions: Europe, 1870–1914. The invention of tradition, 215 Herzfeld M (2001) Ethnographic and epistemological refractions of Mediterranean identity. In: Albera D, Block A, Bromberger C (eds) L’anthropologie de la Me´diterrane´e. Anthropology of the Mediterranean. Maisonneuve et Larose, Paris, pp 663–683 Jelincˇicˇ Z (1967) Razvoj slovenskega ribisˇtva ob tržasˇki obali. Založnisˇtvo Tržasˇkega tiska, Trst Kladnik D, Pipan P (2008) Bay of Piran or Bay of Savudrija? An example of proglematic treatment of geographical names. Geografski Zbornik/Acta Geographica Slovenica 48(1):57–91 Kremensˇek S (1974) Etnolosˇka topografija slovenskega etnicˇnega prostora. Traditiones 3:189–191 Kremensˇek S (1976) Etnolosˇka topografija slovenskega etnicˇnega ozemlja: uvod, porocˇila. Raziskovalna skupnost slovenskih etnologov, Ljubljana Lisjak BV (1995) Slovensko pomorsko ribisˇtvo. Mladika, Trst Lisjak BV (2004) Cˇ upa, prvo slovensko plovilo, in drevaki: prispevek k etnologiji in vprasˇanju etnogeneze Slovencev. Mladika, Trst References 83

Lisjak BV (2013) O zgodovini in dedisˇcˇini slovenskega morskega ribisˇtva: Ribisˇki muzej tržasˇkega primorja. Slovenski etnografski muzej; Križ: Ribisˇki muzej tržasˇkega primorja, Ljubljana Lofgren€ O (1989) The nationalization of culture. Ethnol Eur 19(1):5–24 Novak V (1960) Slovenska ljudska kultura. DZS, Ljubljana Rogelja N (2006) Ribicˇi pripovedujejo. Založba Annales, Koper Smerdel I (2004) Predgovor etnologinje o iskalcu Brunu Lisjaku in o cˇupi. In: Lisjak BV (ed) Cˇ upa, prvo slovensko plovilo, in drevaki: prispevek k etnologiji in vprasˇanju etnogeneze Slovencev. Mladika, Trst, pp 13–22 Sˇuligoj B (1994a) Ribicˇi napovedali stavko. Delo, May 5 Sˇuligoj B (1994b) Portorosˇkim ribicˇem se je spet nasmehnila srecˇa. Delo, December 14 Sˇuligoj B (1999a) Hrvasˇka koncesija za portorosˇke ciplje. Delo, March 4 Sˇuligoj B (1999b) Ribisˇke zdrahe: sramota za državo. Delo, April 7 Sˇuligoj B (2001) Ribicˇi brez morja. Delo, November 2 Sˇuligoj B (2002a) Slovensko-hrvasˇka asimetrija. Delo August 22 Sˇuligoj B (2002b) Prazne mreže in dva policijska cˇolna. Delo, Septembre 3 Sˇuligoj B, Potocˇnik P (1999a) Vrocˇi Piranski zaliv. Delo, March 5 Sˇuligoj B, Potocˇnik P (1999b) Bodo ribicˇem odvzeli mreže? Delo. March 5 Sˇumi I (2000) Kultura, etnicˇnost,mejnost. Založba ZRC, Ljubljana Vidic T (1996) Vecˇ preteklosti za vecˇ samozavesti. Primorske novice, January 5 Zˇ erjavicˇ P (2002) Naposled premirje med Ljubljano in Zagrebom. Delo, September 11 Chapter 4 Conversations on the Pier

Abstract The chapter present mullet fishing in the Bay of Piran after the 1991 as well as it highlights various formal and informal categories of Slovene maritime fishery. Within this segment the ethnography of viewpoints over the question “Who is the real fisherman?”, will be presented in a rather descriptive manner in order to shed light on several delimitations and categories used among fishermen. Although the ethnography relates mainly to the first ethnographic period (up to 2004), numerous points are still topical for understanding the development of events over the next couple of years as well as for highlighting the broader contextual framework of transitional processes within Slovenia. The ethnographic approach in particular provides a useful insight into the multiple actor’s perspectives.

Keywords Piran’s Sea Bass • Piran’s Mullet • Mullet Fishing • The Bay of Piran • Transitional Processes within Slovenia

4.1 Mulling over the Mullets

Before we start with the history of hunting rights in Piran’s bay and mullet fishing after the break-up of SFRY, let us first introduce Piran’s mullet, a migratory fish belonging to the Mugilidae family that has an important economic and symbolic role for the region but is otherwise a common species of fish spread worldwide and enjoying no special attention from the side of scientists or environmentalists. We will also present its rival, a “sedentarized” pray fish, Piran’s seabass and its symbolic and economic value. The Mugilidae family includes 72 species (Harrison and Senou 1999; Nelson 2006) while eight1 inhabit the Mediterranean Sea (Turan et al. 2011). For Slovene maritime fishery, the Golden Grey Mullet (Liza aurata), a pelagic migratory species is the most important from the economic point of view (Marcˇeta 2016: 105). This relatively common fish is thus the target of commercial fishery along the whole eastern Adriatic coast (Jardas 1996), while it has special importance in the NE Adriatic, as once a year (in winter), it appears in large shoals in the Mirna Estuary

1Species commonly found in Mediterranean are M. cephalus, M. ramada, M. labrosus, M. labeo, M. aurata, M. abu, M. saliens, M. carinata (Turan et al. 2011).

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 85 N. Rogelja, A. Janko Spreizer, Fish on the Move, MARE Publication Series 11, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-51897-8_4 86 4 Conversations on the Pier

(Croatia) and in the Bay of Piran in Slovenia. Migration of Piran’s mullets is osmoregulatory, designating a phenomenon of juveniles migrating towards estuar- ies (Marcˇeta 2016). Fishermen call them Piran’s mullets or wild mullets and, as they have explained to us, it is practically impossible to grow these mullets in fishing farms as they are too smart, but also because they jump too high (personal conversation, December 2000). Furthermore, they told us how a small hole in the net is enough for the entire shoal to escape. According to their observations, mullets form a long line and wait patiently without jostling, escaping one by one through the whole in the net (ibid). The results of biologists show that L. aurata can be stocked in saltwater ponds, but their growth rate does not compare favourably with those of other fishes (Chervinski 1975). We might also find some blog comments of people involved in mariculture, commenting how “[g]rey mullets are funny fish. When fenced off – they’ll just jump over the net cork line and laugh at you from the outside. They may also jump back and forth – just for fun”. (Worldfishing.net 2014). Mullets feed mostly on small benthic organisms and detritus (Jardas 1996) and in popular discourse they are sometimes described as “dirty” fish due to their eating habits. In their defence, fishermen explained to us that during the winter period they fast and their meat becomes clean. Despite the fact that they feed on detritus they have an important symbolic role in the region; black-and-white photos of “traditional” ways of catching mullets from the beginning of the twentieth century is a secure part of Piran’s imaginary. Mullet’s image was selected for the Slovene animal postage stamp in 2013, the fish often finding its way into Slovene newspapers, most frequently in the winter period or in connection with the disputed maritime border which they obliviously cross. Piran’s seabass swimming in fish farms in the Bay of Piran, on the other hand, is a novelty. It is a fish “without history”, a fish for which the doors of Piran’s municipality and museum are closed, a fish that doesn’t cross the contested border and in the context of our study an actor that will be introduced in more detail in the concluding chapter dealing with sustainable development and projects. Within the two fields of sustainable devel- opment and projects, Piran’s seabass can be said to sit comfortably. Generally, seabass is a pray fish, belonging to a well-known and much appreciated local species with no special symbolic role ascribed to it, that is until recently, when a private entrepreneur – a local family – started a business with farmed seabass in the Bay of Piran. Generally, seabass can be stocked in saltwater ponds quite easily (personal conversation, May 2013), its meat is much appreciated in the area and as a matter of fact, over a period of a very short time, almost every Slovene family tasted (or at least heard about) Piran’s seabass that had become something of a trademark. You will find it packed in an attractive white ice box and embellished with small information emblems. The box, the fish and the emblem are together aesthetically so pleasing that Natasˇa hesitated to destroy this harmonious package and put the seabass in the oven. The fish was not cheap in comparison to other fish from the Slovene sea, but buying the white box Natasˇa was left with the feeling that her money was well spent. Some even believe that it is much safer to eat Piran’s seabass than it is to eat Piran’s mullet, considering the eating habits of “wild” mullets (personal conversation, May 2014). Piran’s seabass has no historical reputation but 4.1 Mulling over the Mullets 87 it easily glides across the waves of sustainable development; packed in a white box it bonds easily with consumerism and coming directly from the fish ponds owned by the Slovene fishing family, it fits in well also with the local development issues – both socially and environmentally. The question however remains whether it can, and whether it will, as a socially and economically rightful fish, eventually find its way also into the museum and municipality halls? It seems unlikely, as only recently, in July 2016, there was a news item that Slovene fishing ponds are supposedly being sold to a new Italian owner (RtvSlo.si 2016). Following our intuition, supported by some ethnographic data, À the likelihood of Italian seabass entering Piran’s museum, a place much invested with nationalistic imaginary of Slovene maritime tradition, is slim indeed.

4.1.1 The Mullet Fishing After 1991

The creation of the new border between Slovenia and Croatia in 1991, whipped up any number of debates on the piers as well as at the family dinner tables in both Slovenia and Croatia; newspapers were filled with intriguing contents while polit- ical parties used those developments to obtain votes and to construct their party programs. All the conundrum notwithstanding, the border indeed cut most drasti- cally into the everyday work practices of maritime fishermen in Slovenia. Not only did the fishermen in Slovenia lose some of the resources in the now Croatian waters, where some of them used to fish, the administrative center had also shifted (from Split to Ljubljana); overall the breakdown of the routine engendered numerous new conflicts and cast a problematic light on what had once been “natural” practices. The mullet fishing practice, for reasons already mentioned in the previous chapters, was given an unprecedented focus due to the new situation and is therefore of special relevance to our debate on fishing between borders and discourses in the NE Adriatic. We will first analyze the mullet fishing ethnographically while also adding some contextual historical data mostly referring to the transitional period during 1990s. Namely traditionally and economically, mullet fishing has occupied a central place throughout the history of Piran, but unfortunately mullets have chosen to gather exactly in the bay across from the town, precisely where the contestable and still unsettled maritime border between Slovenia and Croatia has run since 1991 onwards. Due to the large quantities of mullet gathering in large schools in the Bay of Piran between November and March every year, the Secˇovlje reserve garnered a lot of attention already in the early history. One of the first written historical sources describing rules in the reserve dates back to the sixth century. Sources indicate that the city commune sold the hunting rights to tenants who either fished alone or hired workers while numerous entry bans in reserve were recorded in statutes of the city (Mihelicˇ 1998: 7). Written sources explicitly connected with the mullet fishing in the Secˇovlje reserve can be found on parchment documents held in the archives of Piran and date to the beginning of twelfth century. Memories of mullet fishing from 88 4 Conversations on the Pier the beginning of the previous century also hold an important place. Black-and- white photos on the walls of Piran Maritime Museum and in the Piran’s munici- pality corridors show the so-called “traditional” way of catching mullets and date back to the beginning of the twentieth century. Since the end of the WWII the mullet fishing has undergone many changes, being carried out within the frame- work of various associations such as Fishing Cooperative Piran, the company Fisherman, Agricultural cooperative Lucija and Delamaris state company. In the last period of SFR Yugoslavia (before Slovenia gained independence) the state owned company Delamaris, later on in self-management of workers, was the principal venture carrying out mullet fishing up until the second half of the 1980s when mullets, according to newspaper articles, ethnographic data and sporadic quotations from biological academic literature, disappeared from the bay. Although biologists did not systematically or comprehensively deal with the phenomenon of mullets in the area of the Bay of Piran, Slovene biologists Miroslav Zei wrote a few excerpts about the decline of mullets in the early 1980s: Over the last few years, mullet fishing has gone somewhat into decline, for which the causes may be biological (fluctuation, variation in fecundity and yield) or related to the ambient (varying oceanographic parameters, pollution, etc.). (1984: 138) In the same article Zei states that in 1978 the total mullet catch was 43 tons, in 1981 it amounted to 30 tons, and in 1982 it rose phenomenally to 80 tons, while in 1983 the state company Delamaris recorded no catch. Zei believes that this apparently happened due to unfavorable temperature conditions (ibid). Over the next 8 years, the total mullet catch was negligible (according to the Delamaris official statistics) while different official and unofficial theories developed trying to unravel the phenomenon of “mullet disappearances”. According to the ethnographic data, the Delamaris2 company was already in decline then and was not interested in mullet fishing, while mostly private, small coastal fishermen started to fish mullets ille- gally in smaller amounts and consequently learned about the changed behavior of this fish. In 1990 announced an open call for mullet fishing for which three bidders signed up: Delamaris state company, private company Barmar and a group of three independent, small coastal fishermen from Piran. The latter offered the highest percentage to the municipality and were selected as the best bidder (archive of the Municipality of Piran 325–5/90). Although in the next years the company Delamaris won the call for mullet fishing several times, the event triggered much debate among fishermen and further afield. There was criticism of the “illegal fishermen” who were selected as the best bidders, and questions were

2Within SFR Yugoslavia Delamaris owned 26 ships while after the 1991, only four remained. The company also used to have numerous berths along the nowadays Croatian coast that were used in the situation of multi-day fishing. Due to the political changes after 1991 this was no longer possible, and the relationship between the fishing effort and investments showed negative results (personal conversation with the director of Delamaris company, March, 2001). Additionally, after the 1991 fishing with trawls was the most affected fishing technology due to the new regulations (6-month ban on trawling was put in the first years after the independence of Slovenia). 4.1 Mulling over the Mullets 89 being raised also about the support, or rather lack thereof, for the company who takes care of numerous employees. As one of the three fishermen said in his defence, knowledge about the area and mullet behaviour in the reserve (acquired before 1990, when he went for an occasional illegal fishing in the reserve) was of key importance for locating the fish, for recognizing the new mobile patterns of mullets and for the successful catch itself. He also stressed that a certain amount of courage was required for such an action, and not all fishermen – pointing the finger especially at those who were most critical towards them – were brave enough to take such risk. As he explained about the period before 1996: People talked about it, they said never again would the mullets return... I didn’t believe it...Is it a coincidence, is it nature... because I doubt that such big school can be scared away just like that. Maybe for one year, but not for six or seven years. But the fish was there. Because I went into the reserve...illegally, you know...they called me fish-breaker, but I was not the only one. But you know, nobody was interested in the reserve anymore, it was a reserve just on the paper. And then you get this envy, they saw me coming back with the fish and... you know some of them, they’re just too frigging scared to do something like this and I was a pain in the ass for them. But we were catching mullets they just changed their position in the reserve. (personal conversation, April 2000) Furthermore, in these debates a change was visible primarily in openly expressed wishes and requirements of private small coastal fishermen who were claiming the right to go mullet fishing. Their arguments were linked to their new economic situation as well as to the so-called traditional discourse on mullet fishing according to which small coastal fishermen were the icons and the “owners” of this right, again referring to the history. These changes have coincided with political developments after the collapse of SFR Yugoslavia. Apart from mullets fishing, private small coastal fishermen began to link up with each other to address all sorts of issues. These were mainly related to the regulation of the status of fishermen, payment of contributions for health and pension insurance, financial help for diversification of their activity (into tourism for example); they demanded a proper articulation of the fishing agreement with Croatia (the agreement from 1994, did not, according to them, take into account private fishermen but only addressed problems of the Delamaris company); they criticized the issue of protected reserves that were impinging on fishermen territory; they suggested the abolition of the status of the afternoon (part-time) fishermen; they required free moorings for fishermen and the creation of a new law on fisheries in which fishermen alone would participate (archive of the Municipality of Piran, a letter date 23. 1. 1995 and personal conversation with the responsible administrators at the municipality Piran). They articulated these claims in joint petitions, open letters to the govern- ment and advanced them in fishermen’s strike at Cˇ rni Kal on 24. 6. 1994. That summer the police had removed the strikers while fishermen’s requirements were left mostly unresolved. In 1995 mullets were also the cause for a set of local conflicts between coastal cities, namely each Slovene coastal city wanted to have the privilege to issue concessions for mullet fishing. The debate was also triggered with regard to the fact that this “privilege” had so far belonged to the state administrative unit of Piran, 90 4 Conversations on the Pier while the municipalities proposed to take managements of mullet under their jurisdiction (local level). Generally speaking, the debates about the “centre” (national state, EU...) vs. “periphery” (local municipality, local community...) and small coastal fishing (private, “traditional”) vs. industrial fishing (formerly state-owned and later on privatised) surfaced during the 1990s were fitting into the larger agenda of transi- tional processes occurring within the area of post-Yugoslav republics. When in 1990 three private fishermen from Piran were selected as the best bidders and got the right to fish mullets, while this was not seen as an exceptional event to which individuals, state companies and newspapers reacted differently, it nevertheless did not pass unnoticed, unimportant, natural or self-evident. Small coastal fishermen mentioned to us several times how jealous the company Delamaris was (a privileged party in mullet fishing within the days of SFR Yugoslavia), and as with every conflict, there were also rumors about Delamaris’ employees, when in 1990 they were not selected at the call, deliberately scaring the fish away and going illegally into the Secˇovlje reserve to see for themselves if mullets really did come back (personal conversation, May 2000). In the years following 1996, conflicts amongst the fishermen appeared and were articulated mostly through participation in two separate associations Cooperation of Professional Fishermen from Slovene Coast and Fishing Cooperative Portorož (zaduga).3 In 1996 both groups registered for the call on mullet fishing, but the second association advanced a “new” net for mullet fishing. Over the following years this net, supposingly imitating the old traditional net for mullet fishing but incorporating a few contemporary innovations, became the core of the conflict between the two groups. Referred to as trata or traditional trata, the net was financed (in 1997) jointly by the state and zadruga. While designing trata, the fishermen sought advice with a specialist in the field of technology of floating nets who eventually gave his positive opinion about the net. His opinion was brought up in the conversations again and again (critically as well as approvingly). The fact that the specialist held a master degree was seen to play an important role in bolstering their arguments. To give one example: Let’s say it all started with trata. But if an expert tells you it is trata, then for sure it is. But they say it’s not. Well, they have their reasons, but if someone with a master degree say it is trata...And they say it is not, well...Try telling this other guy it is trata, and you’ll see he’ll tell you it’s not. And that’s when we split, we also saw the possibility for making extra profit. So we said, let’s do it! (personal conversation, April 2000) Some fishermen who opposed trata from the technical point of view or for a variety of other reasons (some reported that the cost was too high, others said nobody had invited them...) did not join this group and decided to apply for the call

3Renaming and setting up novel associations was very common in the 1990s due to the numerous conflicts arising between fishermen, but also due to the initiatives and recommendations of those responsible at the Ministry for Agriculture and Forestry advising the fishermen to appropriate new and more suitable ways of associating. 4.1 Mulling over the Mullets 91 within the other group of small coastal fishermen who intended using other net sˇakaleva (purse seins). In fact the idea for the new trata started developing among the majority of fishermen from Slovenia who were interested in mullet fishing that year, while latter on it was only one smaller group of fishermen who decided to finance it and consequently got to decide on the technical details of the net (there were indeed several different technical ideas how the net should look like). Over the next few years both groups applied for several different calls (exchang- ing the right for mullet fishing), and the conflict continued to be centered around the different net technology. Those who disapproved with trata stressed that this net did not meet ecological criteria, since the technique of dragging the net towards the shore does not allow for any fish to escape (as they maintained should be the case). They also stressed that a big number of fishermen was needed for such a procedure, and at the end of the day the effort did not pay off, as the profit was very small. The latter argument was also drawn upon by the other group, but with the positive connotation stressing the importance of the involvement of all the Slovene fisher- men in this traditional fishing activity. The latter argument won public applause also at the Ministry for Agriculture and Forestry, and the state eventually decided to co-finance trata. The opponents of the trata method saw the net as useless in a modified urban situation along the present-day Slovene coast, saying this was also because of the different position of mullets in the bay. This is part of the conver- sation with two fishermen from Koper: I will give you another absurdity...This year’s catch of mullets in the bay of Portorož... each year we quarrel with the state that keeps issuing the call, because they keep pushing forward this traditional fishing method, trata and such like...a 1000-year-old tradition! But gentlemen in Ljubljana, what do they know about fish, they haven’t a clue that even 20 years ago there were no nurseries for shells, or nurseries for sea-bass, or for sea-breams, the entire sea was free playing ground and you could throw a net wherever you wanted. Neither was the beach at Portorož protected then, whereas now you’ve got these concrete blocks and they’ve put a net around to keep seaweeds at bay... And it was precisely there, on that beach that they used to drag the net towards the shore in the old days. This is no more. And they persist regardless of everything. It’s now the fifth year running that we are telling them, stop with this traditional, traditional. If we want tradi- tional, then let’s empty the nursery. And the state gave the money for this net. [...] Yes, they gave 20.000 German marks4 to the cooperative from Portorož that was founded by three people who wanted to fish with this trata, and we, who’ve been fishing nonetheless this and the previous year have proven them wrong. They are not fishermen, but a company. [So, you were not involved at all with this group who bought trata?] No, we never were. We hang out with fishermen, with those who actually work and fish at the sea and not with the kind of fishermen we now have in Slovenia, fishermen on paper. Once a year they come out and they say, we are also fishermen and we have the right to catch mullets. That’s it! We fight every year. Those of us fishermen who live from the sea and work at the sea and the fishermen who in 1992 sold their boat, saying they couldn’t make a living with it anymore but still kept the fishing license. And once a year they come and make trouble. That’s it! (personal conversation, December 2000)

4In this period people in Slovenia (as well as in the other part of ex-Yugoslavia) calculated market prices mostly in German marks. Nowadays it corresponds with the value of 20.000 EUR. 92 4 Conversations on the Pier

Though trata is nowadays no longer in use, it still provokes rumours. For a while it was stored in the abandoned salt warehouse near the sea between Piran and Portorož while several people mention that trata is nowadays literally buried in the ground. Mullet fishing was in the first decade after the independence of Slovenia a bone of contention but it was also the only collective fishing activity along the nowadays Slovenian coast. The realization of mullet fishing indeed demands a group of fishermen to be involved in the process regardless of the fact which net is used. Fishermen are of diverse opinion over the optimal number of fishermen involved in mullet fishing. Post-1996 mullet fishing became more of a “mass” activity (in 1996 for example 50 fishermen were involved which is an approximate number of small- scale fishermen with boats under 12 m) on account of several reasons – economic problems in general and the fact that the involved ministry usually gave priority to the group with the higher number of fishermen involved and they also sympathized with the idea that mullet fishing would be an all-encompassing Slovene fishing event. Nevertheless, mullet fishing consists of several phases and division of labour encompassing usually a leader, an assistant to the leader, those who manage the fishing net, persons responsible for selling the fish and the rest of the crew as additional workers needed for the catch itself, the night guard, for sorting the fish, to be at the reserve, etc. In the period between 2002 and 2004 they also had a coordinator whose function to mediate between the ministry and fishermen. This role was later on dropped, as it was seen to be unnecessary. In spite of the fact that there are usually 30–50 people involved in the whole process, the act of catching the mullets usually requires the presence of 12–15 persons. Later on when the fish is cleaned, sorted and distributed, all the fishermen are involved. During the whole period of “mullet fishing”, a 24-h watch is carried out, for which usually two fishermen are needed. Agreement over the sharing of the payment is usually done each time anew but as a rule those who are involved more actively get a bigger share. In the period of our ethnographic work the share in the profit was divided as follows: one and a half share for the leader, for the assistant of the leader, for the seller, for those who managed the net (that winter sˇakaleva net (purse seins) was used instead of trata net) and for coordinator if he was involved; the rest of the group got one share of the whole catch. In given years the percentage for the municipality was also vectored in. The guards of the reserve are paid separately; night guards are paid marginally more than the day guards. Again, there were debates and quarrels over whether the guard is necessary or not. Some stated that guards were traditionally present throughout the whole history of the Piran reserve and claimed that that should not be changed. Apart from the net quarrels, from 1996 onwards, a new question emerged among the fishermen as to whether mullet fishing is a privilege of Piran’s fishermen or it belongs to all “Slovenian” fishermen. One fishermen from Piran gave the chronol- ogy of the events: That year six of us got together and we went round looking for... we rounded up all the fishermen who were interested, at that time we competed with each other, the one who’d get the biggest number of fishermen in his group would win the call for mullet fishing. And 4.1 Mulling over the Mullets 93

people rounded up all sorts of persons with fishing license, anybody they could find, just so they would get through the call. And from then on joint mullet fishing began... But the Piran fishermen they buggered it...and now they cry, wishing the catch to belong to Piran only. But without the support from the mayor... [...] Let it still be a Slovenian thing, as long as it is from Piran. I don’t see why not put it back to what it used to be. Why not put it right? We have this bay here. And the main problem is...we have a reserve here; do you know how many square meters of fishing area we haven’t been able to use for decades? Why, because it’s a reserve. And in the past they also had a reserve here but only fishermen from Piran used to fish here. There were no fishermen from Koper or Izola here. Just fishermen from Piran. We didn’t want to put them out in any way but...Izola has its own fishing territory, they fish there all year round, Koper has its own bay...It’s all there! And they fish all year round. Does it make sense then for these fishermen to come here and fish our fish? I don’t go for their fish during the whole year. But it sounds better when Slovene reporters write Slovene fishermen (personal conversation, April 2000). Regardless of the numerous negative memories connected with quarrels among the fishermen, generally speaking mullet fishing is perceived also as a positive and special experience. Many times they stressed hard work, long hours standing on guard in the reserve and the cold wind coming off the quarry in Kanegra and from the Portorož side of the bay but at the same time they also spoke about special experience as “...something that is worth seeing”. Apart from that they also stressed the importance of will power in the work they do and a pride in a good catch worth showing to others and seeing. It is for these reasons that fishermen are sympathetic towards reporters, anthropologists, students, visitors and others who come to Piran wishing to see or participate in this event. Many times they also told us to go to the municipality hall of Piran, where there are photographs of mullet fishing on display (some old ones and some recent ones hanging side by side). As one of them described mullet fishing: This really was a catch; the municipality has recently put up these photos. This really was something to show. The fishing itself it was a bit laborious and they even wanted to trip us up...we were at it for two days and three nights non-stop. Thirty people, I am telling you, nobody would want to do this again, I wouldn’t. Crazy. But that will and...we didn’t want to stop. (personal conversation, April 2000) In the last few years fishermen were rather unhappy with the situation in the reserve, saying that “...something is not right with this reserve.” The reason for their misgivings might be the relatively small catches over the last years from 2010 onwards, the increasing number of shell fish and fish farmers in the reserve, their observation that there is no clear agreement over the strategy of the management of the reserve or broadly speaking over the future of Slovene fishing as well as “the return of the rumor” about mullets retreating from the bay. One of the locally well- known owners of the fish farms in the bay stressed that mullets retreated from the reserve already in the late November, blaming the birds such as cormorants or Mediterranean shags for that. Nevertheless, mullet fishing nowadays still holds an important place within the local environment, a recent subject of several lectures and a public debate organised within the broader framework of European heritage days (in September 2014), and taking place in the city library of Piran. Vinko Oblak, a lecturer at the event, a local 94 4 Conversations on the Pier amateur writer from Piran who deals extensively with the preservation of maritime heritage and is interested specifically in fishing, spoke about five different species of mullets that can be found in the Adriatic sea and stressed that mullet fishing in Piran’s bay has more than a thousand year-long tradition. In the discussion the participants discussed the idea of the fishing museum and mentioned the famous “big catch” from 1964, when Piran’s fishermen caught 100 tons of mullets. Local fishermen were also involved in this public debate while their “mullet narratives” were interspersed with many nostalgic as well as sarcastic anecdotes. To conclude this section let as focus on the notion of “traditional” in relation to mullet fishing as articulated by fishermen themselves, for the notion cropped up many times in conversations as the “core of the problem”. Firstly, it stood in relation with the “traditional” net trata (seen both negatively – tradition as obso- leteness, and positively – tradition as a wise teacher). It was also evoked pragmat- ically as a ‘bait’ for the call committee. Secondly, it was evoked in relation to small coastal fishermen, insofar as they are perceived as icons of “traditional” mullet fishing as well as the “owners” of the right to catch mullets, and thirdly, it was seen as inextricably linked to the perceived long-lasting historical tradition of local authorities of Piran having the right and power to manage mullet fishing. Following thus the ethnographic data for mullet fishing in Piran’s bay, the meaning of tradition splits (at least) in three directions; the tradition of the catch itself (i.e. mullet in the net as well as on the plate, but also the earnings for the fishermen involved), the tradition of fishing techniques and organization of the catch (techniques of fishing, net technology, division of roles, labor and profit, the number of people involved...) and the tradition as appealing to the past (Piran’s entitlement to the reserve, with references to “our ancestors” or at least “our precursors”).5 The tradition of the catch itself argument is the most accentuated among the fishermen, while the other two, no less important, are more context-bound and drawn upon variably according to the situation. As one of the fishermen explained: Tradition of mullet fishing...have you ever asked yourself what that means to you?...The fishing technique, that’s one thing, how you pull the trata net, but what it boils down to, really, is that you have mullets on your plate. That’s tradition! Mullets! You understand? For me to make a living and for you to eat mullets from Piran. (personal conversation, February 2001)

5See Chap. 2 for the history of the twentieth century of the present-day Slovenian coastal towns, which was marked with the exodus after the WWII and ethnic demarcations between the Slavic hinterlands and Roman coast while the “real Slovene fishermen” can nevertheless be found in popular discourse on the present-day Italian coats near Trieste and not on the present-day Slovenian coast. 4.2 Who Is the Real Fisherman? 95

4.2 Who Is the Real Fisherman?

Within this segment the ethnography of viewpoints over the question “Who is the real fisherman?”, will be presented in a rather descriptive manner in order to shed light on several delimitations and categories used among fishermen. Although the ethnography relates mainly to the first ethnographic period (up to 2004), numerous points are still topical for understanding the development of events over the next couple of years as well as for highlighting the broader contextual framework of transitional processes within Slovenia. The ethnographic approach in particular provides a useful insight into the multiple actor’s perspectives while we as anthro- pologists tried to navigate (on our mental charts) between the details and the broader perspective. As the title of the book from anthropologist Thomas Hylland Eriksen Small Places Large Isues (2001) informs us, the anthropologist’s view is in a sense tapered and apparently potty, and rather than following an overly qualitative approach, it is indeed very accurate while the detection of a variety of shades is established precisely through the nature of the work invested in the research process.

4.2.1 Back to the Future: From Industrial Fishing to Private Fishing

There are numerous formal, semi-formal and informal categories of fishermen according to which we can speak of fishermen in Slovenia as a highly heteroge- neous group. Divisions and lines of demarcations are especially interesting in the situation of a new state border and transitional processes within the ex-Yugoslav republics in which categorises and relations were sometimes reformulated and set anew. If in the period of SFR Yugoslavia, the state owned fishing company Delamaris with its fish processing industry and fishing fleet had a central role in Slovene fishing, certain changes occurred after 1991 as the small coastal, private fishing became more visible due to several factors (new maritime border, decline of Delamaris fleet, transition to the capitalist economic system...). Within SFR Yugoslavia a strong emphasis was put upon economic development while industry itself, as George Zaninovitch has written, proved attractive to workers as well as to a growing number of intellectuals who were being uprooted from the village. As Zaninovitch explained, the predominant conviction that a strong Yugoslavia had to be a modern, industrial and highly educated state, had also led to a rejection of the traditional forms of values of the village (1996). Industrial fishing during the SFR Yugoslavia period has to be understood from within this context. On the other hand, the development after the break-up of SFR Yugoslavia took a different direction. Slovene industrial fishing met with several environmental and other critiques. At the last visit of Greenpeace ship Artic Sunrise in Koper in April 2013, for example, 96 4 Conversations on the Pier industrial fishing was strongly condemned, while small coastal fishermen were described in terms of sustainable fishing: ...small coastal fishermen, who have fished responsibly for generations, are in real danger of losing their jobs and way of life. This threatens the future of our fish and our seas, as well as the communities that rely on them. (Greenpeace 2014) The Greenpeace visit, the seminar and the critique of industrial fishing echoed strongly in Slovene newspapers as well as among the small coastal Slovene fishermen. In Slovenia there are several formal categories of maritime fishing according to which we can speak of commercial maritime fishing (within which companies as well as individual fishermen perform their activities) and non-commercial, i.e. sport fishing and recreational fishing. Commercial fishing is furthermore divided into full- and part-time commercial fishing, the latter combining fishing with other activities. When the company Delamaris was still involved in fishing (the last two biggest ships of Delamaris fleet were destroyed in 2012) the informal categorisation of industrial fishing and small coastal fishing also existed, as well as the division between the companies Riba and Delamaris (which were in self-management of workers) and private fishing firms of smaller independent entrepreneurs. The number of different categories and groups significantly increases in the area of semi-formal and informal categorization, and these are at least in part connected with the above mentioned legal divisions and additionally informed by different synchronic and diachronic contexts reestablishing certain categories according to the given situation. Additional formal category appeared in the context of EU, namely the category of small-scale fishers (those with boats under 12 m). Although not all fishing boats for commercial use along the Slovene coast are under 12 m (91% is under) in the popular discourse today all Slovene fishers are perceived as small scale fishermen while the terms small coastal fishing and small scale fishing are used as synonymous. Additionally in the fishing office in Izola6 for example the fishermen are semi-formally divided into several groups according to the net-technology (each group having its own representative), since, the administrator of the office stated, this was the most suitable way of representing different interests within the Slovene maritime fishing sector. In this sense we will use these categories as descriptors, while the debate around the “right fishermen” must be seen as a process with a fluid character which is constantly fluctuating between rising and vanishing shapes. Each of the following subtitles aims to describe the most prominent debates in the first period of our ethnographic work (1999–2004) (Fig. 4.1).

6The appearance of the Fishing office in Izola and its activities will be described in the last part of this book. 4.2 Who Is the Real Fisherman? 97

Fig. 4.1 Small coastal fishing boats in Izola (Photo Natasˇa Rogelja)

4.2.1.1 Family and Blood Succession

During the transition from the Yugoslav industrial state-owned7 fishing to Slovene small coastal, private fishing, the argument about family and blood succession many times rounded up the image of the right fisherman. Although the small coastal private enterprise such as family restaurants, renting rooms businesses and private fishing were legally allowed in SFR Yugoslavia, the private fishing sector in Slovenia only became visible after 1990. Following the family argument, real fishermen were described as those coming from a fishing family (or at least having some ancestors related to fishing) where the knowledge and tradition of fishing was passed on from one generation to the next. This argument was used mostly by fishermen who claimed to be from the fishing family and who supposedly inherited their fishing knowledge in the broadest sense. The qualities of the family succession were mainly expressed in terms of privileged fishing knowledge, in turn assuring a better catch, a better quality relation with the sea environment and an affirmative attitude towards the fishing profession (“to become a fisherman out of love for the

7Some of the state owned companies in SFR Yugoslavia, such as Delamaris, where later on in the self-management of workers. 98 4 Conversations on the Pier sea” as opposed to “fishing as a mere profession”). As one of the fishermen explained: In my family my grandfather used to fish. This stays in your blood and after you can’t just...Me for example, I was working on a big boat, but I prefer to fish...Always on the sea (personal conversation, May 2001) We also heard that those who lay claim to a family succession were nevertheless more an exception than the rule (several of them were members of an Italian minority living in Slovenia), since they maintain that the fishing tradition broke after the exodus of coastal inhabitants in the second half of the previous century. The maritime skills of some of the “new” inhabitants who came to coastal Slovenia after the WWII from Dalmatia (and passed their knowledge to others) were ignored or simply overlooked.

4.2.1.2 Personal Affection

Personal affection was sometimes seen to be closely related to the family tradition argument, but often it was presented on its own, or in relation with natural assets. The latter were not necessarily connected with family succession but were more individually conditioned. In such instances the rightness was grounded in personal affection or talent, while several fishermen stressed the similarity of this with an artistic profession. One put it like this: We fishermen are each to himself, we are hermits. I don’t know how to explain this. Not everyone can be an artist, or a painter, not everybody a poet, not everybody can be a writer, no ...But anybody can work behind the conveyor belt in a factory. And this is where the specificity lies, it’s all to do with that. It’s not just working for money, it’s the love for the sea, for... Its complex...or at least I see it as being called to live with the sea. (personal conversation, May 2001) Although the blood metaphor also came out many times in these debates (as in “I have it in my blood”), in these instances it transcended the family argument and set it in the context of a calling, love of nature, etc...Within this context the Delamaris fishermen were sometimes described as “mere workers, as those who have a formal attitude towards their profession” and as such they were contrasted with small coastal fishermen that supposedly possess the characteristic of personal affiliation towards the profession so essential for real fishermen.

4.2.1.3 Time

Another descriptive category drawn upon to define what constitutes a true fisher- man is time. How much time one spends at the sea (also in the winter period and during bad weather spells), the length of involvement in the fishing profession; how early he/she gets up in the morning, such and similar criteria inform the concept of 4.2 Who Is the Real Fisherman? 99 the right fisherman. In many ways these criteria are intertwined with other descrip- tive categories, such as the “time of the ancestors” or, for example, devotion shown for the profession can be recognised in direct relation to the time one spends at the sea. The argument about time spent in this profession was especially important after 1991, once the fishing territories were reduced. Those fishermen who were involved in fishing for the longer period claimed the right to be protected by the state of Slovenia (or claimed the rights to apply for the EU fishing funds) as they are the “right fishermen”, they protested against issuing fishing licences to newcomers and relied in their arguments on their long career and their “decades long experience in fishing”. In this situation the sons of the ‘right’ fishermen, though their licences had only been issued in the recent past, were not accused in the same way; it seems that they inherited time from their ancestors. The element of time was also important among workers of Delamaris company. They highlighted the importance of time in relation to the long tradition of their company rather than personal experiences. The tradition of industrial fishing and canning industry in the area was thus counterpoised to the private, Slovene small coastal fishing that only developed after the exodus of the Italian-speaking fishermen who were replaced by continen- tals not being accustomed to the sea. Although industrial fishing had in fact a long tradition in the area – starting in 1879 with fish processing industry in Izola where the company Socie´te ge´ne´rale franc¸aise C. A. operated and was later on followed by Arrigoni and others up until Delamaris – it somehow faded over the last decades (for example it is not used in tourist promotion) or was even deplored (following the visit of Greenpeace boat in Koper); clearly the time argument did not hold such persuasive powers in the case of industrial fishing.

4.2.1.4 Private Small Coastal Fishing

In the period of our ethnographic work the argument showcasing private fishermen as “real fishermen” was used extensively. Our interlocutors used the expression private fishing only in relation to small coastal fishing regardless of the fact that previously state-owned Delamaris’ industrial fishing was later on also privatized. Partly private fishing correlates with family tradition but mainly it is meant to stand in opposition to large-scale industrial fishing. If the latter is perceived as harmful, small coastal private fishing was framed within contextual discourse of sustainable development as sustainable fishing. Another line of argumentation important for projecting private, small coastal fishing as real has to do with the specific work conditions of small coastal fishermen who are said to be their own bosses and have free use of their time. Again this is a very specific notion, as it locally relates to the image of Delamaris’ industrial fishing fleet where fishermen were employees while the Slovenian fleet of private, small coastal fishermen is usually organised according to the principle “one boat one man”. As one of the fisherman said: In Delamaris they have a better salary, but I would never swap. [...] And then what... I work for some captain, or for this or that guy...and he can just tell you off, if you are late. Here you only have yourself to depend on. In the summer, even if I don’t go early, I go 100 4 Conversations on the Pier

when I feel like it, there’ no one to boss me around. I would never swap, no (personal conversation, May 2001).

4.2.1.5 Knowledge, Skills and Inventiveness

Having knowledge, a mastery over certain skills as well as the ability to “know one’s way around”, to be inventive and to react quickly – all these characteristics were also regularly listed as being key to who constitutes a “real fisherman”. They were voiced particularly with reference to the context of reduced fishing area, the development of commercial port of Koper as well as in the contexts of new regulations (set by Slovenia and later by EU policies), where for example knowl- edge about different fishing techniques (the use of different nets in response to new prohibitions), the ability to shift between fishing and additional activities (such as tourism) were of special importance. As one of the fishermen stated: All they fish there is common sole, because that’s all they know how to. These are not fishermen at all (laughter)! That’s what they’ve learnt to do, and they must have all kinds of nets at home. We fish everything from common sole to, seabass. All the available nets we have. And they have just nets for common sole and if they happen to catch something else alongside, fine, they take it ...That’s how it is. Besides, fishing for common sole requires no thinking. You just go there, throw your net ...You don’t have to think how and what...and the next day you go and haul it out and there you have it! (personal conversation, May 2001) Certain types of fish such as common sole can also become subject of the debate surrounding real fishermen, since, as common sole is fished using passive technol- ogy in contrast to mullet, for example, that demands a more active approach and more knowledge.

4.2.1.6 Additional Activities, Part-Time Fishermen and Sport Fishermen

Particularly between 2002–2004, as some fishermen began to develop quite suc- cessful businesses with passenger transportations, fish canteens, sport fishing tours and other tourism related activities, the argument that often cropped up in these debates was the argument of fishermen involved in additional activities. The connection between fishing and tourism was especially key to these debates, and since these activities were viable only for those who owned bigger vessels (as toilets and other facilities were required), the critique usually came from the owners of smaller vessels. As the start-up capital was also needed for the estab- lishment of such additional tourist activities, there were also rumors about certain fishermen involved in tourism as having political connections, while others claimed that these fishermen were effectively becoming tourist workers and only advertise themselves as real fishermen. 4.2 Who Is the Real Fisherman? 101

It’s like this, you can’t sit on two chairs. If you are with one wife, you are with this wife, otherwise you should leave her...And here is the problem. Among fishermen there is one third who are also involved in tourism, restaurants, fish markets...And this is the one group that is better off; they have a possibility to earn. And they extract money away from us... Italians have a special law. You get a license for fishing only if you are a real fisherman, if you only live off fishing, not like here. And some say it’s no longer possible to make a living as a fisherman. But it is! (personal conversation, May 2001) Other form of additional activity is connected with the official categories of full time and part-time fishermen. After 1991, full-time fishermen expressed dissatis- faction with part-time fishermen or afternoon fishermen8 (as they also called them) who earned additional money with fishing while working in other professions (or were retired) and in doing so they took part of the fish from the people whose only occupation was fishing. Generally speaking, commercial fishermen made similar arguments also in relation to sport fishermen who are placed indisputably on the side of “unreal” fishermen while their relation towards the sea and nature was of special importance here. Sport fishermen (also perceived as “well-standing gentlemen from Ljubljana”) are supposed to have an infantile relationship with nature, romanticizing the sea and fishing itself. As one of the full-time fishermen from Koper said: The love for the sea is for those who have a job in the morning and then the afternoon fishing licence or for those who are sports fishermen... And they take fish from us. ‘It’s easy for them to say they go out to the sea out of love, I can’t say that. At least not anymore. I work in order to survive. (personal conversation, April 2001) Nevertheless, in 1999, when we visited an exhibition at the Koper fish market where one of the fishermen from Koper presented his photos showing his working day, fishing techniques, his fishing boats and people, a number of photos of sunsets took an important place within his exhibition. As we were still under the impression of the interviews on sport fishermen and their allegedly naive romantic relation to the sea and nature, we could not help but question the author about the sunsets and romantic attitude towards they might embody. His answer was: It’s really not romanticizing... even if I put up some of these sunset photos to attract visitors... but not just for that... I think they are beautiful in themselves. It’s the respect and understanding of nature that I want to show in showing our profession. But you know...When I went fishing with my son and we took these photos of sunsets...I enjoyed it, sure! Is this romantic? (personal conversation, May 2001) His answer revealed a basic understanding of human-environmental notion as it highlights the importance of the relation (towards the sea and the sunset in this case) rather than the sunset itself. A sunset can be a motif on a postcard; it can be the cause of a tourist excursion, but it can also be an everyday event in the life of a fisherman (and his son) without it being stripped of its aesthetic appeal.

8The category afternoon fishermen was used officially before the introduction of new terminology; namely the full-time and part-time fishermen. 102 4 Conversations on the Pier

4.2.1.7 Organisations, Nets and Work at the Sea

In the period between 1996 and 2001 when the conflict between the two organisa- tions involved in mullet fishing was at its peak, the arguments around who is a real fisherman were very much attached also to the affiliation to certain organiza- tion. Opposing groups were denying each other “the rightness” using various above mentioned arguments such as; “...there are only retired and part-time fishermen in Zadruga, in Zadruga you find only petrsˇiljcˇkarji (those who smoke marihuana) ...” As in the case of mullet fishing, we have established that different groups using different nets for mullet fishing were also important in discussions over correct image of fishermen and the right practice of (mullet) fishing. Different net technologies in general contextualised the debate on the right way to fish in the NE corner of Adriatic as generally fishermen in this area are divided between kocˇarji (trawlers, active technology of drag nets) and mrežarji (using different passive gears). In this regard kocˇarji were described to us as being problematic for ecological reasons (drag nets are supposed to be harmful) but also due to bigger financial investments that arouse suspicion. This aspect is also connected to the relation between the ownership (of the boat and fishing equipment) and work invested in fishing. The real fisherman is not the owner of the boat who hires workers, but someone who has to work as a fisherman and invest his work instead of his money. Mrežarji on the other hand, with their involvement in different static net fishing technologies, supposedly real because of their linage with “tradition” but also due to the small-scale character of their fishing which is allegedly not harmful for the environment. As one of them said: These guys (kocˇarji) are lords. What do they do? They drag a net for an hour and a half, they’ve got a slave? ...who does the work for two whites and two blacks, right? ... while the lord watches the TV, chatting away with others... that’s all he does, that’s the extent of his work. After an hour and a half, he hauls the net up, tips out the catch... all these small fish...and then shovels them back into the sea, these small fry, but they don’t survive.” [...] Our elders have always worked with the nets and so we too stayed with the nets. But these guys with drag nets, they became fishermen out of personal interest, they did not grow up with it from an early age...(personal conversation, December 2000) However, opposing arguments came from kocˇarji stating the backwardness and laziness of mrežarji. Additional problems between the two groups arouse also in concrete situations at sea when there were quarrels over net damages and the problem of closing an area with the static nets. With the GPS technology, established corridors and internal rules between fishermen coordinated by the Fishing office in Izola (today every trawler has to be marked on the GPS system), these problems seem to have been reduced over the last few years, while the division between kocˇarji and mrežarji began to be contextualised more with sustainable development and sustainable fishing discourse. Delamaris and Riba company were once again stigmatised rather negatively. According to the fisher- men who use static nets there is a huge difference between smaller (private) drag nets (bottom trawl or pelagic nets, locally known as tartane, romanjole and volantine) and Delamaris’ drag nets (locally known as volante). The latter are 4.2 Who Is the Real Fisherman? 103 described as harmful for the environment and leading to overfishing while the smaller drag nets are acceptable from the local perspective. This is how one of the fishermen with static nets described Delamaris fishing: From those dragnetters the Delamaris ones are the worst [pelagic pair trawl]. I tell you, once I was under water, and when the boat goes above you, let’s say, a 100 metres away, you can hear such horrible roaring. I could feel the vibrations all over my body. The fish would huddle tight under the old boat. They would huddle close to me and we were crowded there together. I hold my breath and listen in to hear whether the boat was going away or approaching, you can make out which. When I swam to the surface I saw the Delamaris boat two miles away, starting to drag with this volante drag nets. And with the ropes they regulate how deep they’ll sink it with the weights. It can go all the way to the bottom or it can stay floating in the middle. It should be in the middle; volante means a floating drag net. But actually they drag all the way to the bottom. [...] They give off such horrible scary sounds. Italians have forbidden the volante net. They have them, but they are forbidden in the Golf of Trieste. (personal conversation, May 2000)

4.2.1.8 Locality

The real fishermen debate sometime stood also in relation to the local differentia- tion between Piran’s fishermen and other fishermen from Slovene coastal region, in which Piran as a town was seen to hold, generally speaking, a special place following local perceptions. Piran’s fishermen were many times described to us as “not the real fishermen, as those who sell drugs” and also as potential or actual drug consumers. As a fisherman from Izola described his encounter with a fisher- man from Piran: They close off the entire area with their nets. And then they don’t even know where they are. They come out all stoned, half drugged...In Piran there is a lot of that, you know...in Izola and Koper it’s better, but there, honestly.... You can see them and really it beats me how can they even go out to the sea in such a state. And they go with these engines ...but let them go...(personal conversation, April 2000) It is important to note that Piran’s fishermen were the most vulnerable in the new political situation (in their everyday practices they had to cope with the maritime border directly) and most stigmatised not just from the part of media discourse (which described them as fighters for the border as well as the ones most respon- sible for the quarrels) but also from the perspective of authorities and specialists. In one of our field work experiences we met a person working in a Piran maritime museum, and, explaining our research subject, the person sympathised with us in regard to our “poor subject”. Apart from Piran’s fishermen, Piran itself has a bad reputation as a “remote and obscure place, a dead-end street”. As such it is often described also by the Piran fishermen themselves. As one of them wrote: This went on for several years, until the civil war broke out, after which there were the misunderstandings between the countries over the maritime and land border, which remain unsolved to this day as far as the inhabitants of the region are concerned...Sewing of the nets stopped but life goes on. I left the town that has changed over the course of ten so much 104 4 Conversations on the Pier

that today it’s not even a shadow of, the town where I was born, where I had spent my youth. (fieldwork archive of NR) Interestingly, however, Piran nowadays – a port dotted with colourful smaller boats and nets, a common image one finds on postcards – is seen to hold any number of features typically used to describe “real fishing” and “real fishermen.” – None- theless Piran is one of the most stigmatised and marginalised towns along the Slovene coast (following everyday discussions) and perhaps as such it reflects broader attitudes towards Slovene fishing as being at the core of the border problem (Piran being the closest town to the unsolved maritime border), but, at the same time, also holding out “hope” for solving maritime border issues and to maintain the Slovene maritime identity. Despite the fact that according to the above discussions all or none can fit into the frame of “the real fisherman” it is interesting to reflect on these notions as on autonomous and situationally used ideas about the life and work of Slovene fishermen in the contexts of post-Yugoslav and transitional period, which, in the case of Slovenian fishing, remains linked to both ends; to Yugoslav and the pre-Yugoslav past and to Slovenian and EU future developments. Changing work and life conditions in the context of post-socialism, neo-liberalism and deindustrialisation as well as previous experiences (during the Yugoslav period) and memories (of pre-Yugoslav fishing and the exodus of Italian-speaking inhab- itants from the present-day Slovenian coastal towns in the late 1940s and early 1950s) are all knitted together in the various theories bearing on the image of the “right fisherman”. In what we have observed, the working class has been stripped of its glorified status; Slovene industrial fishing disappeared as did a stable and affluent lifestyle that, according to our interlocutors, characterized the Yugoslav period after the 1960s. The remaining fishermen have been stigmatized as marginal, as those not having a link with tradition, as those whose (harmful) fishing industry had disappeared, as those whose parents came to the coastal towns from “the continent” and as such they were denied possession of real maritime knowledge. In this view the question of what it means to be Slovene and a fisherman (or a seaman) requires rewriting from the new position which is directly the result of the Yugoslav past and attendant nostalgia as well as embedded in the global economy, new ideologies and rules set up after the EU accession. In this new situation small, private, traditional, “once-upon-a-time” fishing has been attributed with positive connotations, while “modern”, Yugoslav, state owned, industrial fishing slowly disappeared. Being part of all these different past experiences and new circum- stances, Slovene fishermen try to maintain their autonomy referring to various “right” relations such as blood and family relations, time, net technology, locality, attitude towards the work and nature as well as their knowledge and inventiveness. Although the last two characteristics may appear to stand at opposite ends – knowledge being connected with tradition and inventiveness with novelty – they were indeed used creatively by those who stayed on in fishing as we will observe in the next, third part of the book. References 105

References

Chervinski J (1975) Experimental raising of golden grey mullet (Liza aurata (Risso)) in saltwater ponds. Aquaculture 5(1):91–98 Encyclopedia of Life. Liza aurata. Golden grey mullet. http://eol.org/pages/206064/details. Accessed 9 Aug 2016 Eriksen TH (2001) Small places, large issues: an introduction to social and cultural anthropology. Pluto Press, London/Sterling Greenpeace (2014) Greenpeace international. Support sustainable fishermen. http://www. greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/oceans/support-sustainable-fisherman/. Accessed 1 Aug 2016 Harrison IJ, Senou H (1999) Order Mugiliformes. In: Carpenter KE, Niem VH (eds) The living marine resources of the Western Central Pacific, FAO species identification guide for fisheries purposes. FAO, Rome, pp 2069–2790 Jardas I (1996) Adriatic ichthyofauna. Sˇkolska knjiga dd, Zagreb Marcˇeta B (2016) Pomembnejsˇe ribolovne vrste slovenskega morja. Zavod za ribisˇtvo Slovenije, Ljubljana Mihelicˇ D (1998) Piranski zaliv: K tradiciji ribolova in ribolovnih pravic. Annales VII 14:7–18 Nelson JS (2006) Fishes of the world, 4th edn. Wiley, Hoboken RtvSlo.si (2016) Ribogojnica Fonda v roke italijanskega podjetja. July 22. Ribogojnica Fonda v roke italijanskega podjetja. http://www.rtvslo.si/gospodarstvo/ribogojnica-fonda-v-roke- italijanskega-podjetja/398631. Accessed 26 Aug 2016 Turan C, Gürlek M, Ergüden D, Yaglıo glu D, O¨ ztürk B (2011) Systematic status of nine mullet species (Mugilidae) in the Mediterranean sea. Turk J Fish Aquat Sci 11:315–321 Wordfishing.net (2014) Jumping mullets. October 21. http://www.worldfishing.net/news101/ Comment/ben-yami/the-jumping-mullets#sthash.pcc5XM3L.L9UuuI3a.dpuf. Accessed 1 Aug 2016 Zei M (1984) Problemi in stanje slovenskega morskega ribolova. Slovensko morje in zaledje 6–7:131–141 Part III Innovation: Uses of Authenticity in North-Eastern Adriatic Corner

Many anthropologists contend that the Mediterranean coastline today is somehow tired (ecological crisis – e.g. Kousis 2004), overloaded with historical burdens (political conflicts – e.g. Kousis et al. 2011) and overdetermined by two aspects of place – the material and the ideological (Boissevain and Selwyn 2004). It is also a site of advancing capitalist relations that have profoundly influenced coastal development and caused any number of social and cultural transformations. Tour- ism development, as Tom Selwyn has argued, has played a significant role in the extension and deepening of capitalist relations of production in the coastal areas (2004: 35). Apart from introducing capitalist relations of production to the littoral, tourism has also introduced a “parallel reality” – a kind of aesthetification of the landscape that is, following Selwyn, increasingly unrelated to the uses to which it is put (ibid: 57). Questions of aesthetification and of a “parallel reality” that tourism has introduced to the coastal regions can be further contextualized within a broader theoretical debate about authenticity. Urry has observed that tourist sites may be a subject of historical research but at the same time they are transformed into a kind of “spectacle”, one that would attract visitors (1990, 2001). Double uses can lead to a misleading oversimplification of the conflict as that existing between “authentic” historical research and an “inauthentic” tourist spectacle. Such oversimplifications have been discussed and criticized by a number of authors (e.g. Urry 1990, 2001; Selwyn 1996; Macdonald 1997; Nadel-Klein 2003 and others) among which Macdonald’s views are of special importance for this chapter. Describing heritage representations of Aros, Macdonald highlights the local people’s awareness of touristic images of themselves, “their ability to play along with those images, and their enjoyment of subtly disposing of them” (1997: 155). As Sharon Macdonald concludes, people are not only aware of external images of them but often they also attempt to actively counter these images and construct alternative visions of their history and culture (1997: 175). Starting from her conclusions we will posit authenticity as unstable, always in the process of re-shaping and in the service of its creators. Although we will follow several theoretical debates on authenticity (Selwyn 1996; Bendix 1997; Macdonald 1997; Theodossopoulos 2013), this chapter will 108 III Innovation: Uses of Authenticity in North-Eastern Adriatic Corner neither dwell on the theoretical discussion of authenticity in general, nor will it engage in any extended sense the dilemmas about the use of the concept of authenticity in anthropological analysis. Our more focused and modest intent is to present everyday uses of authenticity within the popular and tourist discourses along the present-day Slovene coastline and to highlight the active role of individ- uals in this process. In particular, we will be interested in the uses of authenticity connected to fishing tourism that was developed due to the economic and other problems within Slovene fishing sector. Our contention is that different understand- ings of authenticity attached to Slovene coastal area can best be understood as holding a key element of innovation. This preoccupation with authenticity comes to the fore in, for example, tourist discourse, especially in promotional material attached to fishing tourism. We will therefore focus on the case of fishing tourism in nowadays Slovene coastal town of Izola, where for many decades now fishing has been the first and foremost local activity (Kramar 1987, 2002). Recent touristic brochures represent Izola and its hinterland as a town where people appreciate healthy local food and refuse to buy into capitalist consumerism, aiming instead at “Kilometre zero” philosophy. As written in the promotional brochure: The diverse and rich Mediterranean – Istrian cuisine in Izola has been further enhanced with the initiative “Kilometre zero”. The idea of “Kilometre zero” is to offer in selected local restaurants autochthon and authentic food. [...] Guests will have the opportunity to taste the typical dishes of our local seafood as part of the “Sea on the table”, where the catch of the morning is on the table at lunch (Kilometre Zero 2014).1 The above quotation is entirely in consonance with Slovenia’s national marketing strategy for the Littoral, and it foregrounds three key aspects relevant to our discussion: the Mediterranean, Istria, and authenticity. Although the case of Izola’s fishermen remains in the background of this campaign, it is closely interwoven with all three aspects. First of all, Izola is seen to be represented primarily through its fishing and work culture, as an ...old Mediterranean town [...] where the genuine traditions of fishing and winemaking, mysterious traces of the past, and the welcoming character of the locals merge together to form an unforgettable mosaic of experiences (Welcome to Izola 2016). Nowadays Izola still remains a fishing town and fishing is promoted as one of the main landscape attributes from the town’s history. One can find old photos of fishermen and fishing boats blown up into large posters looking out on the pavement from the Mercator shop windows2 alongside the information on working hours of this Slovenian commercial enterprise, or attached to the walls and doors in public toilets – mysterious traces of the early twentieth century – staring at visitors without

1Corrections to the original text: “The rich and diverse Mediterranean – Istrian cuisine in Izola has been given an extra boost with the initiative “Kilometre zero”. The idea of Kilometre zero is to offer in selected local restaurants local, authentic food. [...] Guests will have the opportunity to taste typical seafood dishes of the area as part of the “Sea on the table”, where the catch of the morning is on the table at lunchtime.” 2Following ethnographic documentation in 2014. III Innovation: Uses of Authenticity in North-Eastern Adriatic Corner 109 any explanation but merely, it seems, for aesthetic pleasure. The last two decades have also seen extensive promotion of programs encompassing the experience of spending free time with Izola’s fishermen (“With fishing boat Zlatoperka you will get to know hard fishing life”; “Experience a different day, experience a fishing day!”) coupled with the demonstration of mending and sewing fishing nets called Fishing holidays. Fishing is promoted also through notions of healthy climate and food (Rogelja 2006) in relation to Istria or the Mediterranean more generally. We will show the impact of a host of different factors – economic (the possibility for EU funds aimed at sustainable development and preservation of traditional fishing) environmental (pollution, overfishing...), political (maritime borders) and historical (migration after the WWII) on our subject. Local innovations of authenticity are indeed deeply connected also with the historical context. The troubled history of the exodus of the Italian-speaking inhabitants (among whom there were also fishermen) who after the WWII left en masse the coastal towns of the present-day Slovenia constitutes, for example, a chapter in history that is still considered to be too problematic, to be openly talked about and refashioned for the purposes of tourism. Furthermore, the marketing of industrial fishing heritage is also not without its silences, since most of the factories were closed in the last 20 years and the fishing industry restructured, sometimes even collapsed due to unsuccessful attempts at privatization from 1991 onwards. After the dispute over the new maritime border between Slovenia and Croatia, Slovene fishermen on the one hand experienced a narrowing of fishing territories but on the other, by joining the EU in 2004, they also experienced new possibilities derived from EU funds for regional development. Regional development funds have provided new opportunities and marketing niches, whereby authenticity becomes on one hand popular and up-to-date and on the other it is still semantically loose enough to provide a space than can accommodate the hidden and suppressed historical episodes (wrapping them up in phrases such as “mysterious traces of the past”) and simultaneously allow for the development of new innovative contents. Ideas on authenticity are ubiquitous and all-pervasive, cropping up in everyday conversa- tions with local people, among researchers of University of Primorska in Koper discussing conservation of culture, heritage and traditional Istrian sˇagra [feast] (Heritage LIVE!3) among tourist and restaurant workers as well as among farmers and food producers for whom authenticity became a popular trade mark and economic good. In this, authenticity is indisputably connected with consumerism

3The results of the applicative project HERITAGE LIFE: dedisˇcˇina v živo / HERITAGE LIFE: heritage life were published in the edited volume Istrski prazniki: preteklost, sedanjost, avtenticˇnost: sˇagre in ljudski prazniki v severni Istri [Istrian feasts: past, present, authenticity: sˇagra and folk feasts in Northern Istria] (edited by Aleksander Panjek 2012). Heritage LIVE! was a training project dealing with identifying, preserving and presenting the cultural heritage in Slovenian-Croatian cross-border zone. The booklet brings articles on tradition, heritage and authenticity, some ethnological discussions on these issues, recommendations, tools and criteria for sustainable local development. 110 III Innovation: Uses of Authenticity in North-Eastern Adriatic Corner and modernity despite its manifest penchant for the anti- or pre-modern. As Regina Bendix stated: The quest for authenticity is a peculiar longing, at once modern and antimodern. It is oriented toward the recovery of an essence whose loss has been realized only through modernity, and whose recovery is feasible only through methods and sentiments created in modernity (1997: 8). The third part “Innovation: uses of authenticity in the NE Adriatic corner” is divided into three chapters. The chapter entitled “The Yugoslav and post-Yugoslav coastal tourism” provides the historical framework for understanding the specifics of fishing tourism in one of Slovenia’s foremost coastal towns, Izola. Although the dominant characteristics of contemporary Mediterranean coastal tourism (the dis- crepancy between material and symbolic aspects, consumerism, capitalist relations of production on the coast, etc. ) are more or less applicable to any number of different coastal regions around the world, the East and North-Eastern Adriatic shores have historical peculiarities that merged with this general contemporary development and need to be considered if we are to understand more fully the present-day coastal dynamics in this area. Yugoslav tourism has an important place in this story as it reflects on the meaning of consumption and on the relationship between individual experience and ideology, be it Western, Yugoslav or post- Yugoslav one. The peculiarity of the cohabitation of domestic and international tourism in SFR Yugoslavia reveals both the specificity of socialist past as well as the introduction of capitalist relations of production for the coastal region. Tourism development within the NE Adriatic grew out of different political experiments and personal experiences that should be taken into account when trying to understand the present situation. With the exception of a few books and articles (Grandits and Taylor 2010; Ballinger 2006) not much has in fact been written about Yugoslav tourism and its wider contexts. Following some of these written sources as well as personal communication and interviews with the local actors, various historical peculiarities with the accent on domestic tourism will be illuminated. The aim is to describe the context of Yugoslav and post-Yugoslav tourism along the Eastern Adriatic coastal region with the emphasis on the Slovenian coast. As seen in this particular setting it would be wrong to understand transition (from socialist to post- socialist condition) as a passage from one condition to the other, as a mere replacement of the previous routines and institutions by a new set of mentalities, routines and institutions. Following Stark and Bruszt (1998) and equipped with the ethnographic examples from the present-day Slovene coast we believe that “...the structural innovations that will bring about dynamic transformations are more likely to entail complex reconfigurations of institutional elements rather than their imme- diate replacement” (ital. orig. 1998: 83). In the case of post-Yugoslav tourism, the introduction of new elements took place in combination with a re-arrangement of the previous, already existing forms such as domestic tourism, family economies or the development of holiday camps and holiday homes for workers and members of labour unions. In the post-Yugoslav period Slovene tourism industry needed to rethink its strategies and concurrent destination branding. In this process the image III Innovation: Uses of Authenticity in North-Eastern Adriatic Corner 111 of Slovenia as a Yugoslav ski-centre for middle class workers gave way to a more diversified destination identity. Furthermore, coastal Slovenia began flirting with the Mediterranean imaginary and its new consumer-oriented logic. In the local context, tourism actors merged together existing practices with new free market initiatives underlining the need to survive in the local environment but also stay competitive within the global market. The chapter “Fishing for Tourists” will outline an ethnography of tourism on fishing boats, providing also an additional link to an ethnographic film Fishing Tourists by Natasˇa Rogelja. With this ethnography we underpin the analysis of domestic tourism along the Slovenian coast, understanding it as a specific part of a broader tourist culture that has been on the one hand under-researched in the anthropology of tourism while on the other it forms a significant part of tourist culture within the NE Adriatic region. In that respect we will try to explain how in a given place a tourist culture comes to emerge and what is, or was, the role of domestic tourism. Furthermore, we argue that the type of fishing boat excursions as presented in the second part of this chapter are on one hand a modified form of syndicalist holidays developed within Yugoslav tourism and on the other they constitute fishermen’s innovative tactics and resilience developed in the period of the demise of Slovene fishing. It was precisely the promotion of authenticity, cohabitation with nature and genuineness that allowed, supported and rendered possible such innovations.4 Finally, the last chapter within this part “How Authentic is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia?” rounds up the discussion by reflecting on theories and uses of authen- ticity within selected local environment, with the emphasis on fishing. Here we will comment upon images of the sea, the Mediterranean, the Adriatic, (Slovenian) Istria, fishermen, sea-food, and wine as deployed in selected tourist materials as well as in everyday conversations in given local settings. The chapter as a whole contributes to the debate on authenticity by pointing out local uses of authenticity within a specific regional context of the NE Adriatic, describing how locals themselves perceive, use and transform tourist representations and other external images which impinge upon them in the context of contemporary coastal develop- ment in Slovenia.

References

Ballinger P (2006) Lines in the water, peoples on the Map: maritime Museums and the represen- tation of cultural boundaries in the Upper Adriatic. Narodna umjetnost 43(1):15–39 Bendix R (1997) In search of authenticity: the formation of folklore studies. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison

4The sustainable development discourse that is also of great importance for the case presented will be discussed in the Part IV. 112 III Innovation: Uses of Authenticity in North-Eastern Adriatic Corner

Boissevain J, Selwyn T (2004) Contesting the foreshore: tourism, society and politics on the coast. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam Grandits H, Taylor K (2010) Yugoslavia’s sunny side: a history of tourism in socialism (1950s– 1980s). Central European University Press, Budapest/New York Kilometre Zero (2014) http://www.obala.net/obala/kilometer-nic-58726/clanek Accessed 10 Feb 2016 Kousis M (2004) Marine and coastal issues in local environmental conflict: Greece, Spain, and Portugal. In: Boissevain J, Selwyn T (eds) Contesting the foreshore: tourism, society and politics on the coast. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam, pp 205–232 Kousis M, Selwyn T, Clark D (eds) (2011) Contested Mediterranean spaces: ethnographic essays in honour of Charles Tilly, vol 4. Berghahn Books, New York Kramar J (1987) Izola – mesto ribicˇev in delavcev. Lipa, Koper Kramar J (2002) Izola – mesto ribicˇev in delavcev. Zgodovinsko drusˇtvo za južno Primorsko, Koper Macdonald S (1997) A people’s story; heritage, identity and authenticity. In: Rojek C, Urry J (eds) Touring culures. Routledge, London, pp 155–175 Nadel-Klein J (2003) Fishing for heritage. Modernity and loss along the Scottish coast. Berg, Oxford Panjek A (ed) (2012) Istrski praznik: preteklost, sedanjost, avtenticˇnost: sˇagre in ljudski prazniki v severni Istri [Istrian feasts: past, present, authenticity: sˇagra and folk feasts in Northern Istria]; Univerza na Primorskem, Znanstveno-raziskovalno sredisˇcˇe, Univerzitetna zalozˇba Annales Rogelja N (2006). Ribicˇi pripovedujejo. Etnografija ribisˇtva med miljskim in savudrijskim polotokom. Koper: Univerza na Primorskem, Znanstveno-raziskovalno sredisˇcˇe, Zalozˇba Annales Selwyn T (1996) The tourist image: myths and myth making in tourism. Wiley, New York Selwyn T (2004) Privatising the Mediterranean coastline. In: Boissevain J, Selwyn T (eds) Contesting the foreshore: tourism, society and politics on the coast. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam, pp 35–60 Stark D, Bruszt L (1998) Postsocialist pathways. Transforming politics and property in East Central Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Theodossopoulos D (2013) Laying claim to authenticity: five anthropological dilemmas. Anthro- pological Quarterly 86(2):337–360 Urry J (1990) The Tourist Gaze: leisure and travel in contemporary societies, theory, culture & society. Sage Publication, London Urry J (2001) Globalising the Tourist Gaze. Department of Sociology, Lan caster University, http:// www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/sociology/papers/Urry-Globalising-the-Tourist-Gaze.pdf. Accessed 10 Jan 2017 Welcome to Izola (2016) http://www.slovenia.info/?_ctg_kraji¼2784&lng¼2. Accessed 10 Feb 2016 Chapter 5 Yugoslav and Post-Yugoslav Coastal Tourism

Abstract This chapter provides the historical framework for understanding the specifics of fishing tourism in one of Slovenia’s foremost coastal towns, Izola. Although the dominant characteristics of contemporary Mediterranean coastal tourism (the discrepancy between material and symbolic aspects, consumerism, capitalist relations of production on the coast, etc. ) are more or less applicable to any number of different coastal regions around the world, the East and North- Eastern Adriatic shores have historical peculiarities that merged with this general contemporary development and need to be considered if we are to understand more fully the present-day coastal dynamics in this area. Yugoslav tourism has an important place in this story as it reflects on the meaning of consumption and on the relationship between individual experience and ideology, be it Western, Yugoslav or post-Yugoslav one. The peculiarity of the cohabitation of domestic and international tourism in SFR Yugoslavia reveals both the specificity of socialist past as well as the introduction of capitalist relations of production for the coastal region. Tourism development within the NE Adriatic grew out of different political experiments and personal experiences that should be taken into account when trying to understand the present situation.

Keywords SFRY • Coastal tourism • Domestic tourism • Post-Yugoslav tourism • Holiday camps for workers

This chapter provides the historical framework for understanding the specifics of fishing tourism in one of Slovenia’s foremost coastal towns, Izola. Although the dominant characteristics of contemporary Mediterranean coastal tourism (the dis- crepancy between material and symbolic aspects, consumerism, capitalist relations of production on the coast, etc. ) are more or less applicable to any number of different coastal regions around the world, the East and North-Eastern Adriatic shores have historical peculiarities that merged with this general contemporary development and need to be considered if we are to understand more fully the present-day coastal dynamics in this area. Yugoslav tourism has an important place in this story as it reflects on the meaning of consumption and on the relationship between individual experience and ideology, be it Western, Yugoslav or post- Yugoslav one. The peculiarity of the cohabitation of domestic and international tourism in SFR Yugoslavia reveals both the specificity of socialist past as well as

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 113 N. Rogelja, A. Janko Spreizer, Fish on the Move, MARE Publication Series 11, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-51897-8_5 114 5 Yugoslav and Post-Yugoslav Coastal Tourism the introduction of capitalist relations of production for the coastal region. Tourism development within the NE Adriatic grew out of different political experiments and personal experiences that should be taken into account when trying to understand the present situation. There are a number of specificities of the Slovenian coast that cannot be subsumed under the general framework of Yugoslav coastal tourism. These include the vicinity of Italian border, the presence of Italian national community known as autochthonous Italian speaking minority as well as Slovenia’s Littoral historical connection with Italy. Such connections were established through trading, family ties and knowledge of Italian, direct vicinity of the “West”, TV and radio networks that crossed boarders and enabled the collective watching of Italian TV series in the coolness of stone houses on hot summer afternoons or simply the pleasure of shopping in Trieste with special border permits that allowed for higher fluidity of people, goods and services across the border (Orehovec 1997). Nonetheless a brief look at the trends in – and the general characteristic of – Yugoslav coastal tourism is necessary to gain a more grounded perspective. We need to understand the com- plexities of family economies within the former SFR Yugoslavia, the peculiarities of Yugoslav domestic tourism, the development of (often illegal) week-end retreats, the development of holiday camps and holiday homes for workers and members of labor unions, Labor Youth Brigades and the meaning of consumption and the merging of domestic and international guests, values and lifestyles after the 1960s, which all left their marks on all the ex-Yugoslav republics. It will also help us to make sense of the ethnography of the fishing boat excursions in Izola, which are indirectly connected with syndicalist holidays developed as part of Yugoslav tourism (Rogoznica 2014). All these official and unofficial strands taken from the history of Yugoslav tourism are, to various degrees and from various angles, echoed in all the present-day ex-Yugoslav republics resulting in a specific post-socialist scenario, quite different from Romania’s, Bulgaria’s or Polish one and may, in our opinion, be called a post-Yugoslav one. The compendium on Yugoslav tourism entitled Yugoslavia’s Sunny Side (Grandits and Taylor 2010) revealed some of these “sunny” fragments from the history of Yugoslav tourism and by doing so cast light on the: ...nature of Yugoslavia’s idiosyncratic version of consumer society, which seem to have been more concerned with offering free time and personal fulfilment than a cornucopia of consumer goods, attractive though the latter were when visitors from the “West” displayed them at resorts or when opportunity arose to enjoy cross-border shopping. (Walton 2010:X) The following section will attempt to sketch the historical outline, drawing on a combination of geographic and historical-anthropological literature, state statistics from the period of SFR Yugoslavia and our ethnographic stories that try to bring attention back to the specificities of the Slovenian Littoral. 5.1 Historical Sketch 115

5.1 Historical Sketch

In 1945 Democratic Federal Yugoslavia (DFY) that subsequently became Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia (FPRY), inherited the Habsburg tradition of spas and health tourism. This kind of elite tourism flourished mostly in the course of the nineteenth century and was connected with the development of the railway and steamer. In the period extending from 1841 to 1857, new transport links connected and Trieste with their outlying territories and several hotels such as “Kvarner” in and “Palace” in Portorož were built. Later on, during socialist times, Yugoslavia broke away from elite tourism in favor of domestic tourism premised upon the reproduction of the working class (Ballinger 2003). Introducing the institution of summer holidays to an overwhelmingly peasant country became a political experiment aiming towards an industrialized state, and many from the generation born in the 1920s and 1930s would see the sea or experience a holiday for the first time in their lives. After the expulsion of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia from the Cominform in 1948, Yugoslavia faced an unstable economic position and began opening out towards Western tourists. As Hall observed, Western financial aid for infrastructural development that went into the construction of the Adriatic highway, significantly stimulated tourist industry within Yugoslavia (Hall 2003: 343). The Tourist Association of Yugoslavia was established in 1953 and domestic tourism, though still an important part of Yugoslavia’s tourism, was complemented with foreign tourism. In 1963 the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY1) developed from the previous FPRY. Within that period reforms encouraged private enterprise and liberal travel policy, permitting foreigners to travel freely throughout the country and Yugoslav citizens to travel worldwide and to work throughout Western Europe. This situation fostered specific experiences on the part of Yugoslav tourists that were not common in most of the other communist oriented countries. Furthermore, under the SFR Yugoslavia government, tourism became one of the most developed sectors of the Yugoslav economy. Yugoslav tourism aimed at several directions; attracting foreign tourists with hard currency, supporting socialist projects of building a nation in the spirit of brotherhood through domestic tourism migrations and putting accent on personal fulfilment and free time instead of on consumerism (Walton 2010: x). The latter point can however be questioned and challenged through the well-established cross-border practice of shopping among Yugoslav citizens in Trieste and elsewhere. Many of ex-Yugoslav citizens remember, with a good measure of nostalgia, the summer Ponte Roso excursions, where they would buy various goods (such as Lewis jeans), of which, they felt, was a shortage in ex-Yugoslavia (personal communication, May 2014). However, the availability of time and space for the enjoyment of leisure, the accessibility of travel within and beyond Yugoslav borders after the year 1960 and the possibility to enjoy – in

1In the following text we will use the word Yugoslavia referring to the period between 1945–1991. 116 5 Yugoslav and Post-Yugoslav Coastal Tourism however a limited version – the so-called “Western goods” and consumerism (ibid) created a unique situation as well as chartered a specific development for the future. From 1965 onwards, tourism expanded rapidly, mostly within two Yugoslav republics, Croatia and Slovenia. Each Slovenian coastal town inherited a different tourist infrastructure and during the years developed a different “cover story” (Izola being a town of fishermen and workers, Piran building its image as a medieval town, Koper as a port and Portorož as a town of flowers still holding on to its fading memories of elite tourism of the pre-Yugoslav past). The following story told by a woman in her mid-60-ies who used to spend holidays in Portorož with her mother, brings to the fore a number of details connected with Yugoslav holidays in Portorož as well as some memories of the pre-Yugoslav middle class life. I visited Portorož with my daughter and with my son-in-law just a few years ago. That summer they rented an apartment in Izola. We walked through Portorož and I hardly recognized the place because of all the hotels that had been built. My first memories of holidays are connected with Portorož. The company where my mother, who was born in 1920s’, used to work had a holiday home in Portorož ...that was after the WWII, around the year 1959. It was situated a bit further on from the Hotel Palace. At that time there was just this hotel. The holiday camp was near the gardening or forestry plantation house ...I remember the first year when we came, I was 13 years old. We completely cleared up an old villa. There was still some furniture and things in the villa from people who used to live there. Volunteers, my mother’s co-workers, removed the furniture and other personal things that were still left in the house. We cleaned up the place and whitewashed the walls. We all worked. Shock-working, we said. Only after we tied up the place we started to enjoy our holidays. In the following years we used to go there a lot for our vacations. We had three hot meals per day. A cook made it for us in a common kitchen. [What did you do while on a holiday?] Mostly we were out on a spree and we took some evening walks, where my mother reminisced on her girlhood. She spoke of the promenades she used to take in her youth in the late 1930s as a middle-class family from Ljubljana (personal communication, May 2010). The story reveals several intertwined childhood memories on “Yugoslav” holidays in Portorož: it hints at a suppressed exodus story; it speaks of the nationalization of property of the Italian- speaking inhabitants who used to live in Portorož until the exodus2; it describes Portorož as a place of a one-time elite tourism, of a well- regulated environment with gardening and forestry plantation houses (porto-rož meaning the port of roses) and it reveals the new culture of workers holidays which came into being during the period of SFR Yugoslavia. The culture of workers holidays was based upon collective voluntary work, a growing familiarity with the concept of leisure time and holidaying, where people from different social settings would meet and spend time together, going for walks along the coast, sitting and drinking, and so on. For some of the people from the older generation (such as the

2The development of holiday houses was often connected with nationalization of private proper- ties. On Debeli rticˇ, near the Italian border, police holiday houses were built on the property of a “French count”. Nowadays the Ministry of the Interior owns these holiday houses, but some reminders of the Yugoslav as well as pre-Yugoslav past are still present, as, for example, the common toilets and kitchen or terraced gardens stretching from house towards the sea as well as the trees planted by the count (personal communication, May 2010). 5.1 Historical Sketch 117 narrator’s mother) the walks were a reminder of a bygone middle- class era, in which walks were promenades and entertainment was of a different order. The above ethnographic detail may also point to the middle-class personal identification that may have been rooted in observing foreign guests of Hotel Palace and seeking points of identification with them. The narrator and her mother have visited Portorož on a number of occasions since 1965, after SFR Yugoslavia had already opened up its borders to foreigners, so that contacts between Yugoslav workers and foreigners were highly likely. The growth of large hotels along the Adriatic coast and the creation of camps and holiday homes were paralleled with the creation of private accommodation for tourists. Basic Low on Catering Activities in1965 permitted Yugoslav citizens to house paying guests and to establish private catering enterprise while the credits from the government facilitated the building of such apartments (Ballinger 2006: 5). Tourism in SFR Yugoslavia was highly seasonal (from May till September) and was concentrated mostly along the Croatian coast. Due to economic success of tourism the state invested heavily in the tourist industry in Croatia in subsequent years (Gosar 1990). After the WWII, several areas such as Istria, which had previously suffered from isolation and economic underdevelopment, were transformed radically due to tourism development (Allcock 1986). As observed by several researchers, prior to 1991 up to 80% of all tourist activities in SFR Yugoslavia took place along the Croatian coastline and domestic tourism was still predominant (Gosar 1990). Domestic tourism can be further understood through several sub-forms such as holidays homes, camps, second homes (vikendica, vikend), car or motorcycling trips and Labor Youth Brigades (Grandits and Taylor 2010), all contributing to a specific tourism development along the Adriatic coast. If international tourism was orientated towards tourist centres along the Slovene and Croatian coast, such as Istria and Dubrovnik, domestic tourists, who travelled the country with trains, motorcycles and later on with cars, found their way to both – the tourist centres as well as some less developed regions of SFR Yugoslavia (Peljesˇac, remote places and islands in Dalmatia such as Bisˇevo, Lastovo, Vis zones, closed to foreign guests until 1990s’, and inland regions such as Bosnian canyons...). As such, domestic tourism supported the underdeveloped regions of the country and helped spread tourism throughout the whole SFR Yugoslavia. Such consumerism was allowed and supported by the state as it was seen to be beneficial economically as well as in the context of nation building. Similarly, to the Yugoslav military service, the purpose of which was also to mix people from different parts of the country (young Slovenian men were for example sent to Serbia or Macedonia and Macedonian men to Slovenia), domestic tourism in SFR Yugoslavia also fulfilled this role by making connections, mixing people (many intimate relations were established during hol- idays), and domesticating culturally very different places of “one brotherhood nation”. Additionally, the Youth Labour Brigade can also be seen as another form of domestic tourism that was especially popular among the youth. Numerous “happy memories” attached to summer work combined with bathing and first romances are 118 5 Yugoslav and Post-Yugoslav Coastal Tourism still circulating in the social world of ex-SFR Yugoslavia. The following story sketches the Youth Labour Brigades experience as a special kind of youth holiday, partly comparable to nowadays exchanges of youth volunteers. I do not belong to the Labour Youth Brigade generation; we were more camping guys. But I remember how we visited my cousin, who was in the brigade in Slovenian Istria, I think this was in 1980. He went to Sˇmarje near Koper, his brigade was involved in building the waterworks. He didn’t go to the sea with his family, so the brigade was an opportunity for him to bathe in the sea. It was Sunday and brigadiers had a free day for visits. Our uncle took us to San Simon to bathe. My cousin was a teenager and of course they teased him, how was the front with the girls. We, the youngest ones were all ears, while mother and uncle were laughing and whispering in turn. Certainly my cousin did not reveal anything of use, except to say that the commander of the brigade ordered the use of condoms and suitable age. Apart from this fading memory I also remember our visit to San Simon, at that time it was not urbanized as today but yet it was full of people who would come and make the water quite muddy. My mother didn’t want to enter the water because she was used to crystal-clear water of the Dalmatian sea, while here the water was full of sea-grass and quite murky. For our holidays, we didn’t go to Slovenian coast; that was at best a destination for a one-day excursion. Later on we sometimes visited friends who had second homes in Piran but we would never spend family holidays on the Slovenian coast (personal communica- tion, May 2014). An important part of domestic tourism was connected with vikend – second homes. Apart from being an important part of domestic tourism, second homes also reflect the attitude towards private property in SFR Yugoslavia. As observed by Tylor, ...the private property was not mentioned in the earlier 1953 constitution that had taken leave of Soviet-style centralization, but it had also not been explicitly forbidden (Boric´ 1996 cited in Taylor 2010:180). Furthermore, the constitution of the new SFR Yugoslavia guaranteed the individual right of ownership to items of personal use, i.e., that were not utilized for production and the article 23 permitted the ownership of houses and apartments for the satisfaction of “personal needs” (Taylor 2010: 180). As observed by Tylor, this formulation apparently endorsed the second home. A 1968 report on tourism capacity3 speaks of growing popularity of second homes. As for the Slovenian coast, some 230 weekend cottages were recorded in Piran in SFR Yugoslavia, many of them obtained through the nationalization process (Jersˇicˇ 1968). Slovene geog- raphers were among the first who contributed to the study of second homes in Istria. In 1968 Matjaž Jersˇicˇ published a study on secondary holiday cottages in Slovenia and West Istria. He established that in the proceeding 15 years, more than 3000 private weekend houses were built or adapted from existing properties in Slovenia and along the West Istrian coast, and he attributed the ownership of second homes to the urban population with a full two-third of owners resident in the capital, Ljubljana (Jersˇicˇ 1968 in Taylor 2010: 181). The following ethnographic story reveals some of the details connected to second homes in Slovenia.

3Uslovi privredjivanja samostalnih ugostitelja. Domovi odmora, turisticˇke vile i vikendice, Stalna konferencija gradova Jugoslavije, 1968. Unpublished report, National Library of Serbia (cited in Taylor 2010: 180). 5.1 Historical Sketch 119

We went to Piran for the May Day holidays with my schoolmates; it was in the first year of my secondary school. Parents allowed us to stay there for a few days, because we went to the weekend retreat owned by one of my classmates’ parents. I think they were probably convinced that her parents will stay with us too, so they let us go. At that time Piran was full of people from Ljubljana. Wealthier people had their second homes in Piran. We travelled by train. The travel alone was a special experience for us; a train was pulling in slowly. Afterwards we went with the bus or we hitchhiked to Piran. I don’t remember clearly what we did there. I know for sure that we didn’t swim in the sea because it was still cold and it was impossible to get warm in those damp houses. People usually started to use second homes after the May Day Holidays. During the winter they would stay empty due to the lack of insulation. In Piran we went for a small drink ...we didn’t have enough money ... and then we waited for disco Three parrots to open. It was very cold in the evening so we took a walk to the church and to the walls and we went to someone’s else weekend retreat to warm up. The boy was from the same school; his parents had a neighbouring weekend house to where we were staying. In this house almost the whole class had been invited by this boy and it seemed a lot of fun to us. It was almost like during school breaks. We put our sleeping bags on the flour and because there was some 20 us in the room, it soon got warm. We experienced nothing but joy of being together at the seaside; bits of romances were in the air. Finally, nobody felt like going to the disco, the entrance was expensive and there was cold wind blowing outside. We were also tired from drinking. The whole night we would talk and laugh, so we hardly got any sleep. In the morning some of us had to leave for Ljubljana as parents would not allow us to stay another night. In the train we all fell asleep. It was snowing in Ljubljana. It was horrible. I had light shoes on and I remember shivering with cold. This was around 1984 (personal communication 2014). The census of 1981 listed 340,000 second homes in SFR Yugoslavia owned by Yugoslavs. These numbers are much bigger in reality as many of these holiday cottages were built without proper documentation.4 Instead of using hotels, a large number of Yugoslavs spent their holidays in second homes and camps. Camps were spread across several locations along the coast of NE Adriatic. Private caravans situated in those camps were in a way comparable to the well-established practice of second home holidays, as people tended to go each summer in the same camp. Several of these touristic camps are still in use today5 and caravan owners and their families still constitute (today and in the Yugoslav context) one of the more significant groups of tourists on the NE coast. Although the “socialist worker holiday camps” are slowly disappearing, camping holidays are still popular and memories of camping holidays are still vivid. Many of the stories connected to

4Often caravans would be parked on the non-urbanized land and slowly such areas developed into illegal caravan holiday settlements with huts (such was the example of Portic´ in village Peroj near Fažana in nowadays Croatia). 5After 1991, and during the war, some of the camps were used as refugee settlements and were later renovated (as for example the camp named 13th of May in Fažana, Croatian Istria). Also along the Slovene coast, there are still several camping sites today. Camping site Jadranka in Izola and another one in Strunjan, though privately owned, they still resemble the connection with the socialist holiday camps; the same wooden huts, and immobile caravans, occupied by the same guests, who have been coming year after year and who would hire for a longer stretch of time their own same pitches, where they would put up their immobile homes, and take care of the vegetation they planted and their small kitchen gardens (personal observation and communication, May 2010). 120 5 Yugoslav and Post-Yugoslav Coastal Tourism summer holidays in camps along the E Adriatic coast that we have heard were positive. Above all, people remembered the relaxed atmosphere (with a shared kitchen, where the interactions between visitors often developed into long lasting friendships) and stressed the aspect of low budget holidays in camps (personal communication, May 2014).6 According to sporadic ethnographic documentation, the German tourists too had various positive images of SFR Yugoslavia (mostly connected to the Croatian coast), stressing again the relaxed atmosphere, the low prices and the general affability and non-superiority of local population in compar- ison to other Mediterranean locations (personal communication, May 2014). Recently, we heard a story of an elderly man, our acquaintance from Frankfurt, who regularly went for summer holidays to SFR Yugoslavia. The story reveals a measure of ambiguity in the relations between German tourists and Yugoslavs, on the one hand perfectly amicable, but on the other still overcast by the shadow of the WWII. In 1960 he made friends with Yugoslav (Slovene) manual workers, who went to Germany for occasional work so as to buy a better car. Back home the workers were choir singers of a well-known Yugoslav choir APZ, whose members would occasionally spend their collective holiday at the Croatian coastline. In the summer of 1961 they invited a German friend to join them for a holiday in the camp of Tucˇepi near Makarska (at that time the Makarska region was remote from any tourist centres). Reservations in the camp were made for the choir members only, but they managed to “smuggle through” their German friend. The whole choir knew about the German, but they all covered for him, ordering food for him in the dining hall, so he would not have to talk and, most importantly, remained incognito. As he remembers, the whole episode was quite an adventure for him. On the last day, when the choir was leaving the camp, the manager of the camp came up to him, patted him on the back and said: “I knew you are Sˇvaba7 [German], but you are a good one!” Along the Slovene coast, tourism developed in different ways mostly in accor- dance with the specificities of each coastal town – Koper, Izola, Portorož and Piran. As one of the inhabitants from Koper stated: “...the port of Koper closed the sea and rendered impossible the development of tourism”. Izola on the other hand built its identity around the fishing industry and kept its image throughout the Yugoslav and Slovene period as fishermen’s and workers’ town. Although Izola had the capacity of 300 beds for tourists before the WWII in the period after the war, tourism was slow to develop. In 1952 Izola started to develop holiday camps for children in villa Isolina and several restaurants for visitors were opened such as At the Fishermen, Tourist, Park (Kramar 2002: 269). Slowly the former hotel Luigi Menis was renovated in 1956 and renamed into Zora [Dawn]. In 1962 they started to build holiday homes and bungalows in Belvedere and later on, two camps

6Slovene families who go on camping holidays along the Croatian coast today stressed similar qualities as their parents’ generation. Child memories of “Adriatic” vacations are often stressed as an important factor in their holiday choice (personal communication, May 2010). 7The word Sˇvaba was used in SFR Yugoslavia for Germans and carried pejorative connotations. 5.1 Historical Sketch 121

(Jadranka and Belvedere) were established (ibid: 270, 271). In the beginning of the 1980s, holiday houses for the retired were built as well as several syndicate homes and later on holiday homes for the handicapped (Tome Marinac 1994:130). Despite this development, tourism still only played a minor role in Izola around the 1980s (ibid), and the strong accent on syndicate tourism was specific to Izola. Portorož,on the other hand, focused the most (in comparison to other Slovene coastal towns) on foreign tourism, developing alongside also a measure of domestic tourism in the holiday homes. Tourist organization Portorož (TOP) was the biggest tourist orga- nization during the 1980s and it united several elite hotels such as Palace, Metropol, Triglav and others.8 In the year 1983 SOZD9 TIMAV was established and TOP Portorož was one of its units.10 In 1980s TOP Portorož advertised its offer also on foreign markets and invested in the building of nautical infrastructure in Portorož and oriented Portorož’s tourism also in the direction of the casino type of tourism.11 Piran on the other hand was always considered to be a sleepy town, stigmatized as a town of drug addicts or celebrated as a town with a rich history, building its narrative around culture, symbolized, for example, by the music tradition of Guiseppe Tartini (personal communication, May 2000). Piran was also specific for its numerous second homes, as many of the former Italian houses were transformed into weekend retreats of urban people (Jersˇicˇ 1968 in Taylor 2010). As Ballinger observed in the period following Tito’s death in 1981, the economy declined slowly and the efforts were made to liberalize it, including tourism. Whereas the 1974 Constitution had permitted small private businesses employing a max- imum five persons, a 1988 constitutional amendments opened up greater possibilities for private businesses. (2006:6) Nevertheless, the private sector (with the exception of family companies) was still associated with corruption in the popular discourse (personal communication, May 2014), and the political and economic situation in the second half of the 1980 that resulted in several restrictions (electricity, petrol ...) lowered the standard of living and influenced tourism development badly. Although in the 1980s SFR Yugoslavia was listed among the five most visited European destinations, all this changed with its political disintegration of the 1990s. It is interesting to note that in the early 1980s, a decade before the breakup of SFR Yugoslavia, the Slovene Tourist Society and Slovene central marketing enterprise already started putting a great deal of effort to market Slovenia,

8Nowadays most of these hotels are sold to foreign investors. 9SOZD is an acronym for sestavljena organizacija združenega dela, meaning joint organization for coordinated labour. 10SOZD TIMAV was divided into several work organizations Droga Portorož, TOP Portorož, Preskrba Koper in Jadran Sežana. Work organisations connected in several aspects (food produc- tion for hotels) as the idea was the new organization of agriculture, fishery, trade and tourism within the coastal region (Lisjak 1999). 11TOP Portorož offered also tourist transportation on fishing boats. The first boat to be converted to transport of tourists was a fishing boat with drag nets named Lastovka [swallow/flaying gurnard]. 122 5 Yugoslav and Post-Yugoslav Coastal Tourism developing slogans such as “Slovenia on the Sunny Side of the Alps” and “Slovenia my country”, the latter fostering Slovene patriotism. An advertisement entitled “The guests are coming” promoted linden leaf and presented tourist workers from selected tourist areas getting ready for the tourist season (Slovenija moja dežela).12 Among them was an owner of a sea boat intended for passenger transportation. The advertisement promoted images of well-regulated places and tourist workers pre- pared for foreign, or at least wealthier, tourists. However, as observed by Gosar in 1990, the dominant type of tourism in Slovenia was still transit tourism, since “Slovenia has not yet succeeded in creating an “image” as a vacation area” (ibid: 37). Nonetheless, Slovenia’s tourist industry played an important middle-man role in distributing tourists from Europe to the Adriatic coast, and the Slovenian based travel agency Kompas Yugoslavia had a share of 43% of all package tours in the North Adriatic Area (Gosar 2009: 16). As Gosar further observed: In times of the young automobile society, as leisure travel by air was rare and overseas resorts expensive, the geopolitical locality [of Slovenia] close to the consumer population, and, at the same time, on the edge of the western world was of an outstanding importance. (ibid) Most of the Slovene municipalities with major tourist infrastructure were located along the traffic line between the Austrian Alps and Croatian Mediterranean (Jersˇicˇ 1992). Slovene travel agencies soon became major tour operators within SFR Yugoslavia for the wider European market. Slovenia somehow accommodated to the fact of being a transit country and partly continued with this tradition also after 1991.

5.2 After 1991

After 1991 sovereign national states made their own separate entry onto the tourist market. Slovene and Croatian tourism continued to invest in marinas and nautical tourism but in several aspects national tourism was still connected with the Yugoslav tourist heritage – such as the importance of domestic tourism or nowa- days international ex-Yugoslav tourism. Several hybrid forms of domestic tourism developed, such as the Slovene-Croatian exchange tourism (Croatian coastal resorts are still visited numerously by Slovenes and Slovene spas and ski resorts became lately very popular among Croatians while in both cases people “feel as though at home” (personal communication, May 2014)); daily excursions of semi-domestic

12This brand was sold to the chain of supermarkets Spar and it is now used for the promotion of Slovenian goods. At the time, an interview with the Founder of Studio Marketing Jure Apih was published, which generated heated debates over authorship, triggered by the act of selling this brand. The objection was that this was a marketing campaign promoting tourism in Slovenia and was in concordance with raising patriotic feelings, and the idea that Slovenia as a country is not any more truly connected with SFR Yugoslavia (Hladnik-Milharcˇicˇ 2012). 5.2 After 1991 123 tourists (between ex-Yugoslav republics), weekend excursions or second-home holidays within the territory of ex-SFR Yugoslavia. However, according to statis- tics, the 1991 war had a disastrous impact on Slovene tourism. As reported by Slovene geographers following Statistical yearbooks of Slovenia, in 1992 Slovenia’s tourism had reached (in terms of nights spent in tourist amenities) a mere 55, 3% of its peak year in 1986 (Gosar 2009). Following consumer interests and the general market Slovenia is still divided into several regions such as: the coastal region, the alpine region, the sub-Pannonian thermal spa region and other sub-regions as well as communities such as Ljubljana, Postojna, etc. Coastal region still leads in terms of attracting tourists, while regional tourism-exchange forms are nowadays an important part of Slovene coastal tourism. Observing the bus station in Piran on a busy spring weekend in April 2014 we were able to spot several Austrian buses, an Italian bus as well as Slovene buses from Murska Sobota and Maribor. In the years following the break-up of SFRY, Slovene tourism sector was exposed to the process of restructuring from the previous socialist economy to the new mode of capitalist privatisation. New tourist companies were established and Slovene tourist industry strove to attract foreign capital. But since the sector was not recognized as a good opportunity for foreign capital, Slovene tourism did not develop in the direction of mass tourism. This failure latter turned into a strength as the tourist sector started pointing out that Slovene tourism is a mode of tourism tailored according to the measure of man. After 1991 experts in tourism thus opted for individual, more personalised approach where people would be accepted as persons. They started to develop offers of active, cultural, congress, health and wellness tourism. In 1995 the Center for Promotion of tourism was established and then replaced by Slovene tourist organisation in 1999. In later years Casino tourism flourished for a short time in locations close to the borders (SRST 2012). Slovenia explicitly reconfigured its tourism emphasis by replacing the slogan “On the Sunny side of the Alps” with “The green spot of Europe” in 1995, stressing the importance of nature while broadening its scope from the Alps to the entire variety of Slovene regions. Slovene tourism industry needed to rethink its strategies and concurrent destination branding and in this process the image of Slovenia as a Yugoslav ski-centre for middle class workers gave way to a more diversified destination identity. In 2002 marketing experts promoted Slovenia in all its seg- ments (not only in tourism but also in economy, culture and policy) with the slogan “Slovenia invigorates”, stressing the point that the new state within the EU may surprise guests with what is has to offer. The strategy for the period between 2002 and 2007 offered 10 tourist destinations, the coast being one of them. Striving for a robust tourist image, coastal Slovenia began flirting with the Mediterranean imag- inary as well as with a new consumer-oriented logic. Tourist institutions started to offer products, such as wellness tourism, business and casino tourism. The strategy intended to develop several programmes including ethnological offers based on countryside and vine tourism; sport tourism with active and adrenalin tourism and experiential, adventurous and heritage tourism. Slovene Strategy of tourism development for the period between 2007 and 2011 with the intent to organise regional destination organisation (RDO) under the 124 5 Yugoslav and Post-Yugoslav Coastal Tourism initiative of Directorate for tourism of RS. The Karst Coastal region and coastal towns have not yet organised their RGO, due to some discordances with munici- palities. Coastal towns, on the other hand, have been able to develop their own directions. While Izola developed its initiatives in connection with rural tourism, Koper opened up the port for massive tourism through cruise ships, and Portorož, with a nearby airport, targeted also wealthier and more elite tourists with their private airplanes. The following years saw also the emergence of opportunities for sustainable tourism and in the coastal area this meant additional offers of fish and shell-growing farms for its visitors. Besides this, tourist workers still kept their standard offers for domestic tourists, such as sport events, solidarity tourism, joint association excursions for workers or offers for retired workers. Moving the emphasis from the Alps to the idea of greenness of Europe and further on to feelings, emotions and adventure in connection with sustainability and health, opened the space for domestic tourist as well as for fishermen to experience Slovenia in these novel dimensions but also to establish tourist business on the grounds of known relations. We could observe how in the local context, tourism actors (tourist agencies as well as fishermen) merged existing practices with new free market initiatives underlining the need to survive in the local environment but also stay competitive within the global market. In the new millennium, Slovenia is on the one hand seen to play along with the global trends, trying to find a specific niche to attract visitors, and on the other it still trades on some of the remnant Yugoslav holiday traditions. The youth health resort and children’s summer resort (aimed at poor children) in Debeli rticˇ is promoting itself with a new interpretation of Yugoslav tourism – solidarity tourism. In November 2013 the youth health and holiday resort celebrated the 50th anniversary with the slogan “Solidarity is building solid foundations”. For the purpose of this celebration, a poster was created showing old photos of youth labour brigades, of young people with spades in their hands building houses. Some photographs also showed young children and their teachers seen to be taking care of them. With the slogan “50 years ago the volunteers built pavilions in Debeli rticˇ, proving that strength is in unity and collective work. In Slovenia we attest to this once again by helping each other” the authors of the poster tried to draw visitor’s attention to the spirit of the former Yugoslav period. Alongside these facets reflecting previous traditions, the images of Mediterranean Sea are slowly starting to develop, posi- tioning Slovenia more securely within Europe. Even though the stress on the Mediterranean-ness became more accentuated only over the last decade, we could state together with Emilio Cocco that: ...the Eastern shores of the Adriatic-Ionian basin, with the exception of Greece and the partial exception of Croatia, have been largely excluded from what one can call the Mediterranean imaginary, both in terms of national identity making and territorial market- ing. (2006:7) In the period between 2004 and 2006 Slovenia’s national promotional activities were connected with the slogan “Slovenia Invigorates” trying to offer adventure, excitement and alternative as part of the holiday package. The stress was laid on 5.2 After 1991 125 adrenalin-rush activities (mostly in the mountain region), spas and thermal tourism (in sub-Pannonian region), casino tourism (around Nova Gorica and along coastal area), to mention the main ones. From 2008 onwards, a new national promotional slogan was developed: I FEEL sLOVEnija. A local tourist worker from the coastal region stated that today the emphasis is on emotions when promoting Slovenia. Given the suppressed historical episodes related to the present-day Slovene coastal areas (such as the Italian exodus), this broad framework is especially apt as it can blur historical details and redirect our attention to personal emotional experiences; to sounds, colours and words felt at any given moment. As stated on the Slovenian Government Communication Office’s official internet site: Slovenia’s brand ‘I feel Slovenia’ has been in use since 2007. The brand was developed with a view to increasing Slovenia’s competitiveness in different fields. It is no coincidence that the brand’s slogan is I feel Slovenia: one cannot get to know Slovenia by simply viewing its image – one must feel and experience it – through words, sounds, colours, touch, action, and experience. ‘I feel Slovenia’ is an emotional brand, and this sets it apart from the brands of other countries. (Country Brand: I Feel Slovenia 2016) Croatian promotional slogan, on the other hand, which states: Croatia – Mediter- ranean as it used to be, does not hesitate to draw and capitalize on the Mediterra- nean dimension, expresses a markedly different approach. It must, however, be conceded that the accent on the Mediterranean within the promotion of Slovenia’s Littoral is becoming more visible in the last decade mostly with the local promoters; the photographers and text writers of tourist brochures and local tourist organiza- tions. Nevertheless the restaurant menus along the present-day Slovene coast (some resembling the old Yugoslav ones because they have not changed much and others playing on nostalgic memories such as the newly opened restaurant “Sarajevo 1984” in Piran, serving cˇevapcˇicˇi13), Dalmatian imagery,14 and domestic tourism still play an important role as domestic and cross-regional weekend tourists, caravan owners, labour collectives but also school excursions continue to find their way to the region in the new millennium, whether due to nostalgia, recession, the vicinity of the sea or simply, a wish to explore new identity options. In this setting the introduction of new elements took place in combination with a re-arrangement of previous, already existing forms. The type of fishing boat

13Cˇevapcˇicˇi is a grilled dish of minced meat, found traditionally in the countries of SE Europe. They are considered a national dish in Bosnia and Herzegovina, but also common in Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, Slovenia, as well as in the Republic of Macedonia. Within SFR Yugoslavia cˇevapcˇicˇi were many times associated with summer holidays, barbecues on the beach or summer picnics in general. 14One of the tourist workers on the fishing boat has said how the Dalmatian music played on the tourist trips simply goes with the environment. Such obvious or natural place of Dalmatian music played in the context of Slovene coastal towns is, according to the interlocutor, perfectly under- standable to local people and perhaps German tourists who still remember Yugoslav holidays, but not so obvious to other foreign tourists or Slovene younger generation. Dalmatian imagery will be further discussed in the Chap. 6. 126 5 Yugoslav and Post-Yugoslav Coastal Tourism excursions to be presented in the next chapter are on the one hand a modified form of trade-union holidays developed within Yugoslav tourism and on the other they constitute fishermen’s innovative tactics developed in the period of the demise of Slovene fishing and in the context of capitalist economy. Together with Stark and Bruszt we claim that from this perspective we might become more alert to such notions as the transition to capitalism or transition to a market economy which lay more emphasis on the destination rather than the process, and aware that “behind such seemingly descriptive terms are teleological constructs in which concepts are driven by hypothetical end-states” (1998: 83). Following our ethnographic exam- ples, we came to understand that what we actually analysed was indeed the transformation (from socialist to post-socialist coastal tourism) instead of the transition, and that this transformation bore more impact on the actual process. As Stark and Bruszt proposed, transformations are about the introduction of new elements that take place most typically “... in combination with adaptation, rearrangements, permutations, and reconfigurations of already existing institutional forms” (ibid). In this process cˇevapcˇicˇi, Dalmatian music and domestic tourism were no longer the same as they used to be, neither did they disappear; they simply transformed into a hybrid form pulsating with its own life.

References

Allcock JB (1986) Yugoslavia’s tourist trade pot of gold or pig in a poke? Ann Tour Res 13(4):565–588 Ballinger P (2003) Selling Croatia or selling out Croatia? NCEER, Washington, DC Ballinger P (2006) Lines in the water, peoples on the Map: maritime Museums and the represen- tation of cultural boundaries in the Upper Adriatic. Narodna umjetnost 43(1):15–39 Boric´ T (1996) Eigentum und Privatisierung in Kroatien und Ungarn Wandel des Eigentumsrechtssystems und Entwicklung der Privatisierungsgesetzgebung. Wien New York Springer, Verlag Cocco E (2006) Introduction. The Adriatic space of identity. Narodna umjetnost 43(1):7–14 Country Brand: I Feel Slovenia (2016) http://www.ukom.gov.si/en/promotion_of_slovenia/coun try_brand_i_feel_slovenia/. Accessed 10 Feb 2016 Fishing holidays (2016) http://ribiske-pocitnice.si/partnerji/morski_ribolov/. Accessed 10 Feb 2016 Gosar A (1990) Some characteristics of tourism in Slovenia. Slov Stud J 12(1):33–42 Grandits H, Taylor K (2010) Yugoslavia’s sunny side: a history of tourism in socialism (1950s– 1980s). Central European University Press, Budapest/New York Hall D (2003) Rejuvenation, diversification and imagery: sustainability conflicts for tourism policy in the eastern Adriatic. J Sustain Tour 11(2–3):280–294 Heritage LIVE! (2016a) http://heritage-live.eu/?cat¼4. Accessed 26 Aug 2016 Heritage LIVE! (2016b) http://heritage-live.eu/?cat¼4. Accessed 10 Feb 2016 Hladnik-Milharcˇicˇ E (2012) Interview with Jure Apih: Slovenia, my country. http://www.dnevnik. si/objektiv/intervjuji/1042515592. Accessed 10 Feb 2016 Jersˇicˇ M (1968) Sekundarna pocˇitnisˇka bivalisˇcˇa v Sloveniji in Zahodni Istri. Geogr Vestn 40 (1):53–67 Jersˇicˇ M (1992) Turisticˇna geografija. DZS, Ljubljana References 127

Kramar J (2002) Izola – mesto ribicˇev in delavcev. Zgodovinsko drusˇtvo za južno Primorsko, Koper Lisjak BV (1999) Delamaris 1879–1999: 120 let iz morja v konzervo. Delamaris, Izola Orehovec M (1997) Delo Istrank v Trstu. Etnolog 7:115–129 Rogoznica D (2014) Aplikacija in uveljavitev modela socialisticˇnega turizma na slovenski obali (1947─1990). Glasilo Arhivskega drusˇtva in arhivov Slovenije Ljubljana 37(2):73–84 Slovenija moja dežela (1986) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v¼jk4ZJ8GDj_I. Accessed 26 Aug 2016. Stark D, Bruszt L (1998) Postsocialist pathways. Transforming politics and property in East Central Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Taylor K (2010) My own Vikendica: holiday cottages as idyll and investment. In: Taylor K, Grandits H (eds) Yugoslavia’s sunny side: a history of tourism in Socialism (1950s–1980s). Central European University Press, Budapest/New York, pp 171–210 Tome Marinac BT (1994) Obcˇina Izola. Znanstveni insˇtitut Filozofske fakultete, Ljubljana Walton JK (2010) Preface: some contexts for Yugoslav Tourism history. In: Yugoslavia’s sunny side. A history of tourism in Socialism (1950s–1980s). CEU Press, Budapest/New York, pp ix– xxii Welcome to Izola (2016) http://www.slovenia.info/?_ctg_kraji¼2784&lng¼2. Accessed 10 Feb 2016 Chapter 6 Fishing for Tourists

Abstract This chapter will outline an ethnography of tourism on fishing boats, providing also an additional link to an ethnographic film Fishing Tourists by Natasˇa Rogelja. With the ethnography we underpin the analysis of domestic tourism along the Slovenian coast, understanding it as a specific part of a broader tourist culture that has been on the one hand under-researched in the anthropology of tourism while on the other it forms a significant part of tourist culture within the NE Adriatic region. In that respect we will try to explain how in a given place a tourist culture comes to emerge and what is, or was, the role of domestic tourism. Furthermore, we argue that the type of fishing boat excursions as presented in the second part of this chapter are on one hand a modified form of syndicalist holidays developed within Yugoslav tourism and on the other they constitute fishermen’s innovative tactics and resilience developed in the period of the demise of Slovene fishing. It was precisely the promotion of authenticity, cohabitation with nature and genuineness that allowed, supported and rendered possible such innovations.

Keywords Ethnography of local tourism • Fishing tourism • Post-Yugoslav tourism • Domestic tourism • Fishermen’s innovative tactics

This chapter will outline an ethnography of tourism on fishing boats, providing also an additional link to an ethnographic film Fishing Tourists by Natasˇa Rogelja. With the ethnography we underpin the analysis of domestic tourism along the Slovenian coast, understanding it as a specific part of a broader tourist culture that has been on the one hand under-researched in the anthropology of tourism while on the other it forms a significant part of tourist culture within the NE Adriatic region. In that respect we will try to explain how in a given place a tourist culture comes to emerge and what is, or was, the role of domestic tourism. Furthermore, we argue that the type of fishing boat excursions as presented in the second part of this chapter are on one hand a modified form of syndicalist holidays developed within Yugoslav tourism and on the other they constitute fishermen’s innovative tactics and resil- ience developed in the period of the demise of Slovene fishing. It was precisely the promotion of authenticity, cohabitation with nature and genuineness that allowed, supported and rendered possible such innovations. One of the factors that fishermen in Slovenia see as having most impacted their daily lives after 1991 was the establishment of the new state border as this caused

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 129 N. Rogelja, A. Janko Spreizer, Fish on the Move, MARE Publication Series 11, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-51897-8_6 130 6 Fishing for Tourists significant losses to their fishing territories. After 1991, this closure of substantial swathes of fishing ground (along the previously joint Yugoslav coastline) coupled with the prohibition of fishing with driftnets during late spring and summer periods, meant a dead season for fishermen used to this kind of fishing technology. Addi- tionally, during the dead season the state of Slovenia withheld their support to fishermen by paying their health insurance and neither did the new Slovenian government with its appointed ministry put any effort into improving their employ- ment status.1 The status of fishermen was initially regulated within the category of individual entrepreneurship and later on it was regulated on the same basis as the status of farmers. Furthermore, the number of Slovenian fishing boats that have previously fished in present-day Croatian waters was, after the dispute over the new state border (which is still subject of the international arbitrage), suddenly much too high for the Slovene sea with less than 50 km of coastline divided into three protected areas within Slovene national waters. Another negative consequence was that the market for the fish cannery factory diminished drastically. Further restrictions on commercial sea fisheries were brought about “by changes to the shipping regime to the commercial Port of Koper as of December 2004, which abolished existing rules giving priority of way to fishing vessels over commercial ships” (NSPDFRS 2008: 8). Due to all this as well as because of the fact that Slovene fishing2 is strictly seasonal, and the Gulf of Trieste is overused, several fishermen decided to combine fishery with tourism in the summer months in a form of passenger transportation, fish picnics, fishing with fishermen tours and school excursions. Izola, as a “town of fishermen”, and its inhabitants took on a special role in these endeavors. In the first phase of our ethnographic research (1999–2004) the idea of connecting fishing with tourism was developing slowly also because the twin business was still in its early stages trying to adapt to the new political situation as well as drawing from erstwhile tourist traditions within SFR Yugoslavia. Namely, in the period of SFR Yugoslavia fishermen already had sporadic experi- ences with fishing tourism by taking their friends, acquaintances or summer guests on occasional fishing trips.3 Such experiences were also well known among those who took summer holidays along the Adriatic coast and were hosted by fishermen’s

1As shown already in the Part II of the book some substantial changes were nevertheless triggered by the efforts of the fishermen office and its inputs for better communication between fishermen, national political actors and the international network Medisamak. 2The data of SURS (Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia) from 2005 shows that 159 fishermen have been active on the strip between Piran and Ankaran. Furthermore 72 fishermen were involved in fishing as their primary occupation and 87 are part-time fishermen (source: SURS. Maritime fishing. 2005 cited in OPF 2013: 155). 3Such fishing trips were sporadically organised also within the company Riba in the period of SFR Yugoslavia. Guests were on board in their own cabins for a certain period and they worked with fishermen for few days in order to experience this kind of life. We were told that these people were mainly men who were foresters, manual workers and hunters from the mainland. When fishermen describe this practice, they said: “They worked with us, they went with us, they were on the sea with us”. Fishermen did not think about these guests as their tourists. 6 Fishing for Tourists 131 families.4 We will show that such previous experiences with domestic tourism enabled the continuation of fishing tourism in the late 1990s. First attempts were modestly connected with the idea of “pristine experience”, “fresh and healthy sea-food” and “genuine contact with the locals”, while the last few years saw the idea of authenticity being emboldened further, enabling the placement of fishing tourism in a variety of forms. In the second stage of our ethnographic research (2010–2014), several changes are seen to have occurred as fishermen have become actively involved in the creation of local development strategies as members of the Coastal Action Group. Many of them had by then become accustomed to the new national, regional and EU strategies (such as the availability of EU funds for sustainable fishing within the framework of common European fishery policy) as well as to the Slovenian and EU legislations. Some of them have been able to adapt to new market opportunities as well as to the broader development trends and imaginaries within Mediterranean tourism, actively cooperating with them. The specificity of our case study is the fishermen’s grassroots approach in connecting fishing and tourism that was initially developed as their survival tactic. From 2004 onwards and through the active cooperation with the Fisherman Office,5 their tourist offer was included as a part of national and regional strategies. It is important to stress that fishing tourism – as it exists today in Izola – represents a peculiar recent innovation (though leaning on previous historical experiences) as beforehand it was never a part of organized tourist offers. Interestingly enough fishermen’s search is now for domestic tourists, and their targets are mostly collectives or closed intimate groups and not foreign tourists. Besides this focus on domestic tourists, their excursions are indeed an innovation within the existing tourist offers of Izola. They promote encounters between visitors and genuine fishermen who are also involved in gastronomy, whose families produce local wine, whose relatives or friends work at the salt-fields, who catch local fish that is offered fresh to their guests immediately after it is caught. In doing so fish does not travel long kilometers or hours, the distance between the plate, the sea, the olive orchards, and vineyards is minimized to ecologically and socially acceptable levels. On the other hand, by combining tourism with fishing, fishermen have been able to compensate for the loss of their income while still partly staying in the fishing business. Additionally, they have used Yugoslav and post-Yugoslav personal experiences and peculiarities of domestic and transit tourism (the latter being specifically characteristic of

4We collected several stories about people who in the period of SFR Yugoslavia spent their summer holidays in rented rooms along the Adriatic coast. Often the rooms were in the houses of local fishermen. Some of our interlocutors reported how they slept in their host’s bedrooms while the owners of the house were sleeping in cars, fishing boats, vine cellars, attics and other improvised dormitories. Memories of fishing with the head of the family while on vacation, or eating fresh fish caught by their landlord [locally in Croatian, gazda], were indeed very alive and reported as authentic experiences, the genuine holidays at the sea. Fishing tourism that was perceived as an innovation and an alternative, supplementary activity that developed after the 1991 was connected with such positive memories. 5More about the Fishermen’s office see in the Part IV of this book. 132 6 Fishing for Tourists

Slovenia), and played with images of the sea, healthy food and positive emotions. In doing so they established a local development model that somehow ended up overtaking The Brand of Slovenia I FEEL sLOVEnia developed only in 2007, but also the ideas developed in the later governmental and research documents from 2007 onwards.6 Besides combining fishing with tourism, their innovation lies in the peculiar way of linking different ideas that later on were partly realized within Slovenia’s Brand “ideology”: “Slovenia cannot be encapsulated only by an image: Slovenia has to be felt and experienced. Slovenia needs to be felt by all the five senses” (The Brand of Slovenia 2007). Slovenia as a tourist destination is constructed through “green experiences...”, inviting people “to do something for themselves”. It is a place where people may enjoy “the vacation which will restore their balance”, because tourists in Slovenia are always “in touch with something elemental, be it water, the smell of forest, or the original flavor of the dish (ibid).” Apart from the above mentioned national strategy, initial fishermen’s activities also anticipated several local projects of coastal municipalities and tourist centers that were to develop later on, after 2012 and focused mostly on food. Apart from the already-mentioned “Kilometer Zero” initiative, the project “Gastronomic treasures of Istria” is another such initiative. Among other events connected with Istrian hinterland, guests are invited to visit fishermen’s boats and their feasts, such as the Fishermen Festival (Fishermen Festival 2014).

6.1 Pros and Cons Discussions

In the first period of our ethnographic research (1999–2004), most fishermen would discuss and seriously consider the possibility of taking up a complementary activity of fishing tourism, due to the loss their incomes have suffered in post-1991 era. Some, mostly younger fishermen, and fishermen with bigger boats (around 18 meters long) opted for the fishing technique called trawling and those with driftnets were the first to react. While some tried to actively combine fishing with tourism, others would merely discuss the possibility. Alongside the already stated arguments related to the establishment of the new state border which propelled them into seeking new means of livelihood, other reasons that came up in discus- sion among fishermen were for example: the demand and interest on behalf of clients; the need for a new service on the market; the reduced fishing ground and therefore not enough space for the numbers of existing fishermen along the present- day Slovenian coast; and the over-fished Slovenian sea. Consequently, the

6Such documents were for example Potenciali povezovanja ribisˇtva in turizma [Potentials for connecting fishing and tourism] (Mihalicˇ and Sedmak 2013), The Operational Programme for Fisheries Development in the Republic of Slovenia 2007–2014 (OPFDRS 2014) and National Strategic Plan on the Development of Fisheries in the Republic of Slovenia 2007–2013 (NSPDFRS 2008) – which put a strong accent, among other thing, the restructuring of fishermen into tourist workers. 6.1 Pros and Cons Discussions 133

Fig. 6.1 Fishermen, tourist workers or babysitters? (Photo Natasˇa Rogelja) attractiveness of their offer was described to us as bringing something new to the existing market by connecting the fishing world with the tourist market, by offering healthy fresh food to visitors and at the same time allowing fishermen the oppor- tunity to maintain their close relationship with the sea. Several disadvantages and obstacles were also stressed. The conversion of fishermen into barkeepers, baby- sitters or grumblers was sometimes stressed in rather negative terms. Some legal issues connected with the unprecedented situation on the level of national gover- nance were also highlighted. Namely, the Slovene fishing law does not define the secondary activity of fishing tourism as a special category and fishermen had to run their activities under the legal regulations applicable to restaurant owners or passenger transportation.7 In several conversations from the period 2003–2004 many fishermen ridiculed the demand that a fishing boat involved in excursions and hosting picnics should have separate toilets for women and men (personal communication, April 2004). That was already difficult to realize on bigger boats and it was virtually an impossibility on smaller vessels. Such legal barriers were stressed mostly by the owners of smaller fishing boats having to meet certain regulations, such as double toilets (Fig. 6.1).

7Suggestions for special regulations concerning fishing tourism are nowadays being discussed and provisions are anticipated following these suggestions in the new version of Slovenian legislation on fishery in the future. Nowadays fishermen involved in fishing tourism still work under the regulation for passenger transportation. Some of them started to cooperate with a few local tourist agencies, such as Authenica and Istranka. 134 6 Fishing for Tourists

In 2008 and 2014 two governmental documents – The Operational Programme for Fisheries Development in the Republic of Slovenia 2007–2014 (OPFDRS 2014) and National Strategic Plan on the Development of Fisheries in the Repub- lic of Slovenia 2007–2013 (NSPDFRS 2008) were developed on the grounds of European Common Fisheries Policy and several previous national documents. The NSPDFRS and OPDFDRS proposed permanent or temporary cessation of fishing activities or reassignment of fishing vessels into non-fishing activities due to environmental problems and disproportion between number of fishing vessels and available maritime resources. On the other hand, the connection between fishery and tourism was accentuated within these documents as a possible positive development trend that will be supported in the following years by the state mostly due to the importance of Slovene maritime identity and protection of Slovene fishery. Owing to a decline in fishery resources and probable rationalization/reduction of the number of economic operators in the maritime fisheries, a reduction of the number of employees in this sector is likely to be expected and therefore diversification is necessary to create new jobs in sectors like tourism, environmental protection and services provided to the local population. [...] It is in the national interest of Slovenia to protect this area and prevent it from increasing competition and industrialization. At the same time, fishers who are the ones that earn their living from fishing and thus significantly contribute to the identity of Slovenia as (also) a fishery and maritime country should not be neglected. The preservation of traditional fishing should be pursued. It needs to be revived before it is too late as the competition on the market in fishery products is getting tougher and Slovenian fishers are slowly losing their battle with competitors (NSPDFRS 2008: 25). Although the fishermen were not familiar with all the details of the governmental debates and documents in the period prior to 2004, which is when the Fishery office was established, ideas of permanent or temporary cessation of fishing activities, the possibility for refunding the slitting of their boats and the transformation of fishermen into tourist workers or “museum objects” predated the publication of these documents. For many fishermen it seemed somehow contradictory that the state would like to abolish the Slovene fishing fleet while at the same time there was also a strong initiative to preserve Slovene fishing and fishermen who contribute importantly to the identity of Slovenia as a maritime country. This contradiction was discussed many times by some fishermen who stressed the negative effects of the connection between fishing and tourism. Many of them stated that it is not their intention to abandon fishing and to involve themselves exclusively in fishing tourism. For several interlocutors the connection was acceptable only if it was combined with a real fishing activity. On the other hand, those who started to get involved in this alternative stressed also several positive starting points. The attractiveness of their product was men- tioned in a way that it brought something new to the existing market by connecting the fishing world with the tourist market and at the same time allowing fishermen to stay on the boat. As observed in the years between 1999 and 2004 and also during the last decade, several forms of excursions were developed, such as shorter panoramic trips and excursions, short fish picnics, longer full-day picnics with 6.1 Pros and Cons Discussions 135 optional swimming, fishing trips with fishermen, educational excursions for experts, school excursions and pilgrimages. I started this in 1993, after the break-up of Yugoslavia; I made my living only from fishing ... Me and my entire family. And you have to maintain such a big boat, and you have to maintain three families. And obviously ... I mean, what can we do ... but to reorganize ourselves and change our work into something completely different, or try and live with the sea again. And then we tried tourism, and 4 to 5 months we only engaged in fishing. This way the whole year is covered: a little bit of fishing and a little bit of tourism. If it is not so, you cannot live properly. Tourist workers ...yes you could say that we are, but we are still with sea and so on ...With the same boat we catch fish and tourists. This is it ...(personal communication, May 2001). One of the explanations for why this connection has come about in the first place is the profound interest of visitors. Panoramic excursions and fish picnics, for exam- ple, were highly sought-out for the promise of amusement and relaxation. In the opinion of some of our interlocutors, “amusement on the boat” was entirely different and much better than anything “amusement on the land” could promise. The fishermen described visitors’ reactions as follows: ...they become very talkative, they lighten up, they relax, they sing, they take off the tie, sometimes there is a bit of adrenaline because of a wave and afterwards even greater enjoyment, they enjoy the sea and nature (personal communication, May 2001). Fishermen also stressed that visitors are interested in the state border between Slovenia and Croatia. As one of them explained: Some attractions are shown, let’s say, if there are special wishes we take them there ... Usually, they want to see our state border on the sea ... interestingly we do not know exactly where it is ...some of them imagine that there is a wire on the sea. And then ...you say we are out, we are in (Slovenia)...(personal communication, March 2001). Apart from the ambience and the curiosity over the new sea border, other attractive aspects that came up in the course of our interviews include the fact that they are with ‘real’ fishermen; that a lot of the fishing equipment stays on the boat also during the summer and is shown to people; and that the freshest fish considered to be very healthy is on offer. Often, the fishermen stress that they try and provide fish that swam in the sea only several hours ago. It is assumed that visitors could not get hold of such fresh fish. Such and similar ideas developed over the years into local initiatives, as for example, “Kilometre zero” that was initiated in 2012 and later on gained the support on the national level as well. The initiative shortened the travel of food from the sea to the table, but also cut short the chain of traders who used to make much more money by selling the fish than the fishermen who caught the fish, and who would earn substantially less. Fishermen also stressed the possibility of hosting sport fishermen on their boats. The positive side to recreational sport fishing is said to be primarily that many people can fish together and compete with each other, proving themselves as fishermen. On the other hand, fishermen can show the visitors viable fishing territories. These visitors come for their own pleasure, because they want to fish. That is why I took them to the fishing spots where there is fish. And fishing ...as we know ...you can catch 136 6 Fishing for Tourists

something or you may not ... In the meantime, they get hungry, thirsty and become a bit moody. Some were successful and some weren’t ...If they are successful in fishing, they are pleased; if they are not, they get angry. So you must be able to adapt to their situation and make the visitors happy. Supposing, they didn’t catch anything, you offer them a fish snack for comfort (personal communication, April 2001).

6.2 Three Ethnographic Narratives

On the following pages we will take up three ethnographic examples referring to three different trips offered on fishing boats in Izola. The first ethnographic story, “A day off for coal-miners and peasant women” took place in the first phase (1999–2004) of our ethnographic research, while the second one “Fishing with fishermen” together with the third one, “When the sea is caught in the net”, draw on our second ethnographic phase (2010–2014). These ethnographic stories obtained through the method of participant observation reveal a variety of approaches in fishing tourism, from daily excursions, fishing with fishermen excursions, to edu- cational trips. They also point to some differences between the first and the second ethnographic stages. Whereas in the first stage the fishermen can still be seen to be experimenting with their new alternative business, the second stage reveals a different, more differentiated approach with a number of forms and sub-forms pertaining to it. Fishermen started to offer their services more frequently now to hotel guests, schools or join occasional events, transporting for example the partic- ipants of a pilgrimage ceremony. Some of them actively participated with their boats on the pilgrimage and sailed the picture of St. Maria from Strunjan to the chosen location (i.e. Izola or Piran). From time to time, they also hosted smaller weddings or funerals where the ashes would be scattered into the sea.

6.2.1 A Day off for Coal-Miners and Peasant Women

The most frequent excursions practiced among the fishermen from Izola between May and September in the period between 1999 and 2004, as also during the last decade, were those of panoramic excursions and fish picnics (as they call the excursions where seafood is offered). The average number of working days connected with such excursions in the season is seen to vary between 70 and 100 days. The visitors who signed up for such excursions were at the time mostly people living in Slovenia, which gives a special character to this particular line of business. When fishermen talked about their visitors, they tended to stress that they were not involved in business with tourists but were dealing mostly with “organized groups”. In saying so, it became clear that the word tourist was strictly reserved for foreigners or strangers, defined as those not living close by and not speaking Slovene or Italian, and the term organized groups was linked to school groups, 6.2 Three Ethnographic Narratives 137 work collectives, or other professional groups from various seminars and con- gresses, all coming from Slovenia. Other terms (rather than organized groups) the fishermen have described their guests with are: visitors, home guests, and the world of business. As one of them said: We mostly work ... In this tourist business we do not engage at all, well, hardly ever ... because we work hardly ever with the agencies, and we have very few strangers. Mostly we have Slovenians, various companies, clubs and groups from all over Slovenia (personal communication, May 2001). During the summer 2001 we participated in several full-day fish picnics were the visitors were work collectives such as a group of coal-miners or a group of peasant women (see ethnographic film Fishing Tourists by Natasˇa Rogelja https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75RKNpQIhWw). Both excursions featured the same Dalmatian pop music that used to be popular also on Yugoslav holidays along the coast. As stated by one of the visitors, songs of the popular Croatian singer Oliver Dragojevic´ bring back the memories of “the sea as we used to know it”. After the panoramic tour along the Slovenian coast sardines and wine were offered to the visitors. Not much attention was paid to the history of the region or to the natural peculiarities of the area. There was small conversation about the boat and fishing itself and about the problems that Slovene fishermen are facing, whereas the capital of Ljubljana as the new administrative center was perceived as a “bad” influence on fishing. Fishermen stressed to their visitors that the times of SFR Yugoslavia were better for them, with the fishing center located in Split and thus situated in the maritime culture area, something Ljubljana, in their perception, certainly did not possess. The main motive for the excursion, however, was relaxation. Usually there were two fishermen on the boat, occasionally also a friend of fishermen who would help out with the anchor. Usually one fisherman steered the boat and the other prepared the food. While talking on one such occasion to the fisherman preparing the fish, the fisherman explained to Natasˇa that sardines were the best fish for him. Sardines are supposedly healthier and taste like real fish, unlike “the rich people’s white fish”. One of the fishermen stated that he wants to do his best for his visitors as they are hard workers enjoying the sea for one day. The relation between the fishermen and visitors was always congenial and even egalitarian in the sense that enjoyment was reciprocal and on both sides. It seemed that the relation between fishermen and visitors was forged out of the relationship between tourists and tourist workers and in a way resembled the Yugoslav type of domestic tourism that “covered” underdeveloped regions (or in this case disappearing fishing economy). Personally, we were able to witness the fishermen’s encounter with two hard-working groups (coal-miners and peasants), enjoying a day together in the context of an economic transaction of a paid excursion (at a reasonable if not low-price rate). On the basis of these examples one could talk about domestic tourists also in the function of useful consumers. However not all the groups that fishermen receive are such. On the way back one of the fishermen said that he preferred groups such as coal-miners or peasant women. This was the reason why he invited us on these specific days. He said that last week they had to take out a group of friends in their 40-ies as they celebrated a birthday party. They 138 6 Fishing for Tourists got very drunk, they didn’t know how to behave on the boat and the fishermen were forced to look after and restrain 15 drunken people dancing on their boat. They said they were afraid for their safety and felt stressed because of the huge responsibility they had on their shoulders. The following ethnographic story describes one of the “happy excursions” with peasant women. It was a calm and hot summer day when we came to Izola to participate and film the one-day excursion of peasant women. We agreed with fishermen which excursion was to be filmed and the women agreed to having us around on their day off. We met on the pier and introduced ourselves and the fishermen helped the women to embark in a kind, gentlemanly manner offering each woman a hand, a bow and a smile, guiding them across the bridge. The passage from the pier to the boat already gave rise to a fair amount of laughter and comments, already bonding us as a group. When the boat took off we sat comfortably on the benches taking in the blue surroundings and beginning to chat casually. The plastic canvas protected us from the heat and with the boat starting to move it felt the wind also blew away the heat from the pier. One group of women started to sing a Slovene song Barcˇica po morju plava [The boat sails the sea] as some other women played the accordion. The atmosphere was relaxed and joyful. One of the fishermen offered us a drink. One of the women explained to us that this was her only free summer day as she has to take care of her family farm and cows. She said that she had been looking forward to this day for a long time and that is seemed to her like all her troubles just fell into the water the minute she embarked on the boat. The women were of different ages dressed in casual sport clothes. After a few glasses of bevanda [wine with water] they lightened up even more. They took a walk around the boat and around the cabin, observing fishermen’s equipment. One of the fishermen showed them a dried sea-horse, hanging down from a tiny string in the saloon. Women didn’t pay much attention to the historical peculiarities of the region neither did fishermen bother them with such information. While one of the fishermen was steering the boat the second one mixed with the group and chatted with women. He asked them about their farms and their work and talked about their working fishing day. After a few rather formal sentences about their work as fishermen, they started to make joking comments about the women coming to the boat alone, leaving their husbands behind. The comments reaped a lot of laughter. One of the fishermen started to prepare sardines that were later served as the main dish. Natasˇa started a small chat with the cook and her colleague Vesna was explaining the women about the nature of their work. She promised to send a VHS copy of a movie we were making for their families. After a while the food was served and before we started to eat the captain gave an explanation of how sardines are eaten properly; he told us to throw the bones into the sea if we didn’t want to eat them; he told us about the fresh fish we were about to eat, adding that sardines in his opinion are the best fish as they have the real taste of the sea. Fishermen mixed with the group and the feast began. One of the women told Natasˇa how happy she was, because she didn’t have to cook that day. After lunch the boat stopped for a swim. Fishermen lowered a ladder into the sea from the boat so the women could go in. Again there was a lot of laughter, shouting and joking. The lunch and the after-lunch swim were the two big events of the excursion. In the late afternoon the boat slowly approached the homeport of Izola. Once again the fishermen helped women to disembark safely from the boat, chatting with them for a while still on the pier. Eventually they said goodbye and waved while walking away. Natasˇa and her colleague Vesna waited on the pier for fishermen to clean up the boat and afterwards went for a coffee together. Fishermen finally told them that such excursions were once they liked best. They remem- bered practically with horror how last week they had to take a group of drunken guys on a similar excursion and ended up feeling utterly exhausted from it all... 6.2 Three Ethnographic Narratives 139

6.2.2 Fishing with Fishermen

Fishing with fishermen excursions are, according to the fishermen themselves, emphatically a very distinctive form among all other forms of tourist products. Primarily, this product is not meant to be profitable as a job, but rather as an additional “test” activity, which came in the first place from visitors’ own interests. In other words, it aims to please the visitors, since, after all, as one of the fishermen had said, visitors “live with fishermen for a day, which is something special; they become one of us for a day”. The following story gives something of the flavor of this type of an excursion. In June 2010 Natasˇa embarked on one such “Fishing with fishermen” excursion organized by the company Riba. One of Natasˇa’s friends from Izola, a former school mate of the captain, organized the excursion. She explained to Natasˇa that visitors are supposed to pay a voluntary contribution of around 10 Euros per person. As the fishermen at that time were still employees of Riba company this were effectively extra earnings, a tip for the crew. Together with their children, Natasˇa and her friend met the captain at Izola’s peer at 5.30 in the morning. There were three other visitors sharing the Saturday morning with them, turned with their sleepy faces against the sea; a couple and another acquaintance of the captain. The sharp smell of dead fish lay heavily on morning stomachs. The journey began as two twin fishing boats left the pier. Soon after they took off, they were invited for a morning coffee. There were four other fishermen in the saloon smoking and talking loudly. They had a survey book on the table, and were giving us figures of their previous catches. On the walls there were two pornographic calendars. Natasˇa sat her children so they were facing away from the photos. The small saloon was soon completely filled with smoke. Children wanted to go out. Running past the noisy machine room and escaping the smoke, they were able to inhale deeply the fresh morning sea air. The four children were happy to be together and they started to observe the sea while talking about the events of the previous day at school. It was a bright sunny day with the sea being calm. After a few hours fishermen finally found a spot to start fishing. Fishing was done with driftnets between the two boats. They lowered and pulled the nets several times over the next four hours. The first hour was quite exciting, as we watched a huge quantity of sardines being pulled onboard. At around 12.00, children started asking their mothers if they could go home. The summer heat was building up slowly. We all felt tired. Two people occupied a shade on the roof and the children asked the fishermen if they could play cards in their bedrooms. The fishermen agreed. After the catch was done, fishermen started to sort out the fish and to clean the nets. All the visitors just looked on, observing the process. Nobody asked to join in. Both outside and inside the boat the heat was incredible. Children became irritable. After the fish was packed on the ice, the fishermen asked the children to fill up a big round tub, where the fish were jumping just a minute ago, with water, to which they happily agreed. The mothers exchanged a few glances and helplessly agreed to this unusual bathing spot. The smell of fish was anyway everywhere. It was one of the biggest catches of the year that they had made. Fishermen were pleased. They offered us a stew for the meal. Children refused to eat and continued with their game in the fish pool. It was late afternoon when the boats Riba 1 and Riba 2 reached Izola. Visitors and fishermen were exhausted but satisfied. All of the visitors received a big plastic bag full of sardines and a big hug. In the case of “Fishing with fishermen” excursions it is possible to talk about two sub-forms: firstly, the work on fishing boats is adapted to the visitors (it takes less 140 6 Fishing for Tourists time for example). Secondly, visitors do not disturb the ordinary working routine on the boat but are just additional crew members who observe the activity of fishing from the upper deck. The above story can be seen to link with the second form; in a sense it can be called participation, although, as we saw, the visitors were not involved in the work on the boat, which, in any case, is too hard and too specialized for non-fishermen. Officially, in 2010 participation was practiced only in the company Riba, whereas other fishermen sometimes take occasional visitors on board to fish with them or just observe them working, but as the fishermen say, they do not do so to earn money, but to please the visitors. The adapted demon- stration of fishing mostly involves school groups or group of friends while in the case of participatory fishing there are smaller groups of people (3–5 persons) who stay on board with fishermen the entire day as in the above story. Fishing with dragnet seems the most appropriate, if not the only appropriate way to enable such an experience for the visitors. Fishing with nets, for example, is unsuitable because there is a 12-hour period between setting and raising the nets. Fishing for mullet, which is generally one of the big events in the area, is also unsuitable since the timing for catching this type of fish is unpredictable – often it takes place during the night and during wintertime. As seen from the above ethnographic story one can note certain less appealing aspects to these excursions (such as the intense smell of fish, the heat, the noisy engines, the smoke, pornographic calendars and long working hours...) that visitors need to contend with if they are to embark on such adventures. The authenticity of the whole event is “so authentic” that it is sometimes “hard to digest”, which may be the reason why such excursions are less popular in comparison with other trips and are not so profitable as a full day fish picnic or a panoramic excursion.

6.2.3 “When the Sea Is Caught in the Net”8

Similar excursions as fish picnics and panoramic excursions are practiced also today with additional new forms of excursions being added as well (such as arrangements with hotels and hotel guests, various forms of educational trips, etc.). In the second period of our ethnographic work few boats were transformed into fish canteens, and some fishermen got involved in several other forms of educational trips such as educational TV serials, treasure hunt for children... The third ethnographic story describes the educational excursion on fishing boat with primary school children, filmed for TV serial MUZOZLET, which is another sub-form of hosting passengers on fishing boats. During the second intense period of ethnographic field work Alenka met a primary school teacher of art who organized a creative art day at the sea. Following

8One of the serials of the Eco ex-tempore MUZOZLET programme was entitled “When the sea is caught in the net” (Muzozlet, Eco ex tempore 7 2013). 6.2 Three Ethnographic Narratives 141 her idea, her pupils would create sculptures with stone, rope and wood on the fishing boat, at the sea. As an amateur sailor and a social anthropologist Alenka was asked to give a short presentation about boats and demonstrate how to tie a few sailors’/fishermen’s knots, which would then be used in Eco Ex-Tempore, the creative artistic workshop with pupils. The whole event was recorded by the national radio-television station Slovenia (RTV Slovenia) and is still available on the Internet as a part of the MUZOZLET serial. The aim of this series is to get elementary school children acquainted with different artistic approaches. Apart from the TV group and pupils, the art teacher and curator of one of the coastal galleries were also present on board. The boat was selected as a stage for an art lesson based on the assumption that the sea journey would trigger inspiration and the maritime environment contribute to specific observations. The creators of this episode also saw a special connection between fishing and the technique of making knots used for creating different sculptures. Pupils and teachers involved in this venture had previously already took an active part in several MUZOZLET serials and so were used to camera; the only one new to this situation was the anthropologist. It was a shiny spring Saturday in 2011. The group of pupils gathered on the main pier in Koper. Everybody was punctual except for the TV crew from Ljubljana who were caught in the traffic jam. The minute they arrived, boarding started. Once on the boat, everyone – the TV crew, the group of pupils, the teacher, the curator and the anthropologist – sat on the deck, around the main table covered with a plastic tablecloth, enjoying the shade of a canvas stretching above them. The engines started and soon they were in the middle of the bay. The first route aimed at the protected area, the Cape of Debeli rticˇ. The captain was asked to stop the ship. The cameraman started to record as the pupils were welcomed on board by the curator. She gave a long speech about art in the marine environment. Pupils were told that the purpose of this boat trip is to sharpen their observational skills which are the foremost requirement in art. After that the art teacher was invited to give her speech. Then, finally, the anthropologist was asked for her contribution. Since she had no experi- ence working with the TV camera, she was previously instructed by the TV crew on what she should discuss with the pupils – about the sea and the history of boats. She felt rather uncomfortable talking about the sea and the history of the boats with the fishermen standing beside her, listening to her explanations but not invited to talk about their area of expertise. The director was not satisfied, since for him the scenery and the explanation did not come across as authentic and relaxed enough. The pupils and the anthropologist were made to repeat the scene explaining the history of fishery and boats along the Slovenian coast. Time flew and the fishermen were visibly bemused by the fact that the TV crew was going to spend, it seemed, their entire day floating in the middle of the bay of Koper, in front of the busy port with the protected area of Debeli rticˇ in the background. Meanwhile, the anthropologist started to show the skill of knotting and the fishermen navigated the boat towards the Bay of Piran where the regatta of old timer yachts was taking place. Some pupils, in the middle of their artistic creation, were distracted by this and reoriented their attention to the regatta. Fishermen noticed their fellow ships from Izola and decided to sail closer. The TV crew was happy with the scenery. Teacher, curator and director were enjoying the sun, talking about the picturesque trip while drinking bevanda [wine with water] while the fishermen told the life history of the ship crew (all members of whom were in fact brothers, belonging to a family were people were fishermen for three consecutive generations) to the anthropologist. The anthropologist enjoyed listening to the family genealogies and their connections with the fishing fleet of a former company Delamaris. After some time, the fishermen decided to navigate to the bay of Sv. Duh (Holy Spirit), 142 6 Fishing for Tourists

closer to Strunjan, where they anchored the ship and started the grill. One of them cleaned the sardines with the help of a big net, soaking them in the sea and holding the net with both hands. Fishermen explained the simple procedure of scaling the sardines by shaking the net from left to right and back again. While some were clearly impressed with the clever and fast technique of the procedure, the cameraman carefully recorded the scene. Sardines were grilled and served with bread. The captain and the cook taught their guests how to clean fish with two fingers. The teaching staff was impressed by the fact that nobody amongst the pupils questioned the food, preferring to have something else. After lunch, pupils finished with their sculptures and were asked to present them. The TV crew persistently recorded the entire workshop. In the late afternoon the ship headed slowly back towards the Koper bay, where the journey came to an end. After 6 h of filming on the boat, the TV crew made a short educational film published on the website of MUZOZLET. Film begins with a statement of one of the pupils, a loud-voiced joker: “We live by the sea and we are used to easy life, the seagulls, the smell of the sea, sea animals...” This opening announcement is followed by an animated cartoon showing fishing boats dragging the nets behind. The first sequence shows pupils coming to the pier of Koper. Lifting cranes from the port of Koper are seen in the background. Before focusing on the creation of spatial forms and the accompanying lectures – the main subject of the educational excursion –, the cameraman’s eye takes us across the blue water as the sound of splashing water is followed by the teacher’s question directed at the pupils: “What can you hear?” Contrary to the expectations, the pupils’ answer was that they hear the sound of the engine, which was in fact one of the strongest sounds on the trip. During the trip fishermen covered the sound of the engine with Dalmatian music. In the montage process the Dalmatian music was cut out from the movie and replaced with the sound of the waves and the wind. Following the movie one could see that the regatta with the old sailing boats, which coincided with the educational excur- sion, made quite an impression on the cameraman and director as well as the movie producers. Scenes of the regatta were used as visual background in the movie a number of times, accompanying the teachers’ speech, for example, although the teachers never mentioned or discussed the sailing boats. Likewise, scenes of Piran’s Punta with regatta are shown to the TV viewers while listening to the voice of the curator from Piran’s gallery telling the pupils about the wealth of motifs presented by the sea environment. “We’re on the ship”, she says, “so we can learn to observe differently to how we would observe in an enclosed space; here, we are looking at nature so as to preserve it in the long run”. As she goes on to mention the seagulls, for instance, various shots of seagulls are shown. In her speech, the curator sets out the sea as a peculiarity of today’s event that influences the atmosphere as well as the ambience of this creative workshop; in fine arts the sea in her view is very important due to the light and the atmosphere. While she mentions the sea, the film shows the ship’s bow cutting through the calm surface of the water. In the next sequence Alenka talks about the discipline of anthropology and its subfield maritime anthro- pology and she asks pupils if anybody knows what kind of a fishing boat they are on. While she explains about the fishing technology of catching fish with the dragnets, an animated cartoon with the fishing boat and the dragnet is shown followed by a short insert showing fishermen cleaning anchovies in the small net 6.2 Three Ethnographic Narratives 143 in order to get rid of the scales. Alenka continues, explaining about the knots that will later be used for creating sculptures in the workshop. After the explanation, the art teacher is shown handing out papers to the pupils for them to make a sketch. In the second half of the movie sculptures are shown while pupils are explaining how they did them, why, from which material...They mostly did forms to be found in the surrounding environment, such as seagulls, sailing boats, etc. Some pupils were inspired to make a funny weather station and they explained its function in a humorous way. Following the third ethnographic example, several observations can be highlighted. In the third ethnographic case, fishermen and fisheries are kept in the background of the film although the boat, the sea and the nets are still important marketing components of the excursion. As almost passive transporters, the fisher- men provide the stage for the creative workshops while they scarcely appear on it. Besides fisherman, Dalmatian music too is cut out from the movie, although it was offered by the fishermen as a “sound backdrop” so as to cover the noise of the engine. In the movie, fishery is presented indirectly, through the words of an expert anthropologist. The sea, the nets, the old-timers yachting regatta but also the nets and the knots later used in the creative workshop, are brought into sharp relief. Such contextual framing is expressed also in a title of the movie “When the sea is caught in the net”; the title, which is, practically speaking, quite illogical. It appears as if the local culture in the film is represented as a kind of distant scenery, with the fishermen having only a passive role in it. Nevertheless, we should draw attention to the dual nature of the role of the fishermen. On the one hand, the fishermen in the film operate as “invisible” transporters, “not even allowed to speak for themselves”, but on the other their passiveness can be seen as intentional, working from behind the scenes, steering the boat. They seem to have accepted this role of the invisible actor, while retaining practically all of the essential features of “their fishing tourism”. Sardines, prepared in fishermen’s style are served, money is earned with the old traditional fishing boat and they themselves spend a day out on the sea. By partaking in the “new artistically motivated authenticity” they may also be inspired to develop and envision new forms of tourist offers. As demonstrated in this chapter, fishermen in Slovenia are at present promoting their own innovative forms of tourist offers developed from the late 1980s onwards. These forms bear close resemblance to the Slovenian national tourist brand, along- side being related to the heritage of SFRY coastal tourism, and are driven by the need for fishermen to survive. Taking these three ethnographic narratives into account, it would be inaccurate to understand the changes from socialist to post- socialist tourism as a straight-forward passage from one state to another. Following the findings of Stark and Bruszt, who has written extensively on post socialism and changing politics in East Central Europe, we are inclined to believe that the innovations are better understood as entailing reconfigurations of elements rather than their immediate replacement (1998: 83). Observing three ethnographic narra- tives as well as post-Yugoslav tourism in general, the introduction of new elements took place in combination with a re-arrangement of previous already existing forms. In the following chapter our intention will be to explore the ways in which 144 6 Fishing for Tourists this specific, post-socialist authenticity’s polysemy has played itself out in the context of Slovene fishing tourism. We will explain how authenticity of fishing tourism can be understood as a new cultural practice produced and offered by the fishermen, as well as understand how the images associated with fishing got transformed and rearranged in the context of post 1991 period when Slovene tourism industry needed to rethink the strategies and concurrent destination brand- ing. Fishermen joined this narrative with their own initiatives but also following, and in line with, global and regional trends.

References

Fishermen Festival (2014) http://www.zakladi-istre.si/en/events/item/672-fishermen-s-festival. Accessed 10 Feb 2016 Mihalicˇ T, Sedmak G (2013) Potenciali povezovanja ribisˇtva in turizma [Potentials for connecting fishing and tourism]. Znanstvene monografije Ekonomske fakultete, Ljubljana Muzozlet. Eco ex-tempore 7 (2013) RTV Slovenija. https://otroski.rtvslo.si/avacc/media/search/ section/televizija/group/showId/showId/153497558. Accessed 2 Feb 2016 NSPDFRS (2008) National Strategic Plan on the Development of Fisheries in the Republic of Slovenia 2007–2013. http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/eff/national_plans/list_of_national_stra tegic_plans/slovenia_en.pdf. Accessed 10 Feb 2016 OPFDRS (2014) The Operational Programme for Fisheries Development in the Republic of Slovenia 2007–2014. http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/eff/op/list_of_operational_ programmes/slovenia_en.pdf. Accessed 10 Feb 2016 Stark D, Bruszt L (1998) Postsocialist pathways. Transforming politics and property in East Central Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge The Brand of Slovenia (2007) Published by the Ministry of the Economy. Pristop, Ljubljana Chapter 7 How Authentic Is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia?

Abstract This chapter rounds up the discussion by reflecting on theories and uses of authenticity within selected local environment, with the emphasis on fishing. Here we will comment upon images of the sea, the Mediterranean, the Adriatic, (Slovenian) Istria, fishermen, and sea-food as deployed in selected tourist materials as well as in everyday conversations in given local settings. The chapter as a whole contributes to the debate on authenticity by pointing out local uses of authenticity within a specific regional context of the NE Adriatic, describing how locals themselves perceive, use and transform tourist representations and other external images which impinge upon them in the context of contemporary coastal develop- ment in Slovenia.

Keywords Authenticity • Innovation • Tourist representations • The sea • The Mediterranean • Contemporary coastal development in Slovenia

This chapter rounds up the discussion by reflecting on theories and uses of authen- ticity within selected local environment, with the emphasis on fishing. Here we will comment upon images of the sea, the Mediterranean, the Adriatic, (Slovenian) Istria, fishermen, and sea-food as deployed in selected tourist materials as well as in everyday conversations in given local settings. The chapter as a whole contributes to the debate on authenticity by pointing out local uses of authenticity within a specific regional context of the NE Adriatic, describing how locals themselves perceive, use and transform tourist representations and other external images which impinge upon them in the context of contemporary coastal development in Slovenia. Authenticity might be one of the most controversial and confusing terms in anthropological analysis, discussed mostly within tourist studies. Anthropology of tourism – dealing with consumption of myths and staged authenticity – was the only subdiscipline of anthropology in which the concept of authenticity was frequently reflected on or/and criticized (see among many Abram Waldren 1997; MacCannell 1989; Selwyn 1996; Rojek and Urry 1997; Theodossopoulos 2013). As stressed by Selwyn: Tourism is about the invention and reinvention of tradition. It is about the production and consumption of myths and staged inauthenticites. It also has far-reaching economic,

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 145 N. Rogelja, A. Janko Spreizer, Fish on the Move, MARE Publication Series 11, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-51897-8_7 146 7 How Authentic Is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia?

political and social consequences at levels ranging from the household to nation (Selwyn 1996: 30). Following tourist narratives and tourist sites many anthropologists observed that the history and archaeology aimed at tourists presents a homogenous singular narrative despite the many conflicting interpretations of history and furthermore various recognised levels of authenticity (Duke 2007; Field 2009; Selwyn 1996). As Theodossopoulos points out that while deconstructing the “inauthentic” singular tourist narratives offered to tourists as “authentic”, anthropology can also fall into the trap of operating within the binary framework of “authentic-inauthentic”. After detecting the singular and constructed authenticity of the tourist site this question still begs to be asked: Would this tourist site be more authentic if we made people aware of its heterogeneous interpretations? In his synoptic article on the concept of authenticity “Laying claim to Authenticity: five Anthropological Dilemas” Theodossopoulos (2013) stresses that: The development of analytical conceptualizations of authenticity with qualifying adjectives or nouns is not a sign of academic verbalism, but an academic response to authenticity’s multiple vernacular uses: in many evaluations of objects, performances, or cultural prac- tices, more than one conceptualization or criteria of authenticity is debated at any given moment (2013: 340). In this chapter we would like to follow this direction acknowledging the contem- porary anthropological discussion and starting with the description of a summer performance in Izola followed by our reflection on questions connected to the authentic representations and commodification of culture for touristic purposes. It was in the early July 2014 when the town of Izola hosted a handball champi- onship. In order to give a hearty welcome to sportsmen the town organised a long procession, which was winding slowly along the coastline; from the lighthouse to the town square. Salt-pond workers, dressed in traditional dresses also took part in this procession, aiming to represent the traditional culture of the area. While observing the procession, our friends commented on the organisers’ decision to include folklorized, rural elements in the town’s procession while leaving out the urban ones and not paying attention to the local fishermen. Somebody further remarked that, in another context, folklorized Sˇavrinkas,1 women traders from the town’s rural hinterlands, were similarly heralded as icons of the so-called tradi- tional culture. After a while we took a walk to the fishing pier where we saw two fishermen grilling fish. As on any other day, they turned their boats into fish canteens trying to earn some additional money. They stayed in the background of the event, dressed in their ordinary working clothes. In this section we will highlight several questions and dilemmas connected to the authentic representation and commodification of culture for the touristic purposes in the selected area of NE Adriatic. We will reflect on the judgment of tourist

1More about women’s labour migration between the hinterland and the coastal towns of Istria see Ledinek and Rogelja 1997; Brumen 2000; Ledinek and Rogelja 2000; Baskar 2002; Orehovec 2004; Rogelja and Ledinek 2012; Rogelja 2014: Ledinek Lozej 2014. 7 How Authentic Is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia? 147 workers and organisers of the above described event, according to whom the presence of fishermen (in Izola, in the so-called town of fishermen and workers) was not sufficient for the creation of authentic atmosphere (personal conversation, April 2013). One of the reasons may be that fishermen themselves are not involved in a folklorized, staged authenticity. They do not wear “authentic” clothes, neither do they expose “traditional” fishing equipment for their visitors. Instead the orga- nisers of the event invited the Salt-pond workers association who regularly perform on such events dressed in costumes, holding “genuine” old tools in their hands. The organisers evidently decided to expose the traditional local culture through this specific folklorized image while it was quite obvious that urban images as well as fishermen were not envisaged as part of this manifestation. Furthermore, the purpose of this section is also to describe how fishermen themselves developed – through their active engagement in fishing tourism – different images of authentic- ity and to answer the question why fishermen themselves are not invited to such event as icons of local culture. While developing this discussion our intention is not to discuss “authentic/ inauthentic” representations of culture in a given setting nor is it to reflect upon different forms of heritage representations along the Slovenian foreshore – as this is not of any importance to our interlocutors. As it was demonstrated in the previous section, instead of focusing on heritage representation, the fishermen in Slovenia are promoting their own innovative forms of tourist offers developed from late 1980s onwards and bearing close resemblance to the Slovenian national tourist brand. In the following discussion authenticity serves as an interpretative frame- work through which fishing tourism can be understood. Authenticity is a concept with “diverse sets of meaning that range from genuineness and originality to accuracy and truthfulness” (Triling 1972 in Theodossopoulos 2013: 339). In this way authenticity does not apply only to genuine representations of culture but is also linked to different personal and group identities, cultural practices, playing an important role in the process of social demarcation: Authenticity encodes the expectation of truthful representation: It is concerned with the identity of persons and groups, authorship of products, producers, and cultural practices, the categorical boundaries of society “who” or “what” is “who” or “what” claims to be (Theodossopoulos 2013: 339). Our intention is to explore how authenticity’s polysemy works in the context of Slovene fishing tourism. We will explain how authenticity of the fishing tourism can be understood as a new cultural practice produced and offered by the fishermen. The central argument of this section is that this particular kind of fishing tourism can be interpreted as an innovative cultural practice that can be recognised as such, as innovative only a posteriori as fishermen invented alternative or additional activities based upon heterogeneous meanings of authenticity. Their grass-root tourist products are precursors of later tourist products developed by different tourist actors in the area and coincide also with present-day national tourist strat- egies. We will comment upon the ethnography exposed in the previous section and will describe a framework of the tourist offer along the present-day Slovenian coast. 148 7 How Authentic Is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia?

When addressing tourists, the Slovenian tourist strategy applies different cliche´s, borrowing from a variety of discourses attached to the Mediterranean, the sea and to Istria in particular, while leaning against historical memory of the area. In this framework Izola presents itself as a charming Mediterranean town in the SW part of Slovenia known for its fishing tradition and its multicultural character. In framing their local development model, fishermen use some of these images but they also ignore or reinterpret others. The tripartite form of this section has the following purpose. First, we will analytically conceptualize the relationship between the following relevant terms: innovation (referring to this ethnography), invention of tradition (Hobsbawm 1988) and inventiveness (Sahlins 1999). Then we will explore the polysemic meaning and semantic complexity of authenticity as it is discussed in contemporary anthropo- logical debate. These analytical concepts will serve as theoretical starting points for the ensuing analysis of the ethnographic material. Second, we will explore different notions of authenticity at the level of everyday practice among fishermen and their guests. We will provide an analysis of three ethnographic narratives from the previous sections and will furthermore describe new products or programmes of fishing tourism, promoted as a “Fishing holiday programme”. In this programme the conceptual ambiguity of authenticity is additionally nuanced and elaborated. If in the first years after 1991 fishing tourism developed by fishermen highlighting the “pristine memories”, “nostalgia”, and feelings of yearning for “the holidays as we used to know them”, taking into consideration wishes and feelings of (domestic) guests coming from specific local, historical, social and political contexts, several other characteristics developed over the years. They went in the direction of various global trends, particularly those that focus on the consumption of tourist products highlighting local particularities and those attached to the sustainable development discourse. Third, we will show different uses of authenticity attached to fishing tourism and Slovene Istria. We will be interested on how these uses are displayed at a national and local level.

7.1 Theory: Invention, Innovation and Authenticity

Anthropologists usually find themselves uncomfortable with one-dimensional or static conceptualisations of tradition. The notion of tradition as developed by anthropologists can therefore be contrasted with non-anthropological, every-day uses of the term tradition. In tourist discourses and in various heritage projects one may find only one notion of tradition presented as more authentic than all others. On the other hand, anthropology should not fall into the trap of imposing criteria of authenticity, implying for example that staged authenticities are inauthentic. As an anthropological concept the invention of tradition can be understood as synony- mous with contrived or constructed. Following Hobsbawm: “Invented traditions are legitimizing institutions or establishing social cohesion” (Hobsbawm 1988: 9). 7.1 Theory: Invention, Innovation and Authenticity 149

Hobsbawm’s “invention” (Hobsbawm 1988) and Anderson’s(1983) “imagina- tion” were influential terms, both underlining primordialism by depicting authen- ticity as constructed or imagined. Invention as anthropological academic conception is not used by scholars to denigrate (or de-authenticize) beliefs of practices, but to challenge the taken-for-granted understandings of tradition defined in terms of boundedness, givenness or essence. National(ist) ideologies for example often conceptualize tradition in such objectified terms. They rely on natural meta- phors and timeless and static truths. Invention opposes the naturalisation and penetrates the solid defences against essentialist ideologies. By sketching the socio-political contexts behind invention, we may also explain the political moti- vations behind authenticity discourses. Yet it is useful to stress together with Theodossopoulos that despite the analytic propensity of the concept, the term “invention” can offend local groups and threaten particular (vulnerable) authenticities. Due to the reason that the analytical concept “invention of tradition” can hold negative connotations for local/indigenous/ autochthonous2 people, as it juxtaposes invented with genuine traditions, several authors (Theodossopoulos 2013; Sahlins 1999) have proposed to replace “inven- tion” with alternative terms such as revitalization, revival and revaluation. Theodossopoulos stressed that this is particularly important in those analyses that

2We use the term autochthonous as an ideological expression within the framework of minority legislation. Within particular scholarly tradition called the Slovenian national question this notion is widely used (Janko Spreizer 2004a, b). We use the term autochthonism to label discourses about (non)autochthonous, and (non)autochthony. For a concise analysis of autochthnosim cf. Sˇumi and Josipovicˇ (2008). The analytical summary of the term autochtony recently published within this framework forwards the “proposition that Slovenian post-socialism can be viewed in terms of comparison with post-colony, especially as regards the “anatomy of the ideology of collective self, and corresponding memory” (Sˇumi 2011). According to Sˇumi and Janko Spreizer (2011), the main shared symptom is the ideology of autochthony, the belief in uncontaminated, pseudo-biological national essence that, in places like post-socialist Slovenia, manifests itself in the official history of gradual and growing national autonomy extending from the liberation from the “prison of nations” of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1918 all the way to national independence in 1992, while still being purportedly rooted in a historically much older, but likewise gradually growing spiritual essence of Slovenianess. All manners of reductionism is needed in order to keep the ideology of autochthony alive and functional. As it is crucial to incessantly re-affirm the difference between “Us” and “non-Us,” one of the key reductions targets the collective memory in all its forms, including the official national history. The latter is subject to incessant retrospective pruning of all and everyone who was not “Us” and “ours.” The effort is indispensable in drawing the moral boundaries of the present national community that is persistently seen as “endangered”, “vanishing,” “dying out” (Kneževicˇ-Hocˇevar 2004), having its language “corrupted,” its people engaging in “mixed marriages,” its cohesion threatened by immigrants, etc. Typical for the ideology of autochthony (Janko Spreizer 2004a, b, 2006), this discourse collapses the meanings of cultural, linguistic, historical, population entities into a single, (pseudo)biological one. Thus a person can be versed in Slovenian language and cultural knowledge, but cannot pass for a Slovenian unless proven to be of “Slovenian origin.” Conversely, being non-proficient in Slove- nian cultural codes, but of “Slovenian origin,” makes a person a Slovenian (Sˇumi 2000, 2004). Racist and xenophobic attitudes are thus indispensable, and entirely normalised, through the concern for this ever “endangered” and “dying nation,” as are, inevitably, accompanying dis- courses of, notably, misogyny and homophobia (Sˇumi and Janko Spreizer 2011). 150 7 How Authentic Is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia? discuss politically vulnerable authenticities (2013: 350). With similar arguments Sahlins suggested the term inventiveness. In his opinion inventiveness recognizes that invention is constructed (retaining a sense of the Hobsbawm’s deconstructive irony) yet it is more sensitive to agency and it does take into account local creative accomplishments (Sahlins 1999). As observed by Theodossopoulos: Unlike “invention,” the term “inventiveness” does not offend and can be used not only to describe politically vulnerable indigenous traditions, but also the rhetoric developed by local actors who improvise upon (or oppose) national ideological paradigms” (2013: 350). In the discussion within the next section we would like to follow this direction acknowledging the contemporary anthropological discussion within the anthropol- ogy of tourism that has moved beyond the essentialist conceptualizations of culture, recognizing that there are no bounded, single, and self-contained cultures, neither is there an all-embracing anthropological definition of authenticity (Field 2009). As stressed by Theodossopoulos, this recognition has inspired the development of academic conceptualizations of authenticity specified by adjectives or nouns, i. e. “particular” types of authenticity with their distinctive authenticating meaning (2013: 340). The conceptualization and understanding of each particular authentic- ity should be sensitive to specific ethnographic context and its agents. It is also important to note that some expectations of authenticity that we face in our fieldwork as anthropologists are clearly elaborated and others practically out of sight. Grounded on such observations anthropologists developed various under- standings and denominations of authenticity. Selwyn for example proposed the distinction between cool and hot authenticity. Hot authenticity is applied to the authentically social and a quest for finding the authentic self: “...to that aspects of imagined world of tourist make-believe – that aspects of tourist myths – concerned with questions of self and society” (1996: 20). Cool authenticity on the other hand appeals to those seeking knowledge about the authentic (ibid: 20, 21). Many other anthropologists also developed context sensitive authenticating meaning. Field talks about a brand-named authenticity focusing on the analysis of museum collec- tions (Field 2009: 510–511) while Macdonald for example talks about authenticity of people’s stories. She describes a local heritage center in the Scottish Hebrides that is lacking most of the features which would mark out these sites as authentic, but “it nevertheless is concerned to present itself as an important and true account” (1996: 169), competing with other heritage sites and other versions of history. Besides avoiding the trap of operating within the binary framework of “authen- tic-inauthentic”, we would also like to underline the importance of seeing people not as passive recipients of external influences (such influence could be tourist narratives, national ideologies, etc.) but as active agents who are aware of tourist images of themselves – as this is explicitly shown in the above mentioned research of the local heritage centre Aros (Macdonald 1997) and some other anthropological accounts describing local development models (Rogelja 2006). Through the anal- ysis of Aros, Macdonald’s aim is to examine local distinctiveness of authenticity as represented by its creators. In doing so, she stresses that although the way the creators understand authenticity and their notions of local identity and culture are 7.2 People: Fishing Tourism as Innovation 151 connected to the wider system, their conceptualizations are “...far more sophisti- cated than many of the models for interpreting heritage and touristic performance would allow” (1997: 157). As Macdonald concludes such local understandings can be furthermore used to reflect on our own analytical models (ibid: 174) and can also open a space for fresh understandings of “invented traditions” that can further inspire “inventive local tactics”. We will call these inventive tactics “innovations”. Innovations develop in response to many different impulses such as tourist industry, national narratives, social and economic crisis, or simply in response to various changes that can break the everyday routine. They act through many different agents and are expressed in various forms. As Theodossopoulos pointed out, in local “authentic” adaptations, authenticity can be understood as agency and rhetorical flexibility (2013: 350).

7.2 People: Fishing Tourism as Innovation

Innovation, attached to the here presented ethnographic case, is closely connected to authenticity, yet it also elaborates other aspects, such as emotions and skills, while leaving out the essentialist meanings of traditional Slovene fishing, the original fishing culture, etc. The fishermen’s innovative approach lies precisely in the fact that they bypass the “burden” of local history connected with the exodus of Italian speaking inhabitants after the WWII or with nationalistic narratives. If they were to engage with these meanings of original past traditions they would have to incorporate the historical aspects attached to heritage and tradition. Instead they choose to put effort in the actual activities (fishing, aquaculture, passenger trans- portation, restaurant services, providing fresh and healthy Mediterranean food...) that allow them to financially survive. Instead of fishing for heritage, as Jane Nadel- Klein describes Scottish fishermen in her book “Fishing for Heritage” (2003), Slovene fishermen took almost an opposite direction and have chosen to ignore heritage (part of it). As they do not seem to claim the right to be in the lineage of the original Slovene fishing, they operate very much in the present moment and circumstances, fishing for tourists, for new ideas and discourses that help them contrive and imagine new activities (as for example, the sustainable development discourse to be described in the following chapter). The “fixed authenticities” that can be found in museums are not at all the priority of our interlocutors, which explains the fact why they are not organised in any formal, folklore-type of fishing society, neither do they have an interest in the fishing museum. It seems that such “fixed authenticities” would not help them with their everyday survival tactics dependant on innovation – a tool that is a great deal more flexible. In the case presented innovation needs to be highlighted for the simple fact that fishermen did not concern themselves with the invention of their own identity nor were they engaging their tradition or felt a need to connect the meanings of fishing with the past and with a heritage. They were not involved in the activities developed by several Slovene ethnologists and amateur writers and collectors in search of “the 152 7 How Authentic Is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia? real, authentic Slovene fishing”. Our interlocutors never questioned their authen- ticity; they claim the right to be authentic due to their knowledge and skills as fishermen and they expressed their connection with the fishing tradition to their guests in a variety of ways from talking about family origins, the years spent in the fishing business, the ownership of real fishing boats and fishing skills (see Chap. 4). In spite of the fact that they “ignored” the heritage debate in their everyday activities connected with fishing tourism, surprisingly enough, they agreed – together with amateur researchers of maritime affairs and fishing – with the prevailing opinion rooted in Slovene ethnological production that locates Slovene fishing along the present-day Italian coast between Trieste and the mouth of the river Timav, the territory presented as “the real Slovene sea” (Lisjak 2005: 11, 20). Following this argumentation our interlocutors also agree with the view that the original Slovene fishing culture is placed within the “Slovene ethnic territory”3 outside of the national borders of the Republic of Slovenia and is embodied in the material culture connected with the archetype of the dugout canoe (locally called cˇupa). This specific vessel can be found in the Slovene Ethnographic museum and is contextualised with the narration on the traditional Slovene tuna fishing: For many centuries up to the 1954, cˇupa had an important role for tuna fishing in the Slovene way along the coast between the Trieste and Sesljan at the time of fish migration, which was every year between August and October (Lisjak 1996: 169–196; 2005: 145). Our interlocutors do not problematize authenticity through heritage or material culture, they do not construct their story or their own vision of history, neither have they entered this dialogue in any way. They rather leave this aspect aside and concentrate on contemporary innovations. The history and the narration on the original Slovene fishing is creatively incorporated in a way that certain details (those that do not fit in the dominant narration), are simply left out, ignored or treated as unimportant. Certain fishermen who were the main interlocutors for this chapter and were known in the local community as “ethnic Italians” or part of the “Italian community” would stress the fact that they were the third generation fishermen but would not mention that their family members were Italian speaking migrants, coming from the present-day Croatian towns and villages further South along the E Adriatic coast. Such tactic can be understood in the context of the dominant story rooted in the paradigm of “Slovene ethnic territory” that has grown to become common sense knowledge in the area. In this vein we can also interpret the conversation that took place on the recent excursion to Italy that was planned as a survey of good-practices connected with fishing tourism and intended for fishermen, governmental and non-governmental institutions as well as researchers dealing with fishing. Apart from discussing the Italian regulations for fishing tourism we also stopped to visit the Fishing museum in Sv. Križ. The village is placed within the Italian national borders, yet it is known to be part of the “Slovene ethnic territory”. Although the

3For more on the concept of the “Slovene ethnic territory” developed within the Slovene ethno- logical production, see Part II of this book. 7.2 People: Fishing Tourism as Innovation 153 inhabitants of the village also comprise of Italians, the village is still perceived as an ethnically homogenous place of the “original Slovene (mainly fishing) folk” known for tuna fishing. After the walk we came back to the bus and one of the fishermen from the present-day Slovene coast commented: Now that we are in Italy, we are amongst the Slovene fishermen and when at home, in Slovenia, we talk about fishing along the Slovenian coast in Koper, Izola and Piran as though it weren’t ours, but Italian! (personal conversation, May 2014). This illustrative comment is closely connected to the dilemmas articulated by Theodossopoulos as “expectation of a singular authenticity “deep” in oneself or beyond surface of social reality” (2013: 337). Within this local setting the fisherman’s comment is also connected to the well-established opinion about the urban culture in the NE Adriatic corner that is originally connected with Latin or Roman speaking inhabitants. Considering this, one can understand better the fishermen’s perspective and see how this specific local history, how the authenticity connected with the invention of the tradition is – from their perspective – better left where it is; in museums and books. A slightly different aspect to the authenticity debate that can also be culled from the ethnographic narratives in Chap. 6 relates to, following Theodossopoulos, exoticized versions of authenticity (2013: 342) connected with Western philosoph- ical traditions harbouring expectations of discovering authenticity of the untouched world and realising the self among as yet uncorrupted natives. Such authenticity is articulated in contradiction with modernity and, as Bendix observed, it emerges from the probing comparison between the self and the Other (1997: 17). Certain aspects of this kind of “deep authenticity” can be used also for the interpretation of the ethnographic case attached to the Riba company, which organised a day with ‘true’ fishermen. It seems the fishermen played precisely on those cards – on the “deep” expectations of their visitors to spend an ordinary day with real fishermen. The fishermen did of course have a part to play in all this by presenting themselves to the guests as they really are; treating their guests “genuinely”, they acted as simple hosts and permitted their guests to enter their privacy as for example when they invited the children to play on their messy beds, showed cabins where they keep their documentation, where they eat and where they amuse themselves with pornographic calendars; they would be explicit about showing their masculine sexuality to all the guests regardless of age. They fished with pelagic trawl for industrial fishing and exposed their visitors to the noisy engine; they did not play Dalmatian or any other music on board that would stimulate romantic, adventurous or cheerful emotions during the trip, neither did they preoccupy themselves with how comfortable their guests may or may not be. After the long working day in the heat of the Mediterranean summer, they offered their guests a tub full of cold water to cool themselves down. It was the same tub where sardines had just swam a minute ago for the last time – before they put them into ice. They shared their goulash with guests, making no special provisions for their guest, as would be the case on fish picnics. Nevertheless, the cohabitation and a joint meal can be interpreted as a gift in Mauss’s terms (Mauss 1996) bringing to the fore the 154 7 How Authentic Is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia? symbolic knitting of social relations between hosts and guests. At parting the fishermen also symbolically split their catch of the fish with their visitors (each person got a bag of sardines) who were their colleagues for a day and they (almost) caught fish together. Instead of a hand shake or a formal goodbye, the departure was marked with a hug on the pier. Observing “fish picnics” and “fishing with fishermen” excursions it is also important to note that although some fishermen would ‘catch’ tourists with the boats that once belong to Delamaris4 industrial fleet and were later sold to private fishermen, on the excursions we did not hear stories of memories of the Delamaris factory or about boats as materialised authenticity of the industrial fishing tradition of the area. This part of the history seems to be so natural and obvious (or problematic from the point of view of sustainability) for the fishermen that it need not to be mentioned. Delamaris fleet is gone but what is there is their knowledge about the fish and fishing skills. It seems this is the only “authentic” and “real” component for the fishermen to show, sell and talk about. In cases such as in sport fishing skills were even more important. Fishermen would talk about the industrial fishing only if they were asked, as in the case of the third ethnographic story where they spoke with the anthropologist while the TV crew later on constructed their own authentic images of navigation focused on the nearby regatta, not following the content of the conversation. Observing first ethnographic story with peasant women and miners, fishermen instead exposed the nostalgic memories of “the sea and sea holidays as they once used to be” and once again left out the images of “authentic material heritage” connected with the history of the fishing in the area. Although several of the excursions can be interpreted through the concept of hot authenticity, fishermen do not present themselves as the Other. They offer authentic sociability to their guests with whom they might even share certain aspects, such as social status. The majority of the organised groups with whom Slovene fishermen mostly work, on the other hand, come from the central part of Slovenia and are perceived in Istria as continentals, as those who are usually not knowledgeable about maritime culture and quite ignorant of the context. Visitors on the other hand perceive fishermen as Slovenes, as their compatriots; fishermen speak istrijansˇcˇina (a dialect) but as this is understood as a Slovene dialect, they do not represent themselves as others. It seems that on both the sides represented, fishermen and guests search for authentic sociability. Organised groups, who apply for such excursions, usually do not work on the sea, neither are they familiar with the sea environment and navigation (they work in industry, offices, on farms...). At a certain point the fishermen perceive them as continentals and worry about their behaviour on the boat, so would try to teach them how one should behave on the sea. Fishermen pointed out several such difficulties that they have to face; lack of knowledge about the safety on the sea,

4In the local vernacular the name Delamaris is in use for the entire former industrial fishing fleet as well as for the fish canning industry (see more Chap. 2). 7.2 People: Fishing Tourism as Innovation 155 immoderate drinking, jumping into the water during the trip, dancing on the deck during the night ...They also pointed out that their guests could be non-swimmers, they might not be aware of how hard it could be to find a person if they fell off the deck and they might underestimate the responsibility that fishermen as captains of the vessels have in case of an accident. It is also important to stress that fishermen do not always experience their guests as others, as continentals. Often they understand their visitors in the context of authentic sociality belonging to the same social or class background. This context is formed through the awareness of belonging to the same social status of workers and peasants as was the case of peasant women, miners and fishermen. They have all found themselves in difficult, changed socio-economic circumstances where the same administrative centre is dictating their life while they all expressed that decisions from the centre often surpass their wishes and needs. In this specific ethnographic case fishermen often acknowledged the hard work informing the lives of their guests. As their guests could afford just one day at the sea, the fishermen put maximum effort into “spoiling” their guests so they could recover from work and relax for at least one day. Besides fish, wine, bathing, music in line with the guests’ tastes, they also offered them their company; their masculinity in the case of the peasant women and comradeship in the case of miners. Over the last few years fishermen have continued with their practice of fish picnics, while many of their guests are still hosting working collectives. In the changed socio-economic circumstances people have more difficulties to afford vacations, and instead enjoy their scarce free time (a day off) with greater intensity and appreciation (as often expressed by our interlocutors). In June 2014 many boats such as Morje veselja ladja Jež [The ship of joyfulness Urchin], Zlatoperka [Whit- ing], and Nova [New] were full every weekend. They hosted, one-day excursions, stag parties, collective excursions of working groups and even bikers. Sometimes parties went on long after the fishermen were done with their official excursions. People stayed on the boats and they drank and listened to the music. Often fishermen took such groups for an “extra night trip” in order not to disturb local inhabitants with their loud heavy metal or Yugoslav rock-and-roll music. In the meantime, we, the observers in the port, were asking ourselves how difficult it must be for the captain to handle their cheerful guests. Someone from the local observers sitting in the nearby bar commented: “They must be from Slovenia”. With this comment the person clearly delimited continentals from littorals and/or seamen and implicitly equated himself with the Mediterranean culture. We were guessing if the fishermen had the same thought in their head. Some of us exchanged a few words with the fishermen the next morning, asking them about the previous night while still seeing in our minds the tottering walking of their drunken visitors leaving the pier in the middle of the night. We all agreed that this is not easy money although they seemed confident in handling such situations. On the other hand – it is hard to ignore that the development of sociability between fishermen and their guests enables the fishermen to search (and find) their sense of self and their place in the changed circumstances. At the farewell the happy peasant women, cheerful scholars or proud sport fishermen gave 156 7 How Authentic Is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia? their hosts not only a smile, praising their work or them as persons, but they also gave fishermen a promise that they would return.

7.3 Images: Mediterranean, Istria, the Sea and the Fishing

7.3.1 Heterogeneous Constructions

By the end of the twentieth century and at the beginning of twenty-first century few Slovene anthropologists and historians (Baskar 1993, 2000, 2006, 2010; Brumen 2000; Darovec 1992; Rotar 1993; Orehovec 1997, 2004; Ledinek and Rogelja 1997; Verginella 1996) as well as some other international scholars (Cocco 2006, 2010a, b; Ballinger 2003a, b, 2004, 2006, 2012, 2013) began to focus on the anthropology of the Mediterranean in the Adriatic region. They mostly focused on Istria, trying to understand the political, economic and socio-cultural processes following the history of empires as well as the everyday realities of people from this region. In their endeavours, they constructed a different perspective on Istria and Mediterranean to the one dominating the Slovenian ethnological production of the pre-1990 period and also in comparison with the present-day tourist discourse. What they pointed out was the heterogeneous constructions in the imaginary of the E Adriatic coast and Istria, both of which they discussed also within the larger framework of relations in the Mediterranean. Following the development of eth- nology and historiography of Istria and E Adriatic region, they succeeded in showing how these places were not only the subject of geographical and geo-political delimitations between the Republic of Venice, the Ottoman and Habsburg Empires (and their political successors) but were also subject to different delimitations based on class, ethnicity and culture. Specifically, they highlighted and problematized delimitations between Istria, Dalmatia and the Balkans; between the urban and the rural; the Italian and Yugoslav; Italian, Slovene and Croatian; Latin or Roman and Slavic, etc. Furthermore, historic anthropologists also critically engaged the various delimitations produced by ethno-nationalisms of the nineteenth century; they discussed the impact of border readjustments between Italy and Yugoslavia after the WWI and after the WWII; and after the establishment of the new national states of Slovenia and Croatia as well as within the European Union – and they reflected upon the discourses produced within these political regimes. In the context of these discussions anthropologists devoted their attention also to the history of knowledge. They were interested how historians, ethnologists and social geographers described and perceived the N and E Adriatic area and its numerous borders (Ballinger 2003a, b, 2006, 2013; Baskar 1993, 2000, 2006, 2010; Cocco 2006, 2010a, b). Post-1991 and after the fall of the Iron Curtain, a fresh focus emerged around the question of overlapping identities in terms of ethnicity, region and nation. Those 7.3 Images: Mediterranean, Istria, the Sea and the Fishing 157 discussions deployed notions such as “a field of ethnological study” (which was firstly mentioned by Josselin de Jong in 1935 and then brought into contemporary social anthropology by Albera and Blok 2001), and “the concept of a common interactive ground” (Baskar 2000: 13, 219) when discussing Istria. Despite the fact that the above-mentioned anthropological research operated with a heterogeneity of discursive and local delimitations as well as various regional identities, the domi- nant ethnological tradition and its mono-ethnic approach were still quite influential (Baskar 2000: 41). Those researches who were still bound by mono-ethnic fixations and evolutionary approach to history would still operate from within the concept of the “Slovene ethnic territory” (Baskar 2000: 41). Instead of focusing on the multi- ethnic character of Istrian towns and on the presentation of relations between the inhabitants from different “ethnic backgrounds”, the trend of delimitation between the Slovenian, the Croatian and the Italian still persisted. On the basis of such a belief that sees coastal towns as heterogeneous (and connected with the Italian or the Roman past) and coastal hinterland as homogenous (as Slovene), some Slovene ethnologists focused rather on its hinterland (Ravnik 1996). Consequently, the coastal towns of NE Adriatic cannot be sites of traditional Slovene culture as they are understood in an ethno-national sense. The additional “complication” arose out of a change in the “ethnic picture” connected with the migration pro- cesses, such as the exodus of the inhabitants from Piran, Izola and Koper after the WWII. This change is often portrayed as a migration of the Italian autochthonous population, subsequently followed by the in-coming migration of Slovene inhabi- tants from the rural Istrian hinterlands. This happened in the late 1950s and was later followed by immigrants from other republics within SFR Yugoslavia (Kramar 1987, 2002). On the other hand, Verginela and Ballinger pointed out that the identity relations within these coastal towns were and are much more complex then the ethno-nationalism perspective would assume. They pointed out that it is important to understand the differences between inhabitants also on the basis of their economic status. Verginella for example has pointed out that approaches that focus on the delimitations between the Slovene homogenous hinterlands and homogenous Italian speaking inhabitants needs to be challenged with issues of class belonging (Verginella 1996). Furthermore, Ballinger observed different per- ceptions on Istria between her Italian speaking interlocutors and those who declare themselves to be Italian (Ballinger 2003b). Their opinions differ in relation to whether they moved from Istria (esuli) or they stayed in Istria (rimasti). If esuli from the Trieste environs saw Istria as homogenous and Italian, the rimasti on the other hand talked about culturally heterogeneous and hybrid Istria: One model of identity envisions Istria as a “pure” Italian land “stolen” by the Slavs, and the other understands Istria as historically characterised by ethnic and linguistic hybridity. In the first view, Istrian becomes synonymous with Italian, in the second Istrian represents a Latin-Slav “hybrid” of languages, cultures and population (Ballinger 2003a: 11). In the context of changes that occurred after 1991, Ballinger talks about “authentic hybridity” (Ballinger 2003b: 245–265). Furthermore, she rejected the myth about 158 7 How Authentic Is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia? an ethnically homogenous exodus from Istria that is presented within Slovenian historiography as being exclusively Italian: The exodus from Istria (...) has been largely defined as an Italian phenomenon, despite the significant numbers of Croats and Slovenes who left Istria during the same period (Ballinger 2003b: 276). When analysing tourist-targeted materials and discourses in this region, it is essential to take all these tensions into account. The above sketch reflects the plethora of uses and notions of the past in the NE Adriatic corner5 and will serve as a backdrop to our explanations to the question we wish to address: Why is it that the authors of tourist material in Slovene Istria and Izola (as well as fishermen) are so hesitant and cautious in dealing with the history of Istria and especially with the history of the present-day Slovenian coastal towns?

7.3.2 Tourist Rhetoric and Fishing

Motifs presenting fishing and fishing-related activities are also a feature of tourist brochures and postcards. Shedding light on certain representations and their con- texts can, in part, answer the question why certain motifs are so popular and what their messages evoke. Concrete tourist representations can effectively be seen as reifications of popular current issues. There has been much overgeneralized theo- rizing within the studies of tourism about genealogies and classifications of the relationship between tourists and their motifs. Critiques of such approaches chal- lenge these theories with more ethnographic approaches (Edensor 1998; Boissevain 1996). Tim Edensor stresses that tourism consists of a range of practices and epistemologies, which emerge from particular locations (Edensor 1998:3). The particularity of domestic tourism, for example, raises new questions about the relationship between the center and periphery, hosts and guests, etc. Some studies (Boissevain 1996) have already shown how the notion of domination (economic, cultural, etc.) of peripheries by the center may be oversimplified. In our case, the focus on the center-periphery relationship can only take us so far, since in most cases the vital relationship is the periphery-periphery one. Of course, it is difficult, if not impossible, to fix any one center and any one periphery. The latter, as Tom Selwyn writes, also bears regional, class, and ethnic dimensions; neither are centers or peripheries immutably fixed in a geographical or historical sense (Selwyn 1996: 9–14), and yet certain peculiarities in the presented case do lend themselves to the periphery – periphery relationship model. Fishermen as well as some visitors both locate the ‘centre’ within the region of Ljubljana valley (Ljubljana being the capital city of Slovenia), their class identity is perceived as being close to one another, and even fishermen’s work in tourism is compared to agro – tourism.

5The broader historical context is presented in details within the Chap. 1 of this book. 7.3 Images: Mediterranean, Istria, the Sea and the Fishing 159

Confronting the tourist brochures and postcards from the area in question with ethnography presupposes that the fields in question (tourist imagery and concrete social action) are closely connected, that they inform each other, and that the understanding of local actions demands a closer look at the broader discourses as well. What we suggest is that tourist representations are highly contextualized – firstly, within the wish to represent local distinctiveness and, secondly, within the popular tourist imagery – while at the same time, showing a tendency for the ‘correct’ national presentation. Images from within the tourist landscape are actu- ally concrete forms, satisfying the needs of “invented traditions of imagined communities” as well as adapting to other current trends. Tourist representations are neither unchangeable nor are they unidirectional. Although they radiate the illusion of stability and closeness, they are in fact, as far as their external appear- ance is concerned, very adaptable and readily dynamic. Tourist representations are formed from the beginning through the processes of gazing on the one hand and showing on the other. This formation is a vivid process in which the imagery and the concrete action are not only intertwined, but they also mutually shape and inform each other. In the same way that tourist representations require an appreciation of their context, the identity of an individual or group also does not rely only on the observed activities within the locale. Instead, it is formed at the crossroads of influences that stem from beyond their immediate surroundings. E. George Marcus stresses that: It is the various elements of this process of dispersed identity construction – mobile, related representations in many different places of many different characters – that must be grasped as a social fact (Marcus 1996: 46). When dealing with tourist brochures and other materials aimed at tourists, one must bear in mind that much can depend on who produces the information. The producers of tourist brochures and postcards that we are referring to are independent authors and authors who work for local tourist agencies (workers in tourism, photographers, journalists, text writers, and graphic designers). We examined brochures, flyers or booklets of tourists companies, tourist informative centers and national tourist board, or private publishing houses and institutes. The selected material is not directly related to the commercial advertising material (this being the case with travel organizations and hotel advertisements) but must be seen either as a wish to present truly ‘informative information’ or as an author’s work. Some of the authors are amateur collectors or researchers of local maritime culture. The other interest- ing fact that should be stressed is that almost all of the producers work and live in Slovenia, and many of them are locals from the region that is being examined. The situation presented here is thus the following: native producers who produce their publications (mostly, but not exclusively) for local consumption. The core question is thus how the tourist rhetoric uses fishermen and fishing in their endeavours to represent Slovenian Istria and Izola. We will point out the strategies of tourist discourse that constructs different meanings and feelings of authenticity using sea and fishing. Although we assume that the authors of the tourist brochures and tourist workers are not familiar with the above historical 160 7 How Authentic Is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia? anthropological reflection, we can also assume that they purposely blur history due to its complexity. It must be stressed that most of them are locals and it seems reasonable to assume that they are aware of the contested landscapes and hetero- geneity of views and identities involved. As one of the local tourist workers said: This subject is too heavy for the tourists seeking a break away from everything. Anyway the wounds of the town’s inhabitants run too deep and too raw on both sides – for the natives as for the migrants – to be touched. (personal communication, April 2014). In spite of this prevailing tendency of “blurring the history” some brochures nevertheless touch on the subject. In these the tourist rhetoric is tuned to the deeply rooted opinion, stressing the autochthonous inhabitants as being Italians, the first and only protagonists of maritime culture. It is only seldom that Slovene amateur researchers and writers (those who decided to write about the history) do not agree with the dominant ethno-nationalistic history of Istria which explains the migra- tions after the WWII in the light of the homogenisation of Slovene culture and the disappearing of the Italian one, ignoring the heterogeneity of migrations to and from nowadays Slovene coastal towns. In search of deep authenticity and autoch- thonous culture of the area these amateur writers and researchers draw on the dominant ethno-national discourses of local history. They write about the exodus as exclusively connected with the Italians and they consider the same Italians as the carriers of authentic maritime culture. This sheds light on where the discourse that warns of a disappearing “traditional”, “ancient” or “autochthonous” maritime culture comes from.

7.3.2.1 Mediterranean: A Maritime Character of the Towns

The author of one of the tourist brochures who came with his parents from Serbia, Sombor, to Piran after his first birthday, wrote: [E]specially in the years 1954–1956, the indigenous Italian inhabitants began to leave the town in droves due to political, ideological and economic reasons. New inhabitants arrived at that time with characteristically continental cultural patterns, who often did not take to the Mediterranean, coastal character of the town and its life (Simicˇ 1997: 138). What this suggests is that with Italian fishermen leaving and the arrival of the new inhabitants from the hinterlands this sounded the death knell to the maritime culture and the Mediterranean lifestyle in coastal towns of Izola, Koper and Piran. “The majority of fishermen also left, and with them the fishing boats and equipment” (Simicˇ 1997: 138). In this specific brochure the author did not, for example, tell us that some Italian-speaking fishermen in fact came to Piran, Izola or Koper from the present-day Croatian coast. Among these there were also people from Dalmatia who brought with them knowledge of fishing, shipbuilding and other maritime skills gained at a much “deeper sea”. The discourse of “vanishing maritime culture” and “Mediterranean lifestyle” is attached to the actual disappearance of a specific material culture. Concretely, it is attached to the disappearance of the smaller boats, 7.3 Images: Mediterranean, Istria, the Sea and the Fishing 161 characteristic for Izola at the beginning of the twentieth century known as caiccio and batelina (Simicˇ 1997: 9). The forming of the first fishing fleet is connected with the period before the WWII and is couched in tourist rhetoric of the period “before the exodus”. Never- theless, the photos accompanying the text show the Delamaris fleet from the beginning of the 1990s: In the period from 1938 to 1941, a true fishing fleet was formed in Izola. It was developed by the then-operating factories of Ampelea and Arrigoni. It seems that sailing boats predominated in the primary fleet, large Italian batanas and topos. These were soon replaced by large motorised fishing boats. At present, wooden motorised fishing boats are increasingly used less for fishing and more for transporting tourists and for entertainment. (Simicˇ 1997: 105). The fact that these boats (displayed as visual documentation) were part of Delamaris and Riba fleet and were built in Yugoslavia is somehow overlooked. Another overlooked fact is also the shipbuilding and fishing knowledge brought from Dalmatia that was important for Slovene/Yugoslav fishing. It looks as though a significant part of these writers do not acknowledge the importance and knowl- edge of Dalmatian migrants for the development of maritime culture for the present-day Slovenian coast. The knowledge brought by the Dalmatian migrants is not perceived as authentic Slovene knowledge. Due to the homogeneity discourse prevalent in the dominant ethno-national history, some authors feel that Slovenia has no maritime Mediterranean culture. Only seldom do writers6 acknowledge the maritime culture as an interweaving of various peoples’ knowledge coming from different ethnic contexts or as an interrelation between the land and the coast, as the wood for the boats and the masts is imported from central Slovenia. Recently the batelina type of boats were displayed also in Izola’s public toilets in the form of old photographs replicated on the toilet’s ceramic tiles, intended as a pleasant aesthetic experience for the visitors. Some boats and persons featuring on the tiles would most probably have left Izola due to the changed political circum- stances. These photos are further complemented with images of more recent motorized wooden fishing boats probably photographed in 1960s. Due to the black-and-white sepia technique they give a distinct impression of synchronicity, as if all of the photos are taken from the same past. The borders and problems between different histories thus get blurred and merge into a “mute aesthetic whole” (Fig. 7.1). Meanwhile professional Slovene researchers and universities have developed the so-called Mediterranean studies and use Mediterranean confidently in different contexts for summer school, institutes etc. The national tourist promotion connected with Slovene coast, on the other hand, sometimes use the designation Mediterranean with some hesitation. In 2014 the Slovene tourist agency Kompas used the adjective Coast for Slovenian coastal destinations of Izola, Koper and

6The interweaving of different elements that were important for the local maritime culture is stressed by some amateurish boat builders of old vessels (personal communication, May 2015). 162 7 How Authentic Is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia?

Fig. 7.1 Aestheticization of the past in Izola’s public toilets (Photo Natasˇa Rogelja)

Portorož, while Mediterranean was reserved for Greece, Egypt, Turkey, North Cyprus, Spain, and Bolgaria, (“Listen to the Mediterranean”), while the Adriatic holidays were advertised mainly in Croatia, in Istria, Kvarner and Dalmatia, in the context of post-Yugoslav destinations with the slogan “Feel the Adriatic” (Kompas Holidays 2014). Some hesitations in the use of the term Mediterranean (as well as Istria, as the relation between Slovene and Istria can also be problematic) can be noticed (although rarely) also among independent authors who prefer to use the term Slovene coast (Simicˇ 1997), while the adjective Mediterranean is used in relation to the climate or certain aspects of gastronomy. In local discourse and in the discourse of local tourist agencies the term Med- iterranean is and was used without hesitation already in our first ethnographic fieldwork (1998–2004). It is used in relation to Slovenia (Mediterranean Slovenia), or coastal towns such as “Izola, Mediterranean on your doorstep” (TIC Izola 1998). If the context of the sea can be described in words of romanticized wilderness, healing properties, etc., we need to understand the context of the Mediterranean also within a wider political framework. The titles of the brochures such as ‘Mediterranean in Slovenia’ and ‘Izola – Mediterranean’ on your doorstep tend to display the ‘Mediterranean-ness’ of the region. Not only in the titles, the adjective Mediterranean is used over and over again in the text: Mediterranean food, Med- iterranean climate ...This emphasis on the ‘Mediterranean-ness’ of the region can be understood in several ways: as flirtation with the imaginary concept(s) of the Mediterranean; as drawing a distinction between the coastal and central Slovene region; and the Mediterranean representing a previously established tourist region. 7.3 Images: Mediterranean, Istria, the Sea and the Fishing 163

In connection to the latter observation it is important to note that the stress on Mediterranean was more accentuated in the brochures aimed at foreign tourists. In that sense one could explain the use of the term Mediterranean also in a pragmatic, market-oriented context, in which the Mediterranean is already established as a market niche. Nevertheless, in the use of the adjective Mediterranean, the priority fields of tourist promotion are those of gastronomy, climate and personal experi- ences; it seems like these aspects are less contestable then is the case with history or culture, and are thus used with more confidence. Looking into the pluri-lingual book which was edited by Vita Kernel (2013) and published in February 2013 by Municipality of Izola entitled “Only in Izola”, Izola is represented through photographs taken by Dean Dubokovicˇ. Through pictures and visual images of blue, green and golden yellow colours similar tendencies are identifiable in relation to Mediterranean with Izola poised to take the lead as the most Mediterranean town on the Slovene coast. In the book the Mediterranean is represented through the yellow colour and is used as an adjective; mostly it comes into discussion through the description of climate (Mediterranean climate). When stressing the Mediterranean character of the present-day Slovene coast the book informs us about the exodus of the Italian-speaking inhabitants, the immigration of people from ex-Yugoslav Republics, and about the division between the Slavic and Roman population. In the context of this short “historic picture” Izola is presented as the most Mediterranean of the cities in Slovene Istria. “Perhaps the most Mediterranean town of Slovenian Istria, Izola, is a bilingual area with an active Italian minority” (Kernel 2013). This is where the text highlights the fact that in Izola both languages, Italian and Slovene, are official, while she also stresses the fact that people mostly speak in the Venetian and Istrian dialects, which they mix in their everyday speech with words from South-Eastern Europe. Furthermore, the accent on fishing, gives the town an even more exclusive position of claiming its Mediterranean-ness. Within the tourist brochure Istria (2013), Izola is represented as a picturesque mosaic of tradition, history, architectural sights and hospitable people. The town is represented as “a place of harmonious coexistence of different nationalities” (Slovenian Istria 2003: 6). In the tourist discourse one group among these hospita- ble people is reserved also for the fishermen. Thus Izola is constructed through a narrative that is: ...closely linked to the sea. Being a fishing town it was the home of the first fish-canning factory. Despite its former “sleeping beauty” status, known as the home of fishermen and workers, Izola has developed into a popular tourist resort” (Slovenian Istria 2003: 6).

7.3.2.2 Slovenian Istria: A Generous Garden with a View of the Sea

Slovenian Istria is nestled between the Karst rim to the east, the Adriatic Sea to the west, and the Bay St. Bartholomew to the north. It borders on two neighbouring countries: Italy and Croatia, and its population is really diverse .../.../ Istrian people live in harmony with their soil and know how to make the best of it, even though it is not always easy. Slovenian 164 7 How Authentic Is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia?

Istria enjoys a moderate climate of olive trees, vines and many different kinds of fruit trees. Those are also the basis of Istrian cuisine, not extravagant but a simple and healthy culinary and oenological art of food preparation. Fishing used to be an important part of everyday life as well; however, nowadays the number of fishermen is decreasing. /.../ Slovenian Istria is like haven for your heart and soul. It is truly a place where you will live unforgettable experience (Bencˇicˇ 2012: 6, original bold). Examining bold words in the above tourist-aimed description, it is apparent that Slovene Istria gets defined with geographic notions, gastronomic offer and fishing. Although fishing is made bold in the text together with food and geographic terms, it is described as a vanishing activity. Furthermore, a recent publication of Slove- nian Tourist Board and local tourist association of Koper, Izola and Piran, entitled Slovenian Istria, reveals additional aspects centred around the idea of experiencing and sensing a place. “First-hand experience and photographs tell the story of Slovenian Istria better than any words. The eye glistens with excitement, the soul yearns to travel” (Slovenian Istria 2003: 2). According to this brochure Slovenian Istria is also “A place, where you start to write the story of your own experience” and a place where “Istrian people tell the story of their homeland. They live in harmony with the soil, not always hospitable, yet rewarding hard work” (Slovenian Istria 2003: 2). In this touristic rhetoric, Slovenian Istria is constructed as a generous garden, nothing short of heaven, where people “...grow olive trees, vines and many different kinds of fruit, the basis of Istrian cuisine, not extravagant but a simple and healthy culinary and oenological art of food preparation” (Slovenian Istria 2003: 2). Furthermore, it cannot be represented without its fisher- men: “Fishing used to be an important part of everyday life, now, however, the number of fishermen is decreasing” (Slovenian Istria 2003: 2). From the above excerpts and other brochures, it becomes clear that the most visible accent falls on food in relation to Istria. Slovenian Istria is constructed through healthy but moderate food and through the representation of the “folk Istrian cuisine” with “its roots in nature”. In this culinary construction of Slovene Istria, again the landscape is represented through the opposition between the sea and the hinterland now joined in contemporary Istrian cuisine: In the past, the littoral and hinterland cuisine were differentiated. The first was based on seafood or fish dishes while the second comprised vegetable and meaty dishes. This differentiation practically no longer exists today and we can now speak of a single Istrian cuisine (Pucer 2012: 10). In this perspective fishermen are put into the “Istrian picture” almost implicitly through the sea and sea food. In the same way as the littoral and hinterland cuisine are joined in a single Istrian cuisine, the fishermen too with their “problematic story” can now become part of this “multicultural pot”. The entrance through seafood seems the most “natural” and least problematic one. 7.3 Images: Mediterranean, Istria, the Sea and the Fishing 165

7.3.2.3 The Sea

Within the selected materials of local tourist information centers, the descriptions of the sea are highly romanticised, and the connection between the inhabitants of the coastal towns and the sea presented in tourist brochures carries a transcendental note. One of the more prominent tourist brochures in 2000 stressed the close relationship between the inhabitants of Izola and the sea, a relationship which the tourist is also invited to experience. The text also emphasized the importance of fishing in keeping this connection alive: Each story has its beginning. Once upon a time Izola was an island ...As time passed the island was united with the mainland, but nevertheless Izola maintained its close relationship to the sea through fishing. Izola’s mild winters and hot summers invite you to spend the holidays just here, on the seaside in Izola, where the music of your vacation has the sound of the sea (Izola – Isola 1999). A recommendation for seaside tourists generally follows this, advising them to appreciate the connection with the sea and its ‘healing and spiritual powers’. Much more than just a sea in which we could swim and have fun, we are introduced to the sea that is the object of admiration, through which we come into contact with nature, wilderness, and the eternal. The poem by Jorge Luis Borges, which is included in one of the tourist brochures, emphasizes the fact that the sea is also an inspiring object; the experience of the sea, as presented here, is (first and foremost) spiritual. The poem begins with the following words: “Long before the time condensed to days, the eternal sea already washed the shores...” (Izola – Isola 1999). The sea, as understood here, stands in for wilderness, a notion that one should not treat as a defined physical area, but as a state of mind. Fishing (represented in this same brochure mostly with photographs) adds to this experience a link to the primal and the rural, since it represents an activity that includes a daily confrontation between man and nature. Maritime anthropologists often stress that ‘being with nature’ is also one of the positive attributes of being a small coastal fisherman. According to anthropological data, fishing is often perceived as a ‘natural way of life’ standing in opposition to the ‘city way of life’ that is suppos- edly characterized by criminality, alienation, consumerism, violence, and so on (Einarsson 1996: 49; Acheson 1981: 296). Looking at national promotional slogans, however, a different picture of the sea emerges than the one we have observed in the local tourist promotion materials. The slogan for Slovenia as a destination of travel and as a tourist brand has undergone multiple changes over the last few decades. In late 1980s, tourist advertising used the motto “Slovenia, my country”, stressing the patriotism and political self-esteem which addressed domestic, Slovenian tourists. This slogan had replaced the first promotional slogan developed in the Socialist Yugoslavia, 166 7 How Authentic Is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia?

“Slovenia, on the sunny side of the Alps”, which played on the common sense, implying that Slovenians are on the better side of the Alps in comparison with the capitalistic Austrians. The promotional parole stressed Slovenia’s natural beauties putting the main emphasis on the sun and Alps but not on the sea. The diversity of Slovenian landscapes made it more difficult to frame a simple and effective promotional slogan also for the years to come. In early 2000 the tourist promoters used the motto “Slovenia invigorates”. Finally, the Slovenian promotional slogan “I feel Slovenia/I FEEL sLOVEnia” (original bold), which was developed in 2007, continued to play on the emotional impact, stressing the fact that Slovenia is the only state which has love in its name. The imaginary of the sea entered this framework through the back doors and found its place somehow “naturally”. Although the sea is still in the background of the whole picture, the emotional context made a space wide enough to open its doors also for different local expressions of the sea.

7.4 Putting the Pieces together

While preforming and advertising their activity fishermen are well aware of the symbolic context in which their work operates. They are aware of the attractiveness of their profession in the context of sea imaginaries but also in the context of “problematic history”. In their efforts to attract visitors and to stay themselves on the sea, they cooperate with various discourses and navigate in different directions according to the needs and circumstances of the moment. On their excursions (and their web pages) they do not discuss the history of fishing beyond talking about their family tradition7; they expect that the majority of their guests will be fascinated by spending time on a fishing boat, listening to music that takes one back to Yugoslav holidays, but they are also open to other possibilities with new boats aimed exclusively at passenger transportation, alternative food menus, etc.... Apart from the fact that fishermen are actively cooperating with various discourses and representations of the Slovene coast and the sea as well as with meanings attached to “traditional” professions and romanticizations of the sea, there is a kind of “collective” enjoyment of these representations to be noticeable on both sides – hosts and guests. Curiously, participation in these imaginaries is even more evident among those fishermen who were the most critical of the connection between fishing and tourism and whose alternative solution meant fishermen still continue to be fishermen, rather than allow themselves to be transformed into tourist

7Such symbolic aspects of fishing can also be noticed on tourist boats that are not fishing boats and where captains are not fishermen. We noticed that they also stress in their advertisements certain aspects of their connection with fishing in order to attract more visitors (they for example highlight the fact that the boat was once used for fishing or they stress that their crew members are coming from fishing families, etc.) Such example is the boat Meja [Border] aimed exclusively for passenger transportation. 7.4 Putting the Pieces together 167 workers. Such examples actually indicate both the compatibility between tourist imaginary and everyday life along the coast but also their essential incompatibility. As Selwyn has argued, tourism, apart from introducing capitalist relations of production on the coast, it also introduced a ‘parallel reality’ – a kind of aesthetification of the landscape that is, following Selwyn, increasingly unrelated to the uses to which it is put (2004: 57). Though in agreement with this statement, we should stress here that the studied ethnographic case reveal a possibility of relatedness and compatibility between everyday aspects of life along the coast and tourist imaginaries. The idea of a “proper” connection between fishing and tourism, as stressed by several of our interlocutors, is an attempt to combine aesthetification of the landscape with its everyday usage. Within this process different aspects of authenticity get merged, making the binary framework completely redundant together with the notions of original Slovene fishing culture. Thus merged in the “bag of everyday uses”, these innovative survival tactics in a way relieve anthro- pology of its dilemma about the use of authenticity, exposing the initial question “How authentic is Slovene fishing?” as unimportant and rather empty. If fishermen were to engage in meanings of original tradition they would have to incorporate historical aspects attached to heritage and tradition. Instead their innovation lies in their “play” with surrounding images and in the fact that they put effort into the actual activities (fishing, aquaculture and shellfish farming, passenger transporta- tion, restaurant services, providing fresh and healthy Mediterranean food...). It is in doing so that they build their “authentic hospitality” on the actual genuine relations with their visitors as Slovene fishermen who do this in order to survive in the present-day situation and in some cases even to share enjoyment with their guests. On the other hand, the Fishing Holidays, the program realized through EU funding, brings to the fore novel approaches developed within the last 10 years. The project is a hybrid combination of various – sometimes different approaches and discourses developed and realised by different actors (fishermen – sport fishermen – scientists – tourist workers...), it is still developing and is meant primarily as an educational programme designed for visitors who would like to gain additional knowledge about maritime food producing process, fishing or natural science oriented knowledge on maritime environment. One can observe that within this programme joy and amusement are of secondary importance (as are some aspects of hot authenticity, for example the notion of getting to know one’s true self). Prices of the excursions are higher in comparison to “ordinary” fish picnics and although the rhetoric may seem quite similar to the one seen in the previous material, the target public group this programme wants to attract is obviously a different one; the frame of reference is more likely to be connected with the “cool authenticity”8 and the context that surrounds it is related to the authentic EU strategy – the sustainable development discourse.

8See more on the notion of cool/hot authenticity in Tom Selwyn (1996). 168 7 How Authentic Is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia?

Hence to conclude; exploring polysemic meaning and semantic complexity of authenticity and presenting different notions of authenticity at the level of everyday practice among fishermen and their guests, we showed in this chapter different uses of authenticity attached to fishing tourism and Slovene Istria as well as their innovative transformations. We also demonstrated how these uses were displayed at a national and local level focusing on fishermen’s innovations. In doing so, we took into consideration various national and local tourist promoters that importantly contributed to this story. However, in the last few years fishing tourism has also been additionally promoted in relation to sustainable development discourse while the relation between fishing tourism and sustainable development was also posi- tively evaluated within EU political strategies. Taking into consideration all these different angles as well as the more general position of small scale fishery within the EU and the need to survive, we could conclude this discussion by simply repeating the initial question: How authentic is Slovene fishing?

References

Abram S, Waldren J (1997) Introduction: tourists and tourism – identifying with people and places. In: Abram S, Waldren J, Macleod DVL (eds) Tourists and tourism: identifying with people and places. Berg, Oxford, pp 1–11 Acheson JM (1981) Anthropology of fishing. Annu Rev Anthropol 10:275–316 Albera D, Blok A (2001) Introduction: the Mediterranean as a field of ethnological study. A retrospective. In: Albera D, Blok A, Bromberger C (eds) L’anthropologie de la Me´diterrane´e. Maisonneuve et Larose, Paris, pp 15–37 Anderson B (1983) Imagined communities. Verso, London Ballinger P (2003a) Selling Croatia or selling out Croatia? NCEER, Washington, DC Ballinger P (2003b) History in exile: memory and identity at the borders of the Balkans. Princeton University Press, Princeton Ballinger P (2004) “Authentic hybrids” in the Balkan borderlands. Curr Anthropol 45(1):31–60 Ballinger P (2006) Lines in the water, peoples on the map: maritime museums and the represen- tation of cultural boundaries in the upper Adriatic. Narodna umjetnost 43(1):15–39 Ballinger P (2012) Entangled or ‘extruded’ histories? displacement, national refugees, and repa- triation after the Second World War. J Refug Stud 25(3):366–386 Ballinger P (2013) Liquid borderland, inelastic sea. Mapping the Eastern Adriatic. In: Bartov O, Weitz ED (eds) Shatterzone of empires: coexistence and violence in the German, Habsburg, Russian, and Ottoman borderlands. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp 423–437 Baskar B (1993) Mare Nostrum. Cˇ KZ – Mediteran v Sloveniji XXI(158–159):7–11 Baskar B (2000) Dvoumni Mediteran: Sˇtudije o regionalnem prekrivanju. Zgodovinsko drusˇtvo za južno Primorsko, Koper Baskar B (2006) Imagining the Balkans in Trieste. Caietele Echinox 10(2006):190–199 Baskar B (2010) Southbound, to the Austrian riviera: the Habsburg patronage of tourism in the Eastern Adriatic. Anthropological Notebooks 16(1):9–22 Bencˇicˇ N (2012) Gastronomic guide to Slovenian Istria. http://documentslide.com/documents/ vodnik-po-gastronomski-ponudbi-slovenske-istre-gastronomic-guide-to-slovenian.html. Accessed 11 Feb 2016 Bendix R (2009) In search of authenticity: the formation of folklore studies. University of Wisconsin Press, Wisconsin References 169

Boissevain J (ed) (1996) Coping with tourists – European reactions to mass tourism. Berghahn, Oxford Brumen B (2000) Sveti Peter in njegovi cˇasi. Ljubljana: cf Cocco E (2006) Introduction. The Adriatic space of identity. Narodna umjetnost: hrvatski cˇasopis za etnologiju i folkloristiku 43(1):7–14 Cocco E (2010a) Borderland mimicry: imperial legacies, national stands and regional identity in Croatian Istria after the nineties. Narodna Umjetnost 47(1):7–28 Cocco E (2010b) Performing maritime imperial legacies: tourism and cosmopolitanism in Odessa and Trieste. Anthropological Notebooks 16(1):37–58 Darovec D (1992) Pregled zgodovine Istre. Zgodovinsko drusˇtvo za južno Primorsko, Koper Duke P (2007) The tourists gaze, the cretans glance: archaeology and tourism on a Greek Island. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek Edensor T (1998) Tourists at the Taj: performance and meaning at a symbolic site. Routledge, London Einarsson N (1996) A sea of images: fishers, whalers, and environmentalists. In: Pa´lsson G, Durrenberger EP (eds) Images of contemporary Iceland. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City Field L (2009) Four kinds of authenticity? Regarding Nicaraguan pottery in Scandinavian museums, 2006-08. Am Ethnol 36(3):507–520 Hobsbawm E (1988) Introduction: inventing traditiones. In: Hobsbawm E, Ranger T (eds) The invention of tradition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–15 Izola (1998) Izola: TIC Izola Izola – Isola (1999) Izola: Turisticˇno gospodarsko združenje Izola Janko Spreizer A (2004a) Cultural and political construction of Romani ethnic differences in romological discourse on Romany in Slovenia. Anthropol East Eur rev 22:54–64 Janko Spreizer A (2004b) Avtohtoni in neavtohtoni romi v Sloveniji: socialna konstrukcija teritorialnega razmejevanja identitet. Razprave in gradivo 45:194–218 Janko Spreizer A (2006) Avtohtonost v slovenskem narod (nost) nem vprasˇanju in koncept staroselstva: nastavki za analizo ideologij primata/Autochtonism in the Slovenian national (ities) issue and the concept of indigenousness: elements for the analysis of primacy ideologies. Razprave in Gradivo/Treatises and Documents 50(51):236–71 Kernel V (2013) Only in Izola/Samo v Izoli. TIC Izola, Izola Kneževic´-Hocˇevar D (2004) Vanishing nation: discussing nation’s reproduction in post-socialist Slovenia. Anthropol East Eur Rev 22(2):22–30 Kompas Holidays (2014) http://www.kompas.si/pocitnice/. Accessed 10 Feb 2016 Kramar J (1987) Izola: mesto ribicˇev in delavcev. Lipa, Koper Kramar J (2002) Izola: 1945–1991: iz zgodovine obcˇine od osvoboditve izpod fasˇizma do ustanovitve samostojne Republike Slovenije 25. junija 1991. Zgodovinsko drusˇtvo za južno Primorsko, Koper Ledinek Lozej Sˇ (2014) Sˇavrinke – preprodajalke med osrednjo Istro in obalnimi mesti ter nosilke simbolnih identifikacij: Družbenozgodovinske okolisˇcˇine delovnih migracij in sˇavrinizacije istrskega podeželja. Dve Domovini 40:47–55 Ledinek Sˇ, Rogelja N (1997) Sˇavrinka kot oseba in simbol. Etnolog 7:131–145 Ledinek Lozej Sˇ, Rogelja N (2000) Potepanje po poteh Sˇavrinke Marije. Knjižnica glasnika SED, Ljubljana Ledinek Lozej Sˇ, Rogelja N (2012) The Sˇavrinka, Sˇavrin, and Sˇavrinija in ethnography and literature. Slavisticˇna revija 3:537–548 Lisjak BV (1996) Slovensko pomorsko ribisˇtvo skozi stoletja od Trsta do Timava. Mladika, Trst Lisjak BV (2005) Cˇ upa, prvo slovensko plovilo, in drevaki: prispevek k etnologiji in vprasˇanju etnogeneze Slovencev. Mladika, Trst MacCannell D (1989) Introduction on special edition on semiotics of tourism. Annales Tour Res 16:1 Macdonald S (1997) A people’s story; heritage, identity and authenticity. In: Rojek C, Urry J (eds) Touring Culures. Routledge, London/New York, pp 155–175 170 7 How Authentic Is Fishing Tourism in Slovenia?

Marcus EG (1996) After the critique of ethnography: faith, hope and charity, but the greates of these is charity. In: Borofsky R (ed) Assesing cultural anthropology. Mcgraw-Hill, New York Mauss M (1996) Esej o daru in drugi spisi. Studia Humanitatis, Ljubljana Nadel-Klein J (2003) Fishing for heritage: modernity and loss along the Scottish coast. Oxford, Berg Orehovec M (1997) Delo Istrank v Trstu. Etnolog 7¼58(1):115–129 Orehovec M (2004) Vmesˇavanje v življenja drugih. Zagate antropolosˇkega raziskovanja na terenu na primeru sˇtudije žensk in dela v Istri. Etnolog 14:73–92 Pucer B (2012) Gastronomic guide to Slovenian Istria. http://issuu.com/kopertourism/docs/ vodnik_web?e¼3371853/3957880. Accessed 11 Feb Ravnik M (1996) Bratje, sestre, strnie`i, zermani: družina in sorodstvo v vaseh v Slovenski Istri. Založba ZRC, Ljubljana Rogelja N (2006) Ribicˇi pripovedujejo. Etnografija ribisˇtva med miljskim in savudrijskim polotokom. Univerza na Primorskem, Znanstveno-raziskovalno sredisˇcˇe, Založba Annales, Koper Rogelja N (2014) Vse po resnici! Uporaba biografske metode ob raziskovanju Sˇavrink. Dve Domovini 40:35–46 Rojek C, Urry J (eds) (1997) Touring cultures. transformations of travel and theory. Routledge, New York Rotar B (1993) Kje je Mediteran? Cˇ asopis za kritiko znanosti XXI(158–159):15–24 Sahlins MD (1999) Two or three things that I know about culture. J R Anthropol Inst 5(3):399–421 Selwyn T (ed) (1996) The tourist image. Myths and myth making in tourism. Wiley, Chichester Selwyn T (2004) Privatising the Mediterranean Coastline. In: Boissevain J, Selwyn T (eds) Contesting the foreshore. Tourism. Society, and politics on the coast. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam Simicˇ S (1997) Vodnik po Izoli. Simart, Izola Slovenian Istria (2003) Koper: TIC Koper Sˇumi I (2000) Kultura, etnicˇnost, mejnost – konstrukcije razlicˇnosti v antropolosˇki presoji. Založba ZRC, Ljubljana Sˇumi I (2004) Etnicˇno razlikovanje v Sloveniji: izbrane problematizacije. Razprave in gradivo 45:6–47 Sˇumi, I (2011) Znanost v Butalah / Science in Butale. In: Kolsˇek, Katja & Tomazˇ Gregorc (eds.), Prihodnost znanosti: neoliberalizem, univerza in politika sodobnega znanstvenega raziskovanja [The future of science: neoliberalism, university, and the politics of contemporary scientific research]. Novo Mesto: Goga Sˇumi I (2011) Znanost v Butalah / Science in Butale. In: Kolsˇek K, Gregorc T (eds) Prihodnost znanosti: neoliberalizem, univerza in politika sodobnega znanstvenega raziskovanja [The future of science: neoliberalism, university, and the politics of contemporary scientific research]. Goga, Novo Mesto Sˇumi I, Josipovicˇ D (2008) Avtohtonost in Romi: k ponovnemu premisleku nacˇel manjsˇinske politike v Sloveniji. Dve domovini 28:93–110 Theodossopoulos D (2013) Laying claim to authenticity: five anthropological dilemmas. Anthropol Q 86(2):337–360 Verginella M (1996) Ekonomija odresˇenja in preživetja, odnos do življenja in smrti na tržasˇkem podeželju. Zgodovinsko drusˇtvo za južno Primorsko, Koper Part IV Management: Sustainable Development, Projects and Common Fisheries Policy

The idea of sustainability is deeply intertwined with the everyday discourses along the present-day Slovene coast, while the general notion of sustainable development is mainly understood within the contextual universe created by the Brundtland Commission back in the 1987.1 In a relatively short span of time it became quite difficult to think environmental and developmental issues outside this framework, so that even fishery itself became “sustainable” or “unsustainable”. Over the years, new EU regulations appeared in line with sustainable protection discourse such as Integrated Coastal Management and Marine Spatial Planning.2 These frameworks have underlined “...the importance of an integrated approach to a sustainable management and planning of use of marine and coastal space and natural resources, based on the observance of requirements and limitations of existing marine and coastal ecosystems” (IWRS 2016). When Slovenia accessed EU, the Slovene Ministry of the Environment and Spatial Planning started to adapt national legisla- tion to numerous international and EU regulations and directives regarding sus- tainable development of coastal areas, marine environments and the protection of biodiversity. On the basis of this new regulation different institutional actors (such as the Institute for Water of the RS, National Institute of Biology, Marine Biolog- ical Station...) started to cooperate in order to draft the national operational plan (e.g. Maritime Environment Management Plan (MEMP)). Cross border and cross sectoral cooperation is seen to drive these efforts while the border issues between Slovenia and Croatia are still left unresolved. Regardless of that, researchers and

1The most common definition of sustainable development being – development meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs – was articulated within the Report of the World Commission on Environmental and Development, GA Res 42/187, UN GAOR, 42nd session, 96th plen mtg, UN Doc A/RES/42/187 (11 December). 2Directive 2014/89/EU established a framework for maritime spatial planning. Within the Inte- grated Maritime Policy of the Union this framework provides for “...the establishment and implementation by Member States of maritime spatial planning, with the aim of contributing to the objectives specified in Article 5, taking into account land-sea interactions and enhanced cross- border cooperation, in accordance with relevant Unclos provisions” (Directive 2014/89/EU). 172 IV Management: Sustainable Development, Projects and Common Fisheries Policy experts start to cooperate in the Coastal Area Management Programme. Regional Development Center Koper for example cooperates with the Institute for Water of the Republic of Slovenia and other partners from Italy, Slovenia, Montenegro and Croatia and participates in various European projects (e.g. IPA Adriatic (SHAPE), Adriatic +3 (Sharing Marine and Coastal cross management experiences in the Adriatic basin)). This specific regulatory and discursive setting allows and calls for relations spreading out in various directions, appearing to be open and based on equality between partners, although, as we found out, the role of fishermen in all this is somehow unclear. According to our ethnography there are several minor examples of such cross-sectoral cooperation, which has included, for example, the DeFishGear project,4 where the fishermen got new work clothes. In exchange for professional fishing clothes in bright yellow colour, they collected the old fishing gear and other trash such as plastic bottles caught in their nets and in that way participated in the project (personal communication, December 2015). Slovene fishermen were not included in the project as partners (as a financed institution) while their role in the project is said to be of special importance: “Fishermen are an important link in the chain of marine environment protection, and their current activities could significantly contribute to reducing marine litter” (IWRS 2015). Does not this role of sea garbage men ascribed to disadvantaged fishermen have a strong symbolic meaning? Are they payed adequately to fish garbage in comparison to other experts and scholars included in the project? Did they finally become sustainable? Over the last ten years there has been a lot of talk along the Slovenian coast on the subject of what is or isn’t sustainable fishing and who fishes sustainably, while the debate reached one of its high peaks with the visit of Greenpeace’s Rainbow Warrior III in Koper in 2014, which hosted on board of a ship a seminar on sustainable fishing in the Mediterranean. It was just two years prior to the visit of Rainbow Warrior that some Slovene fishermen as well as the company Riba5 gave up fishing and sent their vessels for scrapping. Namely, to prevent overfishing, Slovenia followed recommendation of EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), and began to decrease the size of its fishing fleets (affected also by the diminished Slovene fishing territory after 1991). Slovenian fishing territory is divided into three zones but our interlocutors fish mainly in zone A (Slovene territorial waters), as zones B and C are problematic due to the unsolved maritime border between

3Project Adriatic + is the first project implemented in practice to meet the objectives of the Action Programme Adriatic Ionic Strategy for the Adriatic region and combines the results of knowledge and positive experience of existing projects related to the marine environment. Intensive use of marine and coastal space for transport, construction, and development activities such as tourism, fishing, aquaculture and sport is reflected in the growing impact on coastal and marine ecosystems (IWRS 2016). 4Derelict Fishing Gear Management System in the Adriatic Region, within the IPA Adriatic tendering programme (IWRS 2015). 5Previously a Yugoslav state company Delamaris, a fishing and fish-producing and fish-caning company. IV Management: Sustainable Development, Projects and Common Fisheries Policy 173

Slovenia and Croatia (see Chap. 2). Furthermore, despite the possibilities to fish in international waters the fuel prices were too high to allow for economic profit. Following the Common European Fisheries Policy (and its reform in 2012) aiming at reducing the effects of overfishing, some Slovene fishermen, including the company Riba, found financial possibilities for dismantling boats that were no longer profitable in this new situation. Those who decided to stay in the business had to cope with high taxes as private entrepreneurs, they had to cope with the tourism impact, traffic regulations due to the Port of Koper and regulations regard- ing natural reserves and protected areas, all of these activities taking place within the zone A. The decision regarding the dismantling of fishing boats was largely greeted in the popular discourse (Slovene fishing now became sustainable, as it was stressed many times during the Greenpeace seminar in local media), though it was also accompanied with some bitterness and sadness that this could mark the beginning of the end of Slovene fishing. Similar observations can be made in relation to another all-pervasive notion – that of the “project”. Everything nowadays becomes “a project”, preferably a sustainable project, and it has become quite difficult to think about work outside of the project framework even if you are a small scale fisherman. While the use of the project discourse has become naturalised to the point of self-evidence, there has been surprisingly little reflection and analysis on how project and project manage- ment function; how they have come into use in a specific local settings (e.g. in the post-Yugoslav context) and what their consequences might be.6 Today projects and project management play a very important role in different private and public sectors along the Slovenian shore, while the project is perceived as a specific task within a limited time frame, limited to the extent that it is supposedly controllable, sometimes even creative and innovative. On the other hand, some of our interloc- utors feel they are being pushed into the insecure situation where everything and everybody has to be flexible, creative and innovative. In this situation some are flexible, innovative and creative (mostly the active and more forceful fishermen or those owning bigger boats where passenger transportation is possible) while others do not find these pressures comfortable and feel that with them “real fishermen” are disappearing, while public welfare had died a long time ago. In other words, “fishing for projects” demands specific skills that go beyond the traditional fishing knowledge, such as locating and catching the fish, environmental knowledge, etc., and has created specific structural changes, as for example the appearance of mediators and negotiators. As Sjoblom,€ Lofgren€ and Godenhjelm argue in their reflections on projectified politics, the project as such has become a post- bureaucratic symbol of adaptability and contingency considered to be a superior way of reacting to unanticipated and irregular situations (2013: 4). Even though fishing is one of the economic activities where adaptability, uncertainty and

6Several texts related to the reflection and analysis of the social context of projects and project management in regional development policies can be found in the Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning (e.g. Andersson 2009; Kova´ch and Kucˇerova 2009). 174 IV Management: Sustainable Development, Projects and Common Fisheries Policy

flexibility are well-known issues, “(sustainable) fishing for projects” seems to be grounded in the idea of scarcity, and there one has to navigate differently. Mantras like “there is not enough fish, not enough jobs, not enough money, not enough ...” have somehow inflected our total understanding of “how things are” or “should be done”. Following the concept of scarcity, as developed by Andrew Douglas, we can place this – at first sight very specific ethnographic situation of “(sustainable) fishing for projects in Slovenia” – into a broader framework of trying to understand people’s concerns as well as the consequences of the project organisation. In his book “In the spirit of critique” Douglas wrote how the language of scarcity provides a way of capturing our total social milieu, a way of describing a unitary relation of a plurality of individuals in the modern world (2013). The idea of a project seems to fit well within this framework as it operates on the presupposition of temporary actions performed creatively by competitive and flexible agents. As Douglas wrote: “Insofar as we project meaning into the world, insofar we fashion our life as project and bring a field of meaning into existence around our project, we do so in a milieu of scarcity in a situation which both the world and others, materially and socially, becomes a potential threat to the success of our project” (2013: 52). Beside the sustainable development discourse and the “projectification” of Slovene fisheries, Part IV will also reflect on how Slovenia confronted the new EU regulations on fishing. Fishery governance and marine sustainable development issues are both part of globalization processes. These environmental and economic ideologies (and the discourses they produce) are part of the European and global universe that influences and impinges upon everyday actions of individuals, regions and states, yet these hegemonic ideologies are also adapted at the local and national levels. What is of special importance for this part and what has become almost a “light motif” for the whole book, is the ethnographically informed knowledge about adaptive actions and tactics of human agents, communities and states that are indeed innovative, creative, complex and locally specific. A general decline in reserves and environmental degradation merged with various environmental and economic discourses led to policies that balance between economic efficiency, social responsibility, and environmental protection strategies, and one of the exam- ples of such efforts is a Common Fishery Policy within the European Union. In this situation fishery dependent regions and bigger European states play an important role in social policy, while smaller states such as Slovenia struggle to accommodate the rules set by “the big players”. In this part we will thus navigate between sustainable development issues, projects, policy regulations and people; namely those who are fishing for fish, those who are fishing for projects, and those who are studying fish, as well as those who are involved in management of Slovene fisheries at different levels. From the chronological point of view, the final part also brings us to discussing recent events along the present-day Slovene coast over the last ten years. In contrast to the previous periods (namely the first period being the break-up of SFR Yugo- slavia and the second being characterised by the attempts to adapt to the new situation that led to numerous conflicts), this last decade is characterised by a somewhat more organised, stable and novel dimension to Slovene fishery, enriched IV Management: Sustainable Development, Projects and Common Fisheries Policy 175 by the knowledge of how to apply for EU funds, how to organise a dialogue through different mediators (such as through the Fishery Office in Izola) but also by how to position Slovenia as a maritime state within the larger framework of the EU. However, in this new situation we were interested in observing the use, implementation and the actual output of the environmental, economic and cultural regulations and discourses within the Slovene maritime region, while the question of “who will win at the end” in this new situation still remains open. It looks like the local mobilization of sustainability can be, at some level and within certain groups of fishermen (the “active” ones, those with bigger boats and good family connections...), also used as a tool for empowerment of fishermen, while such observations cannot be applied generally across the board, since the owners of a “small small” scale fishing boats or less enterprising fishermen would perhaps find it difficult to agree with such a conclusion.

References

Andersson K (2009) Orchestrating regional development through projects: the “innovation para- dox” in rural Finland. J Environ Policy Plan 11(3):187–201 Directive 2014/89/EU. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri¼CELE X:32014L0089&from¼EN. Accessed 20 July 2016 Douglas AJ (2013) In the spirit of critique. Suny Press, Albany IWRS (2015) Derelict fishing gear management system in the Adriatic region, within the IPA Adriatic tendering programme. http://www.izvrs.si/project/defishgear-sistem-ravnanja-z- odpadno-ribisko-opremo-v-jadranski-regiji-2/?lang¼en. Accessed 1 Sept 2016 IWRS (2016) ADRIATIC+ Sharing marine and coastal cross management experiences in the Adriatic basin. http://www.izvrs.si/project/international-project-adriatic-the-project-for- longterm-improvment-of-quality-of-the-marine-and-costal-space/?lang¼en. Accessed 1 Sept 2016 Kova´ch I, Kucˇerova E (2009) The social context of project proliferation – the rise of a project class. J Environ Policy Plan 11(3):203–221 Report of the World Commission on Environmental and Development (1987) GA Res 42/187, UN GAOR, 42nd session, 96th plen mtg, UN Doc A/RES/42/187, 11 December Sjoblom€ S, Lofgren€ K, Godenhjelm S (2013) Projectified politics–temporary organisations in a public context. Scand J Public Adm 17(2):3–12 Chapter 8 Walk Along the Protected Areas and Navigation with Sustainable Fishermen

Abstract Together with changes within the Slovenian environmental policy around 1990s and the introduction of numerous protected areas and environmental programs, the sustainability mantra has entered the social world of the present-day Slovenian coast. Nevertheless, the environmental protection regulations had been present also before the introduction of sustainable development discourse and market economy. In this chapter we will present a specific case study of Greenpeace seminar on sustainable fishing held in Koper in 2013, accompanied by a brief historical overview of the environmental concerns from within the Yugoslav context.

Keywords Sustainable development • Sustainable fisheries • Greenpeace • Protected areas • Environmental protection

Together with changes within the Slovenian environmental policy around 1990s and the introduction of numerous protected areas and environmental programs, the sustainability mantra has entered the social world of the present-day Slovenian coast. Nevertheless, the environmental protection regulations had been present also before the introduction of sustainable development discourse and market economy. In this chapter we will present a specific case study of Greenpeace seminar on sustainable fishing held in Koper in 2013, accompanied by a brief historical overview of the environmental concerns from within the Yugoslav context. There are five coastal and marine protected areas along the Slovenian coast; two nature parks Secˇovlje Salina Nature Park and Strunjan Nature Park (which encom- pass two reserves – Stjuža and Strunjan); two natural monuments Debeli rticˇ and Rt Madona and one natural reserve Sˇkocjanski Zatok Nature Reserve. Some of the protected areas were already drafted in the mid-1980s according to the provisions of the former law within SFR Yugoslavia while several others, such as Sˇkocjanski Zatok, were proclaimed as protected areas over a decade later in 1998 (Vidmar and Turk 2011). The percentage of protected areas along the Slovene coast is very high and it exceeds the percentage of protected areas in many European countries (The World Bank 2016). Our interlocutors (fishermen) see protected areas also as an obstacle to their activities, while some have recently reflected on the possible involvement or “use of the protected areas” through their tourism-aimed activities. On a fishing-boat tourist excursion in August 2014, in which we participated, the

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 177 N. Rogelja, A. Janko Spreizer, Fish on the Move, MARE Publication Series 11, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-51897-8_8 178 8 Walk Along the Protected Areas and Navigation with Sustainable Fishermen

Fig. 8.1 Tourist excursion with the fishing boat Delfin [Dolphin] to Piran (Photo Natasˇa Rogelja) route took us past the protected cliff area towards Piran. As we were slowly sailing on the calm sea, taking in the scenery, the fisherman-skipper spoke of having heard of some recent geological findings in this area and told us he was thinking to include that piece of information as part of his trip Izola – Piran. While discussing this idea further with us, he questioned the possibilities of whether he could get a permission to get closer to the protected areas with the boat; however, finally he drew the conclusion that it would probably be too complicated for him to achieve this end. Instead he will take his guests merely for a coffee in Piran and then back to Izola, while amusing his guests with his “fishing stories” as he always did. “Some think this is a boring business”, he said, but he himself did not hold such opinion (Fig. 8.1). Recently, The FLAG (Fisheries Local Action Group) OAS Ribicˇ [the Fisher- man], founded in 2012, framed several objectives for the local strategies for sustainable development of fisheries in which they specifically discussed the role of fishermen in protected areas. Within the objective 2, describing the preservation of the natural environment and contribution to sustainable fisheries, they wrote: Protected areas represent an important element for the planning of sustainable development of fisheries not only from aspects of nature and landscape protection per se, but also in the context of fisheries. Biodiversity and season occurrence of specific species in these protected areas help us understand why the latter are so important for the preservation of population of fish species that are significant for the economy. It is all the more so because the geo-morphological characteristics of the Gulf of Trieste do not offer many possibilities for juvenile fish and other organisms to grow. Fishermen, fish farmers and mussel farmers shall be actively involved in the protected areas activities (OAS Ribicˇ 2011). 8.1 Environmentalism in SFR Yugoslavia 179

While such ideas of an active engagement of fishermen in the protected areas are not new (as testified by our ethnography of diversification of fishing activity in Slovenia from 1999 onwards), it was only recently that the idea was articulated officially, formalised as a statement within an institutional body, namely the FLAG Ribicˇ from Izola. The 1990s was the time in which sustainability discourse, alongside environ- mental programs and EU projects, entered the social world of the present-day Slovenian coast in a prominent way. This way some previous ideas (connecting fishing and tourism) and old practices (SFRY domestic tourism) began to merge with new ecological and economical ideas. Of course, merging existed even before the breakup of Yugoslavia, and the environmental protection regulations had been present also before the introduction of sustainable development discourse and market economy. So before moving onto the specific case study of the Greenpeace seminar on sustainable fishing held in Koper in 2013, let us first give a brief historical overview of the environmental concerns from within the Yugoslav context.

8.1 Environmentalism in SFR Yugoslavia

In their article on constructing a new understanding of environment under postsocialism, Herrschel and Forsyth wrote that postsocialism is a unique societal condition which needs to be acknowledged for its common characteristics and implications for future development in the relevant countries (2001: 583). At the same time they also stress the fact that postsocialist countries are highly divergent and complex, with specific paths of transition emerging as a reflection of the specific location, and that this needs to be recognized (ibid: 576). Furthermore, with the fall of Berlin Wall in 1989, the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the breakup of Yugoslavia in 1991 and images of Chernobyl disaster in 1986 as well as the Aral Sea, it was easy to be critical of socialism (ibid: 574). Subsequently, several authors also made a link between state socialism and environmental degra- dation (e.g. Waller and Millard 1992), while post-socialist countries had to cope with these negative images in their own way. It is important to note that although state socialism (for example in the former Yugoslavia) did play a certain part in environmental degradation (however, the Yugoslav mainstream media for example would not have reported much on environmental degradation), it was not the socialist model that was to blame for chemical agriculture, unsustainable forestry, accumulation of waste and other major issues connected with contemporary envi- ronmental degradation. As Herrschel and Forsyth observed, many environmental hazards in the socialist states were intricately connected with interactions with the “Western” model of market economy (2001: 576). One of the examples that found its way into public domain, included waste being transported from the “West” to the “East” in exchange for money and silence (Hillenbrant 1996 in Herrschel and Forsyth 2001: 576). Later on, in the period of post-socialism, the initially 180 8 Walk Along the Protected Areas and Navigation with Sustainable Fishermen oversimplified approaches that linked socialism directly to environmental degrada- tion, acknowledged the diversity of socialist and post-socialist processes and focused on small-scale geography and specific case studies (ibid: 581). It has also become evident that ...creating “environmental capacity” implies creating the space for local determination of environmental objectives rather than simply equipping localities with technical expertise to implement objectives identified elsewhere (ibid: 583). As in other postsocialist countries, the story of environmental concerns within the territory of present-day Slovenia has its own specificities that go beyond the socialist political context. At the beginning of the twentieth century the first wave of environmental movements began in the United States. At that time the environ- mental impacts of industrial development were brought to light, while in Slovenia, due to relatively weak industrialization, the focus had always been more on nature conservation (individuals recognized the need to protect nature for its beauty and rarity) than on environmental protection (Polajnar Horvat et al. 2014: 2). Within the second wave of Western environmental movements, books like Silent Spring (1962) from Rachel Carson or the act of announcing the Earth Day in 1970, relativize the faith in progress, while in Slovenia only few individuals wrote (for example in the magazine Tovarisˇ [Comrade]) about the environmental problems of pollution surrounding factories (Polajnar Horvat et al. 2014: 2–3). A general mindset in Yugoslavia was overall inclined towards industry, but emphasizing its positive effects for its people, while the chimney stack, together with factories and workers, became a positive national symbol. In Slovene coastal area, the fishing and fish producing factory Delamaris was for example portrayed as the symbol of coastal progress while industrial fishery was not in any way seen to pose a core problematic in environmental degradation (personal conversation with Slovene maritime biologist Miroslav Zei, February 1999), as it is highlighted in the recent Slovene national strategic government document NUMO [MEMP1] from 2013 (IWRS 2015). At the beginning of 1970, the first tendencies towards planned engagement in environmental protection appeared in Slovenia (and further afield along the Adriatic coast), while individual societies (such as mountaineering societies or Slovenian Natural Science Society) played an important role in this tendency (Polajnar Horvat et al. 2014). As mountains have always been an important part in the Slovene national imaginaries (Kucˇan 1999), the sea somehow lagged behind also in these individual environmental protection efforts. Regarding water protec- tion, inland waters gained more attention in this respect. As observed by Gosar and Steinman, in the past [referring to pre-1991 period] the sea stayed in the shadow of water management issues that were more specifically related to the regulation of internal waters (2000: 101). What was managed in Yugoslav coastal areas in the 1960s and early 1970s was tourism. Regarding the institutional management of

1Marine Environment Management Plan. 8.1 Environmentalism in SFR Yugoslavia 181 coastal areas in the period of SFR Yugoslavia, three plans were developed with the assistance of UN Development Program: Adriatic I (1969–1971, covering SE Adriatic region), Adriatic II (1971–1972, covering the Upper NE Adriatic region) and Adriatic III (1973–1978, covering the whole of the Yugoslav Adriatic region) (Koboevic´ et al. 2012). The stress within the Adriatic I and II was primarily on tourism development component while Adriatic III was more environmentally oriented. [Adriatic III] was launched with the basic aim of harmonizing the development and protection needs as well as possible. [...] That project is particularly important because it was perhaps the first response at the conclusion of the First World Conference on Envi- ronmental protection held in Stockholm in 1972 and because it covered such a large area (the entire eastern coast of the Adriatic with immediate hinterland) (Randic´ 156: 2002). According to Travis, the three studies reflect a maturing of theory, concepts and techniques of planning and development (2011: 162), especially after the year 1978, when SFR Yugoslavia saw the new mode of tourism peak when the Adriatic coast provided accommodation to some 34.8 million foreign and 48.6 million domestic tourists. According to Travis, this made environmental conservation a new imperative (ibid). In the 1970s representatives of the Slovenian Natural Science Society took part in the United Nations Conference in Stockholm and marked the occasion by publishing the Green Book on the Threat to the Environment in Slovenia in 1972, laying down the first guidelines for the improvement of the environment. In the same year the Slovenian Environmental Protection Association and the Environ- mental Committee of the Assembly of the SR Slovenia were established (Polajnar Horvat et al. 2014). One could observe that the institutional framework was generally not much inclined towards environment protection around the 1960s, while Yugoslav state nevertheless offered opportunities and gave relative freedom to environmentally oriented individuals or organizations (ibid). As Horvat, Smrekar and Zorn observed, within the third wave of the environmental protection move- ment around 1980, in Slovenia (which was still part of SFR Yugoslavia at that time) various individuals and NGOs worked together to try to make the governmental bodies more aware of the importance of environmental protection (ibid: 4). Although the mainstream media in SFR Yugoslavia did not report on the environ- mental issues much, there were alternatives magazines such as Mladina [Youth] or radio station Sˇtudent [Student] that undertook this effort. An important milestone in environmental protection in Slovenia was the nuclear accident in Chernobyl, as a result of which an anti-nuclear movement begun in Slovenia, calling attention to the potential danger of the nuclear station in Krsˇko (Slovenia). Around 1990, in the period of political changes within SFR Yugoslavia, the sustainable development discourse encountered pre-existing socio-ecological and cultural environmental traditions while, as Mark Whitehead wrote in his book Spaces of Sustainability, despite the new opportunities offered for the incorporation of the principles of sustainability in the post-socialist societies (one of them being a possibility to be funded through EU fund for sustainability) it is clear that other 182 8 Walk Along the Protected Areas and Navigation with Sustainable Fishermen pressures associated with transition have inhabited the development of effective policies for sustainable development; prime among them being the pressure asso- ciated with economic transformation (2006).2 As far as Slovene fishing is concerned, the fishermen, together with responsible authorities had to learn new ways of funding, writing applications, using catch words and trying to think from within different frameworks when striving for survival and environmental protec- tion. These frameworks were different at the operational level but were not so radically different in terms of their contents (following Adria I, II and III projects as well as local strategies generally). From the perspective of the everyday, anthropological reality, Slovenia and its inhabitants actually had a long history of “invisible” environmental awareness (not labelled as sustainable), present in the practice of picking wild fruits and vegeta- bles, mountaineering and small “sustainable” gardening (vrticˇkarstvo, nowadays praised as organic small-scale gardening aimed at self-sustaining the family). As far as the sea is concerned, some of our interlocutors even think that maritime envi- ronmental problems have increased in the context of the market economy with the increased traffic in the port of Koper, with the plans for the gas terminals in the Gulf of Trieste and with the increased mariculture activity. However the bitter taste of the negative image about the “socialist environmental approaches” still persists within the Slovene costal region and some of it has also affected industrial3 fishing. In 2012 when the two last bigger Slovene fishing vessels from the former Riba state company fleet were dismantled the debate on harmful industrial fishing shifted in various directions. Slovene fishing became “environmentally friendly” but it also started to be under threat, with the prospect of disappearing altogether. In one of the well visited Slovene nautical forum for seafarer (Morjeplovec 2015) there was an interesting debate, which reflected on the vanishing Slovene industrial fishing fleet while also commented critically on the EU market economy and food producing industries. Within the rather nostalgic debates on the destruction of vessels Riba 1 and Riba 2 (people shared memories and photos attached to these two vessels dating from the period of SFR Yugoslavia) someone has attached a link to a short documentary (produced recently by the Slovene TV program POP TV) on EU food producing industries, showing the disappearance of the local producers and commenting upon the more general situation of small states such as Slovenia being made dependable on the corporative food producers who are, as stressed in

2The first overreaching Environmental Protection Act within Slovenia was adopted in 1993, establishing the foundation for today’s environmental protection and following the adoption of the act, the number of laws dealing with environmental protection has markedly increased (Polajnar Horvat et al. 2014: 5). 3The name industrial fishing has its own history in the context of Slovenia and E Adriatic coast. In the period of SFR Yugoslavia, industrial fishing was related directly to the state companies such as Delamaris (and later Riba) in Izola or other companies along E Adriatic coast related to fishing and its processing industry. This link still persisits today. When our interlocutors talk about industrial fishing along the present-day Slovenian coast, they specifically refer to the company Delamaris and their (former) fishing boats. 8.1 Environmentalism in SFR Yugoslavia 183

Fig. 8.2 Farewell to Riba 1 (Photo Alenka Janko Spreizer) the documentary, selling low quality food and are ultimately unsustainable (both from the ecological and social point of view). The debate following the link turned into a criticism of today’s market economy seen to be using sustainability as a cover to perform business (taking care only of the economic side of sustainability). Within this focus Riba 1 and Riba 2, the last two bigger vessels owned by the Riba company looked small, unimportant and destroyed by the administrative mistake (Fig. 8.2). There were also numerous newspaper articles and everyday debates that commented rather nostalgically on the disappearance of the Riba’s vessels. News- paper Slovenske novice for example wrote: [...] boats Riba I and Riba II, the symbol of former Yugoslavia and later of the Slovenian sea fishery, have ended up in pieces. The metal ships are namely being cut up in Izola’s Shipyard. Does this shredding also mean the sinking of the entire Slovenian maritime fishing? Most likely, since given the guidelines set by the EU, we will only be doing sport fishing in the Slovenian corner of the sea in the future. The future is gloomy indeed; there are no prospects of survival for Slovene fishing (Umer 2012). The subtitle of the piece is also telling: “Izola, a fishing museum?” It echoed along the Slovenian coast and informed general opinion, opening a space for reflection on the conflicting opinions on harmful industrial fishing; on prodigality of Riba company who did not cover their salaries with catches; on socially fair politics where workers of Riba had stable salaries, on the end of Slovene fishing, advantages 184 8 Walk Along the Protected Areas and Navigation with Sustainable Fishermen and disadvantages of socialist regime as well as on fears connected with the new EU regulations. It seems like the sustainability discourse offered some comforting answers to all these questions.

8.2 “Slovene Fishing Is Totally Sustainable”: A Dialogue with Greenpeace

Ljubljana, 19 March 2013 – Greenpeace ship Artic Sunrise launches a two-month European tour in support of small fishermen, under which it will arrive in Koper. The tour begins at a time when negotiations on the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) are entering their final phase. For decades, governments gave priority to industrial fishing, which threatens the future of fish in our seas. Communities that depend on fishing have felt the consequences of this action? (Bodi Eko 2013).

Arctic Sunrise, an icebreaker belonging to Greenpeace visited the port of Koper in April 2013 as a part of a tour promoting sustainable fishing, and several environ- mental and “eco-oriented” societies or journals as well as governmental bodies wrote very positively about Greenpeace tour (as demonstrated by the example above). Various events presenting harmful industrial fishing were organised on board, while Slovene local environmental organisations such as Morigenos – Slovenian Marine Mammal Society as well as governmental representatives and local fishermen were invited to participate and speak about their concerns. Before the tour started, Greenpeace had facilitated the European sustainable fishermen congress in March 2013 in Brussels, in cooperation with fishermen from all around Europe. Fifty fishermen from 9 countries (Poland, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, UK, France, Spain, Croatia and Greece) came together to present their perspectives. Even though the fishermen’s perspectives and the perspective of Greenpeace did not always match, the event as well as the ship tour with the Greenpeace ship Arctic Sunrise that started in Romania was, in a sense, unique. In comparison to other Greenpeace actions, it built a much broader network of fishermen, widening also the scope from the environment to the social milieu by directly involving fishermen in the dialogue. Arctic Sunrise anchored in the port of Koper at a particular moment in time; by then the Slovene Riba (industrial) fleet had already been dismantled; Slovene fishermen have already had their first taste of EU regulations; it was also a time when it was not difficult to criticize industrial fishing (the remainder of the Yugoslav industrial past), since many of smaller coastal fishermen (those with boats under 12 m and few boats up to 18 m) were struggling to survive and had to resort to various adaptive strategies, sometimes looking back on the SFR Yugoslavia period with nostalgia. It was somehow easy to “show off” with sus- tainability by pointing at the small Slovene fleet while the remaining Slovene fishermen felt uneasy, stressing that they will “sustainably disappear” if all of the environmental laws will be implemented. As a representative of fishermen Zlatko 8.2 “Slovene Fishing Is Totally Sustainable”: A Dialogue with Greenpeace 185

Novogradec with passive technology from Piran pointed out in a local newspaper Primorske novice: Our sea is small. What has remained of Slovene fishing is inconsequential. Slovenia cannot only be giving orders about reducing the catch. We do indeed all belong to the same pot and we do respect the law, but the responsible ministry does not understand that we cannot follow such laws. If they are to be implemented, there won’t be a single fisherman left able to survive on fishing; the only ones remaining will be those for whom fishing is an additional activity (STA 2013b). A Slovene governmental representative from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food subscribe to such a view in the same local newspaper, stating that “Slovenia is not part of the problem but Slovenia does sometimes have a problem for being part of CFP” (ibid). In the media, governmental representatives generally didn’t criticize the previous CFP regulations but they did express difficulties in adjusting the CFP to the specific situation of Slovenia. Slovene media reported extensively on the Greenpeace events, largely giving support to the Greenpeace campaign,4 while also supporting fishermen’s argument and stressing the uniqueness of Slovene maritime fishing that is heading towards extinction if all the CFP and other environmental restrictions are to be implemented. Slovene fishermen who participated at the round table “Slovene sustainable coastal fishing and its future in the light of the CFP reforms” on April 17, 2013 were cited extensively in the media and the media debate highlighted the “Slovene fishing problem” over the environmental one. The above-mentioned citation “If we were to respect the law, there wouldn’t be a single fisherman left”, was for example used as a heading in a local journal Primorske novice (STA 2013b). The article commented on the Greenpeace visit regardless of the fact that one of the aims of the Greenpeace tour was to promote stricter laws on fishing. Facts about the “Slovene reality” were enumerated, while the concrete details attached to the CFP reform were left out. As it was reported in one of the Slovene mainstream media Delo by Boris Sˇuligoj (2013)5 quoting Tanja Strnisˇa, a representative from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food: Slovenian fishermen are indeed something peculiar within Europe: even the Czech and Hungarian fishermen catch more fish. Slovenian fishermen are the only ones in the EU and probably also in the world who have in the last 20 years reduced the total catch 15-fold, while in the last three years three times more. The fact that 8 ships were dismantled last year, amongst them were also Riba 1 and Riba 2 (which did not possess passive fishing gear), Slovenian fishing has indeed become entirely sustainable. If the CFP reform will be such as to paralyze small coastal fishing, then this is the end to our fishing. In one year, our catch has been cut in half. What we manage to catch in an entire year is what a larger industrial fishing ship in the North Sea catches in a day. For such a small catch, a small state

4Titles such as: Slovenski ribicˇi in Greenpeace vlecˇejo podobne mreže [Slovene fishermen and the Greenpeace dragging similar nets] (Sˇuligoj 2013), Greenpeace podpira male ribicˇe [Greenpeace supports small fishermen] (Cˇ epar 2013), Slovenski mali ribicˇi opozorili na svoje težave [Slovene small fishermen gave voice to their problems] (STA 2013a) appeared in the Slovene media. 5Slovene reporter specialised on fishing and maritime affairs who often represents fishermen’s opinions. 186 8 Walk Along the Protected Areas and Navigation with Sustainable Fishermen

like Slovenia must still obey the same rules with respect to control, monitoring and management of fisheries, but the CFP should also bring in measures to help to preserve small-scale fishing, said Tanja Strnisˇa. In dialogue with environmental and CFP issues Slovene media highlighted the appeal of Slovene fishermen who asked Slovene Ministry to negotiate for excep- tions that should apply to Slovene maritime fishing. Among these exceptions fishermen highlighted two in particular: four remaining Slovene vessels with the technique of purses seins (locally called sˇekaleve) should be/given an exceptional status, and different measures in regards with fish discards should be applied to Slovene fishing.6 The first issue was linked with the discourse on tradition as the fishermen proposed that these four boats should be treated with less severe rules as they are said to be the last four boats performing this traditional fishing technique with sˇekaleve nets (purse seines). The second issue of fish discard was presented in numbers, highlighting the fact that Slovene fishermen produce only few tons of discards per year while the fishermen in the northern seas produce 1.3 millions tons of discards in the same amount of time. As it was stressed in Delo (Sˇuligoj 2013) newspaper, in the article “Slovene fishermen and Greenpeace are dragging similar nets” (ibid), summarizing the fishermen perspective: A single measure of discards affects all the Mediterranean fishermen who do not have quotas. Especially Slovenian fishermen who do not have a place to destroy properly discards at their pier and would have to drive them to Ljubljana. This would entail disproportionate costs. Therefore, Slovenia advocates that a certain percentage of discards can be returned to the sea. Greenpeace, on the other hand, strongly opposing the act of dumping discards back into the sea. Even though Slovene discards are small in quantity, they still amount to, following the environmentalist perspective, a waste of food and destruction of the marine environment. Despite these various perspectives the Greenpeace visit in Slovenia did achieve putting together different opinions and everyday realities establishing a productive dialogue. As one of the Slovene fishermen from the younger generation stated on a Greenpeace blog post (already employing sustain- able discourse): The more talk there will be on small coastal fishing, the better for us small fishermen. [...] Industrial fishing ships have eyes only on profit, while we are the ones connecting this activity with tradition and communities, from which we emerge. We fish selectively, thinking about the future generations. [...] With the help of Greenpeace, we could possibly achieve that. It might be an NGO, but it has its clout and power to ensure that our voices, those of small fishers, come to reach the right ears. I admit, I was sceptical to begin with, but today, I can see that with joint forces we can achieve more (Lazar 2013).

6Discarding takes place in several situations: when, for example, fishermen catch fish which they cannot sell, when they do not have a quota or they catch fish which are too young or too small to be legally landed. In some cases, fishermen may also discard fish to high-grade their catch, or discards may consist of species that are not interesting for selling/consuming at the local market. 8.2 “Slovene Fishing Is Totally Sustainable”: A Dialogue with Greenpeace 187

The Arctic Sunrise finished its journey in support of small scale fishermen in June 2013, only a few weeks after the CFP reform was confirmed. Greenpeace reported that the results were a victory for the CFP reform, and that it will allow nations to re-allocate fish quotas from large players to small, with the goal to reduce the damage caused by overfishing. As stated on the official webpage of Greenpeace: The deal that is emerging today is good news, even if we are disappointed that ministers blocked a deadline for the recovery of fish stocks. For the first time, the EU has recognised the value of low-impact fishermen by highlighting the need for social and environmental criteria in the allocation of fishing quotas (Greenpeace 2013). Even though Slovenia is not a part of the fishing quota system, the Greenpeace campaign did direct some attention to the few remaining Slovene maritime fisher- men who officially supported the Greenpeace campaign while unofficially shared many misgivings about future of Slovene small-scale fisheries. Ethnographic reflection on the managerial and organisational development of the Slovene coastal fishing over the last decade, a subject of the last chapter of the book, partly supports such misgivings. Following the Greenpeace campaign and introducing environmentalism in SFRY, we described Slovene fishery also within the bigger context of transforma- tion from socialist to post-socialist societies. As we discussed in the previous chapters this change was not a simple evolutionary path leading from the old condition to the new one but had more to do with gradual transformation of previous legacies, with reconfiguration and rearrangement of various available elements. After the period of political changes within SFR Yugoslavia, the EU sustainable development discourse encountered pre-existing socio-ecological and cultural environmental traditions that merged into the new story. In describing this process our intention was not to neglect the changes and differences between different periods but to present the hybrid character of these developments. Within socialist Yugoslavia, industrial fishing was not presented as an environmental threat but was embedded within the positive image of industrial development. Fishermen working in the industrial sector were therefore not seen as the ones contributing to the degradation of maritime environment but as workers, as much appreciated social actors, contributing to the state prosperity and development. Fishing factories in Izola held a special place in this story as they covered canning and fishing industry and supplied Yugoslav national army with Delamaris fish cans. Following the year 1991 Slovenia lost the Yugoslav market and Delamaris company lost its fishing territories. The “new” sustainable development discourse was introduced as an all-embracing frame of reference while fishermen had to adapt to the newly launched politics. To be small-scale, private fishermen became a virtue although the holders of such appellations felt rather marginalised. The Greenpeace campaign and a reform of the common fisheries policy some- how coincided with the end of Slovene industrial fishing and with the dismantling of the two last Slovene industrial fishing vessels Riba 1 and Riba 2. Within this context the Greenpeace initiative brought together Slovene fishermen, representa- tives of Slovene environmental NGOs, representatives of the Slovene Ministry of 188 8 Walk Along the Protected Areas and Navigation with Sustainable Fishermen agriculture as well as the wider public. All these actors started to discuss local conditions within a new context. The dialogue born from these encounters revealed on the one hand conflicting ideas (on specific issues such as the regulation of fish discards and boats equipped with purse seines) but on the other it also embraced an understanding of the need for consensus building, conflict mitigations and consid- eration of local specificities.

References

Bodi Eko (2013) Greenpeace podpira evropske trajnostne ribicˇe [Greenpeacesu ports European sustainable fishermen] http://www.bodieko.si/greenpeace-podpira-evropske-trajnostne-ribice. Accessed 28 Dec 2015 Cˇ epar N (2013) Greenpeace podpira male ribicˇe [Greenpeace supports small fishermen]. Zˇ urnal24.si (April 17). http://www.zurnal24.si/greenpeace-podpira-male-ribice-clanek-190645. Accessed 21 Aug 2015 Directive 79/409 EEC. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri¼CELEX:31979 L0409:en:HTML. Accessed 1 Sept 2016 Directive 92/43 EEC. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri¼CELEX:01992 L0043-20070101&from¼EN Accessed 1 Sept 2016 Directive 2000/60/EC. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri¼cellar:5c835afb-2ec6-4577- bdf8-756d3d694eeb.0004.02/DOC_1&format¼PDF Accessed 1 Sept 2016 Directive 2014/89/EU. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri¼CELE X:32014L0089&from¼EN. Accessed 20 July 2016 Gosar L, Steinman F (2000) Pravni režimi na morju. In: 11. Misˇicˇev vodarski dan, Maribor, 8. December 2000. Zbornik referatov. Vodnogospodarski biro, Maribor, pp 101–106 Greenpeace (2013) Press release. EU agrees workable deal on fisheries reform to recover fish stocks and support low-impact fishing. Greenpeace, May 30. http://www.greenpeace.org/eu- unit/en/News/2013/EU-agrees-workable-deal-on-fisheries-reform-to-recover-fish-stocks-and- support-low-impact-fishing/ Accessed 9 Feb 2016 Herrschel T, Forsyth T (2001) Constructing a new understanding of the environment under postsocialism. Environ Plan 33(4):573–587 IWRS (2015) Management of marine environments. http://www.izvrs.si/upravljanje-morskega- okolja/?lang¼en. Accessed 1 Sept 2016 Koboevic´ Zˇ , Milosˇevic´-Pujo B, Kurtela Zˇ (2012) Održivi razvoj i integrirano upravljanje obalnim podrucˇjem – procesi uspjesˇne zasˇtite obalnog mora. Nasˇe more 59(3–4):176–188 Kucˇan A (1999) Cultural landscapes as symbols of national identity-protection or change? The shifting aspects of landscape identity. Agric Conspec Sci 64(4):259–268 Lazar M (2013) Zˇ elim si, da bi lahko tudi moji otroci opravljali poklic ribicˇa [I wish my children too would be able to work as fishermen]. Greenpeace Slovenija. Blogspot, April 22. http:// www.greenpeace.org/slovenia/si/Blog/Blog/blog_ribic/blog/44856/. Accessed 28 Dec 2015 Morjeplovec (2015) http://www.morjeplovec.net/. Accessed 24 Dec 2015 OAS Ribicˇ (2011) Objectives of local strategies for sustainable development of fisheries. (n.d.). http://www.oasribic.si/en/objectives-of-local-strategies-for-sustainable-development-of-fisher ies.html. Accessed 9 Feb 2016 Polajnar Horvat K, Smrekar A, Zorn M (2014) The development of environmental thought in Slovenia: a short overview. Ekonomska ekohistorija X(10):16–25 Randic´ A (2002) Prospects for integrated coastal management development in Croatia. In: Sain BC et al (eds) Sustainable coastal management. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Amsterdam, pp 155–159 References 189

STA (2013a) Slovenski mali ribicˇi opozorili na svoje težave [Slovene small fisher men gave voice to their problems] Vecˇer, April 17. http://www.vecer.com/clanek2013041705907109. Accessed 5 Aug 2015 STA (2013b) Cˇ e bi sposˇtovali zakone, ne bi imeli niti enega ribicˇa vecˇ [If we were to respect the law, there wouldn’t be a single fisherman left]. Primorske novice, April 17. http://www. primorske.si/Primorska/Istra/Ce-bi-spostovali-zakone-ne-bi-imeli-niti-enega-rib.aspx. Accessed 9 Feb 2016 Sˇuligoj B (2013) Slovenski ribicˇi in Greenpeace vlecˇejo podobne mreže [Slovene Fishermen and Greenpeace are dragging similar nets]. Delo, April 18. http://www.delo.si/novice/slovenija/ slovenski-ribici-in-greenpeace-vlecejo-podobne-mreze.html. Accessed 24 Dec 2015 The World Bank (2016) Marine protected areas (% of territorial waters) 2011–2015. http://data. worldbank.org/indicator/ER.MRN.PTMR.ZS/countries. Accessed 28 Dec 2015 Travis AS (2011) Planning for tourism, leisure and sustainability. CABI, Oxfordshire Umer I (2012) Ribisˇki lepotici na skrivaj razrezali [Fisheries beauties secretly destroyed], Slovenske novice, 9 November. http://www.slovenskenovice.si/novice/slovenija/ribiski- lepotici-na-skrivaj-razrezali. Accessed 24 Dec 2015 Vidmar B, Turk R, (2011) Marine protected areas in Slovenia. Varstvo narave 1:159–170. http:// www.zrsvn.si/dokumenti/63/2/2011/Vidmar_Turk_2538.pdf. Accessed 9 Feb 2015 Waller M, Millard F (1992) Environmental politics in eastern Europe. Environ Polit 1(2):159–185 Whitehead M (2007) Spaces of sustainability: geographical perspectives on the sustainable society. Routledge, London/New York Chapter 9 European Books Are Too Big for Us

Abstract From the chronological point of view, this chapter brings us to discussing recent events along the present-day Slovene coast over the last 10 years. In contrast to the previous periods (namely the first period being the break-up of SFR Yugoslavia and the second being characterised by the attempts to adapt to the new situation that led to numerous conflicts), this last decade is characterised by a somewhat more organised, stable and novel dimension to Slovene fishery, enriched by the knowledge of how to apply for EU funds, how to organise a dialogue through different mediators (such as through the Fishery Office in Izola) but also by how to position Slovenia as a maritime state within the larger framework of the EU. However, in this new situation we were interested in observing the use, implementation and the actual output of the environmental, economic and cultural regulations and discourses within the Slovene maritime region, while the question of “who will win at the end” in this new situation still remains open.

Keywords Coastal management • Sustainable development • Environmentalism • Common fisheries Policy • Mariculture

From the chronological point of view, the final chapter brings us to discussing recent events along the present-day Slovene coast over the last 10 years. In contrast to the previous periods (namely the first period being the break-up of SFR Yugoslavia and the second being characterised by the attempts to adapt to the new situation that led to numerous conflicts), this last decade is characterised by a somewhat more organised, stable and novel dimension to Slovene fishery, enriched by the knowledge of how to apply for EU funds, how to organise a dialogue through different mediators (such as through the Fishery Office in Izola) but also by how to position Slovenia as a maritime state within the larger framework of the EU. However, in this new situation we were interested in observing the use, implementation and the actual output of the environmental, economic and cultural regulations and discourses within the Slovene maritime region, while the question of “who will win at the end” in this new situation still remains open. It was a grey rainy day in autumn 2004 when Natasˇa went to Izola to meet two fishermen and heard a story about the new fishing diaries that were much too big for Slovene fishing boats. In that period Slovene administration had to adapt rapidly to

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 191 N. Rogelja, A. Janko Spreizer, Fish on the Move, MARE Publication Series 11, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-51897-8_9 192 9 European Books Are Too Big for Us the EU rules and in the case of fisheries, the state was asked to provide more detailed data on the amount of catches. As the two fishermen from Koper explained, the responsible authorities from the Slovene Ministry organised an unpleasant meeting where they distributed European diaries, as fishermen called the logbooks, and informed them about the new rules and most importantly about the sanctions (personal conversation, November 2004). The system of daily recordings of the catch by the fishermen themselves was introduced due to fact that Slovene maritime fishing is too small and it would be hard to justify costs for state sampling and monitoring of the catch. Fishermen on the other hand felt that the burden of accurate registration of their catch was transposed from the state administrators onto their shoulders. Apart from expressing unease with the additional administrative burden, fishermen also commented on the rather unpleasant way of communication in that specific meeting. As they stressed: “These guys treated us as if we were pupils and they were teachers” (personal conversation, November 2004). They also critically observed the actual size of EU diaries. As one of them commented:

They say it’s only experimental, these European books. European diaries or how shall I call them...Previously I wrote down once a month ...what I caught, but here I have to fill in the amount every day, every catch... I throw the net and I have to fill in the amount... Approximately in kilograms...Because if the police or inspectors come they could charge me..., so they said. Now for me it’s difficult to write the catch down every time I pull up the net... And also these books are way too big. For a big boat it’s not a problem, but if you have a boat of four meters, a boat without a cabin, where can you keep such a book that is too big and too fat? Where can I keep it? And then my dirty hands! (personal conversation, November 2004).

In the first period of our ethnographic research (1999–2004), fishermen talked a lot about the EU, about their expectations and fears connected to the new political situation. According to our ethnographic evidence, they expressed positive expec- tations, hoping that Slovene fishing will be finally regulated properly (mostly their memories of the “chaotic period” were attached to the transitional situation after 1990), but were also disappointed with concrete measures (such as the introduction of EU diaries) and most of all with the Slovene administrative bodies and respon- sible authorities that were, in their opinion, servile in relation to the EU and not capable of taking care of maritime issues. As one of the small scale fishermen said in the period before Slovenia entered EU:

But listen, if we want to enter EU, fisheries will be one of the major problems [...] Things will have to change. The law has to be there... For example, somebody goes and robs a bank and if nobody gives a damn about it, then the others are left with nothing. So, the rules should be there. The attitude of (Slovene) politics towards fishery was up until this year very arbitrary [...] It ignored the fishermen. It’s all very well to go to some seminars in Germany, to the North Sea, but here we have a pond...Everything that’s been done up until the last year had been a disaster. But I say those guys from Ljubljana, they will catch it from EU. And only then things will be sorted out properly, but until then...We finally succeeded in getting the same status as farmers but now they want to put as among the entrepreneurs. This is exactly what we don’t want. And then they say, EU demands this and that, but these are stories for children. In Italy for example, fishermen have a special status, they get some benefits (personal conversation, November 2004). 9.1 Project: Heading Towards Europe 193

In the period after the break-up of SFR Yugoslavia and up until 2004 fishermen mostly criticized Ljubljana, accusing the central state administration of not being capable to handle the new situation. They felt that the state and responsible authorities do not stand up for their citizens; they stressed that Slovenian politi- cians are submissively following larger EU states, ignoring the local context of Slovene fishing, and some even felt that in the previous political regime they had been much better off. Such perspectives might be partly a legacy of the last few decades of the previous socialist regime, namely the period after the 1970 that represents the “golden years” of Yugoslav welfare system, which had left a differentmarkontheoverallsocietyincomparisontoothersocialistcountries (Taylor and Grandits 2010: 17). On the other hand the Slovene state had to cope with numerous challenges in the pre-joining period1; apart from the general economic transformation, responsible ministries had to, on the practical level, adapt to the new ways of project oriented financial mechanism while numerous financial opportunities for fishery were missed out on. In the last decade, after 2004, any number of changes appeared at the level of organisation among fishers themselves as well as at the responsible Slovene Ministry. Apart from the appear- ance of different actors, such as NGOs, private enterprises, independent local consortiums as well as municipal and other state bodies, the other novelty that was spreading rapidly along the Slovene coastal region was that of the only-to-be- expected adoption of the “project philosophy”, namely of fishing framed within specific discourses of competitiveness, diversification, flexibility, innovation and sustainability.

9.1 Project: Heading Towards Europe

9.1.1 Fishery Office

In 2004, a wish for better communication between fishermen and the responsible Ministry was partly realised through the establishment of Fishery Office in Izola, an institutional body that officially operates under the Agricultural Chamber of Com- merce of Slovenia. If the first decade following 1991 (called locally also as pre-joining period) was marked with conflicts, confusion and individual tactics (from poaching to the diversification of activities), and with fishermen expressing frustration and anger (with the Ministry and each other), the beginning of the last decade was in contrast strongly marked by cooperation as an outcome of activities launched by Fishery Office, specifically the active engagement of the head of Fishery Office. Constructive and critical analysis of the situation emerged in

1Our interlocutor from the Fishery Office as well as several fishermen, referred to the period prior Slovenia’s joining the EU as a pre-joining period. The period was clearly distinguished in their opinion as separate (neither SFR Yugoslavia nor EU). 194 9 European Books Are Too Big for Us dialogue with the office but also among the fishermen themselves. This was something entirely new, since Slovene fishermen up until then had never been involved actively in a wider discussion with the NGOs, activists, or academics and did not share a long-standing regional tradition of cooperative and community- based activism. Those who remembered “fishing under socialism” stressed that the previous political period was marked with a certain level of stability but also with a kind of passive political attitude. Especially in the initial phase the fishermen themselves strongly supported the office, developed critical solutions and established a positive relation with the head of Fishery Office. As a fisherman from Koper commented in 2004:

It’s a major shift (Fishery Office). Now the office has been active for a year. Coastal municipalities will financially support the office for the next year and after that our fishing cooperation will possibly help out. Actually it should be the state paying for it, but because this lady works in favour of fishermen, this is what it is. This to them is somehow disturbing. ‘Who are you?’, they asked her when she first arrived up there (in Ljubljana) for a meeting. [...] She meets with us regularly at the meetings... well not with all of us, there are representatives for each fishing technology...So far we are very pleased with her and she has done a lot. She informs us, she collects information, tells us how things are in Italy, she helps. I think she is very good and I think it would be good if she stays. [...]We are also considering this possibility, if the municipality will not finance her, we will try to manage it by ourselves somehow, so she can stay on (personal conversation, November 2004). One of the things that Slovene fishermen found particularly positive about the Fishery Office is the fact that they felt included in the management process while at the same time they did not have to speak directly with the responsible authorities. Estellie Smith pointed out that fishermen included in the regional councils in Canada are often in an ambivalent position; they are the ones participating in management, but they are also the ones being managed. This specific double bind is not without its set of problems (1995: 229). As Smith stressed, fishermen are rarely knowledgeable in managerial discourse and thus cannot fully express their specific opinions and theories on nature, conservation and fishery management. Their attempts at explaining their specific “world view”, or attempts to confront their theory with the theory of managers and scientists are usually perceived as “confused opportunism” (ibid). Although the head of the Fishery Office in Izola did assume a role of an activist speaking up for the fishermen, she also felt somehow uncomfortable being dependant for financial resources on the fishing cooperative. As she stressed, her intention was to be independent in the future, a mediator between different parties involved: I want to be independent, not financed by the fishermen or by the government, so I can have a kind of autonomous position...sometimes fishermen are not right [...] My position is a mediatory one, so things can be solved in favour of all the parties involved (personal conversation, April 2014).

The Fishery Office in Izola was an outcome of the Interreg III B-CADSES project Adria.Fish (2003–2004) led by the Italian partner in cooperation with 9.1 Project: Heading Towards Europe 195

Slovene and Croatian partners. One of the main objectives of the project was to establish the fishing observatory, while the municipality of Izola strove to establish the information bureau for fisheries. The initial idea for the bureau was to cover all three coastal municipalities, while the municipalities agreed to finance the office for a certain period after the completion of the project. In February 2004 the first experimental meeting with seven existing Slovene fishing organisations took place in Izola. They agreed that these organisations existed more on paper than in reality and that they should constituted different working groups according to fishing gears (pelagic trawls for industrial fishing, purse seines, bottom trawl nets and other fishing nets) while each working group agreed to have a representative. After the first few meetings, the head of the office decided to prepare the analysis of the situation. One of the things that she found important to stress in our interview was the unequal treatment of fishermen in the management processes. As she said: “I found out that fishermen had very precise ideas, but nobody was willing to listen, to take them seriously as partners (personal conversation, April 2014). In 2004 and 2005 the analysis of the Slovene fisheries as well as the proposal for regulation strategy was put together (Levstik et al. 2004; Levstik 2005). Analysis highlighted both concrete and general problems; the blurred vision for the development of Slovene maritime fisheries; insufficiently regulated controls on the sea; lack of concern for safety at sea; an inadequate system of evaluation and compensation for damages; disproportional focus of the Slovene scientific institutions on inland fisheries; exclusion of fishermen from the management processes; unregulated local fishing tourism; inadequate Slovene law on maritime fisheries; inadequate solutions to the employment status of small coastal fishermen; the total abolishment of formal education for maritime fishing in 1998; unknown status of the available fish resources in the area (specifically white fish)...It also highlighted the fact that Slovenia did not make enough effort to account for EU fishery funds in the first period after the accession of Slovenia to EU (2004–2006 but also before 2004 in locally called pre-joining period), and consequently made it impossible for Slovene fishermen to renovate their boats, to receive benefits for diversification or restructuring of fishing activities. The analysis also pointed out to the unsettled conditions at the Slovene coastal ports and to the delayed refunding of excise duties for the fishing sector, which has led numerous individuals to economic collapse. Following the analysis, fishermen representatives working with the Fishery Office as well as other interested parties (various environmentally oriented NGOs, representatives of all three coastal municipalities, Institute of the Republic of Slovenia for Nature Conservation, Aquarium Piran...) started to get involved actively in the managerial process, preparing suggestions for regulations, studying European laws (specifically the CFP) and reflecting on their new position (within EU and in the context of the development of managerial processes at the national level). Several issues such as the use of different fishing gears on the same boat (a traditional mix technique within the Gulf of Trieste) and the possibility for “first 196 9 European Books Are Too Big for Us

Fig. 9.1 First hand selling on the pier in Izola (Photo Alenka Janko Spreizer) hand selling” or selling at the Trieste fish market, which had been made impossible within the EU, were being discussed (Fig. 9.1). Generally, the CFP was used as a positive point of reference. As the head of the office stressed in our interviews: We used Common Fisheries Policies to present our arguments and demanded to be treated as partners. At that time Slovene Ministry, for various reasons, considered us as though we were enemies (personal conversation, April 2014). During this period the group surrounding the Fishery Office studied also the draft of the council regulation concerning management measures for the sustainable exploi- tation of fishing resources in the Mediterranean Sea (Council Regulation (EC) No. 1967/2006) and connected with the Medisamak fishing association which spoke against the regulation that was putting strict orders on various fishing gears. As far as Slovene fishermen were concerned, this was not acceptable if Slovene fishing was to survive. After this first connection with Medisamak, the Fishery Office continued to connect internationally and gained more self-confidence. As the head of the office stated, one of the crucial events in their endeavour was a meeting with the European Fisheries Commissioner Joe Borg: We told him how serious our problems were...problems with the state administration, as they didn’t take as seriously, as partners. We told him that we would prefer to settle things at home by ourselves, but if this was not possible we would be forced to search for help 9.1 Project: Heading Towards Europe 197

outside the state. [...] In December 2005, he (Joe Borg) came to visit Slovenia ... [...] The Slovene Ministry wanted to avoid us, they didn’t want us to meet him, so we contacted him through Medisamak and informed him that we would like to talk to him. We had a very serious meeting in Izola and we overturned existing protocols. We started to talk directly. He was listening to us. We told him everything what was happening in our country. [...] After this meeting, the responsible authorities at the Slovene Ministry apologized on our behalf, because they felt we were too direct, but the commissioner explained to them that this was quite normal, and how things should in fact be. A big shift happened after this event. It was simply obvious that the people at the Ministry handled things in the wrong direction. After this event a new team of people was put together at the Ministry and we started to communicate with them in a constructive way (personal conversation, April 2014). A group of fishermen and other involved parties gathered around the Fishery Office slowly gained self-esteem and became a visible player in the Slovene coastal region. As the head of the office explained in one of our conversations, from “the last of the Mohicans”, the Slovene fishermen finally became involved interlocutors, and several changes were brought about. One such change was the amendment of the Slovene Law on Marine Fisheries in 2006 and the new regulation for the first sale of fishery products in 2008 (UR RS 54/08) that enabled Slovene fishermen to choose between different ways of direct sales, be it sale on the boat, sale on the pier, at the fish markets or directly to restaurants or to other officially recognised distributers. The group felt that they had partly stimulated these changes them- selves. As a result of this new communication between Fishery Office and the new group of responsible people at the Slovene Ministry (with whom fishermen felt comfortable, as they had explained), several ideas and suggestions from fishermen found a way to two documents, namely National Strategic Plan on the Development of Fisheries in the Republic of Slovenia 2007–2013 (NSPDFRS 2008) and The Operational Programme for Fisheries Development in the Republic of Slovenia 2007–2014 (OPFDRS 2014). The two documents were prepared by the Slovene Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food in dialogue with the Fishery Office with the intention of gaining EU funding. At that time several fishermen (mostly those active in the Fishery Office) already had a clear idea about the “project way of doing things”. They knew that the guidelines that they proposed for these two documents would be important for future funding of their individual projects. During the following few years the head of the office was more and more confident that the office is representing the whole of Slovenian fishery, while according to our ethnography, several fishermen (those not involved actively in the whole process) started to feel differently, expressing unease with the project way of financing fishing—or “fishing for projects”, as one of them had put it succinctly—or the diversification of the fishing activity. While developing the operational plan, the responsible Ministry, together with the Fishery Office, built their ideas around four axes. These were: 1. Measures for the adaptation of the Slovenian fishing fleet; 2. Aquaculture, inland fishing, processing and marketing of fisheries and aquaculture products; 3. Measures of common interest and 4. Sustainable development of fishing areas. Within these four axis several measures were selected, as for example within axis 1, a permanent and 198 9 European Books Are Too Big for Us temporary withdrawal of vessels from the fishing fleet and the diversification of activities with a view to promoting multiple jobs for fishermen (among these a diversification into fishing tourism was seen as an important option); within axis 2, productive investments in aquaculture were proposed; within axis 3 improving infrastructure in the fishing ports, improving work safety for fishermen at the sea as well as promotion of fish products and the fisheries2 sector were planned; and in axis 4 the establishing of a coastal action group and a local development strategy and implementing the local development strategy through different projects was suggested. Within these measures the responsible authorities at the Ministries as well as the Fishery Office tried to encompass the most urgent steps in the future development of the Slovene coastal fishing in accordance with the EU general suggestions. As the head of the office stated: We had to choose among different EU measures in these four axes, we had to choose wisely, all of us, the fishermen, experts, municipalities, inspecting bodies...At that time we really did work together. And we tried to select those possible actions that would be beneficial for all of us (personal conversation, April 2014). In 2008, when operation plan was approved, several measures from the above mentioned axis were realised through subventions of the EFF (European Fisheries Fund) while fishermen started to question the state strategy of taxing subventions for the realisation of specific actions (subventions for reassignment of fishing vessels into non-fishing activities or permanent cessation of fishing activity were taxed). According to the head of the office the fishermen themselves were mostly concerned with measures within the axis 3. They somehow felt that improvements of port infrastructure will be mainly done in a way to suit tourists and sport vessels. The following years were only to prove many of these fears as justifiable, as several fishermen had to change their side berths for the front ones and double moorings that caused problems for the fishermen when they had to bring fish to the shore. Following such conflicts and problems, the role of the Fishery Office was, according to its head, exclusively mediatory, interfering with misunderstandings or conflicts between fishermen, the coastal municipalities and the responsible Ministry. As for the above mentioned problem with double moorings, it turned out that there was a misunderstanding between fishermen and municipalities as the fishermen agreed with the municipality to have a double mooring, but only in exchange for pontoons being built. It appeared that the municipalities of Koper and Izola ignored the pontoon part of the agreement, and applied for funding that did not include pontoons in the two of the three ports. The fishermen felt cheated while the Fishery Office made an effort to report critically on the issue within the Slovene media (Glesˇcˇicˇ 2014).

2Within this measure a promotional activity “I like to eat fish” was launched in February 2012. Several actions such as the web-page RadJemRibe.si (http://www.radjemribe.si/) as well as fish cook books were approved for financing. 9.1 Project: Heading Towards Europe 199

9.1.2 “Fishing for Projects”

In 2008, when the operational plan was approved, the Fishery office continued to be active in the field, assisting in the necessary steps leading towards EU funding. As in other EU countries, Slovenia had to organise Slovenian Fisheries Local Action Group (FLAG) according to the Axis 4 of the European Fisheries Fund. The idea of the axis 4 of the EFS is meant to support the local fisheries’ communities to build a more sustainable future while these funds are managed by Fisheries Local Action Group (FLAGs), partnerships of sorts between local fishermen and a variety of other local stakeholders. The overall idea of the FLAG is that these stakeholders themselves design the local development strategy that would fit their area’s needs and would be in harmony with the sustainable development tripartite philosophy, namely to increase economic, social and environmental welfare. The main eligible activities—such as fostering competitiveness in fisheries’ areas, restructuring and diversification of economic activities, diversifying activities through the promotion of multiple employment for fishermen, adding value to fisheries’ products, supporting small fisheries and tourism-related infrastructure and services for the benefit of small fisheries’ communities as well as protecting the environment in fisheries areas to maintain its attractiveness – were proposed in the basic regulations of EC. In accomplishing these eligible activities, Slovenia encouraged collabora- tion between public institutions, private fisheries, non-fisheries sector and anyone living and working in this area who might be interested, and so decided to handle the entire coastal area as a single area with a single FLAG. In other words, the platform for obtaining funds was opened to everyone. All three Slovene coastal municipalities as well as the Fishery Office had co-operated already in the initial phase of the establishment of the Slovenian FLAG. Everyone who expressed the interest to participate in the development of FLAG was invited to the initial presentations organised by the Ministry of Agri- culture, Food and Forestry, while the working group of fishermen prepared the initial basis for the Local Strategy for the Sustainable Development of Fisheries (LSSDF) (OAS Ribicˇ 2013a) and chose two sole proprietors for the final prepara- tion of the LSSDF. The two authors of the strategy held interviews with fishermen, economic operators and all other stakeholders from the area who had expressed an interest in collaborating with FLAG. At that time, the Fishery Office together with coastal municipalities organised several working meetings. In 2011, the team of fishermen around the Fishery Office received a draft of LSSDF and upgraded it. The final documents of LSSDF and of the consortium agreement on FLAG Ribicˇ [The Fisherman] were drawn up in December 2011, and FLAG Ribicˇ Consortium was thus constituted on 9 January 2012. The sole appropriator from Izola was appointed as administrator of FLAG Ribicˇ. All three Slovene coastal municipalities signed the agreement of joint financing for the LSSDF preparation while the municipality of Izola has provided an office in Izola for the purposes of establishing and operation of FLAG. FLAG Ribicˇ is nowadays comprised of 46 partners: 26 from the private fisheries sector, 15 from private non-fisheries sector and 5 from public sector. 200 9 European Books Are Too Big for Us

The Slovenian LSSDF, the basis for the functioning of the coastal action group, holds seven objectives: diversification and restructuring of fishing activities, pres- ervation of the natural environment and contribution to sustainable fisheries, mar- keting, processing and culinary offer of the Slovene fish catches/farmed fish, training in the field of fisheries, education on fisheries and enhancing Slovene fisheries, co-operation between fishermen, preservation and restoration of cultural heritage of fisheries and active integration of women into supplementary fisheries activities. With the establishing of FLAG and LSSDF, all the necessary conditions for the disbursement of EU fisheries funds have been realized. After that FLAG Ribicˇ issued an invitation to tender for the selection of projects for the implemen- tation of Local Development Strategy in the period of 2012–2013 on the webpage of the Municipalities of Izola, Koper and Piran and in the newspaper Primorske novice on 12 April 2012. In the following year 17 projects (OAS 2013b)3 were

3Seventeen selected projects are: 1. Dusˇan Kmetec s.p., Mazzinijeva 3, 6330 Piran, “Preureditev plovila 51-PI za izvajanje dopolnilne dejavnosti ribisˇkega turizma” [Conversion of vessels 51 -PI for the implemen- tation of additional fishing tourism activities], 2. Robert Radolovicˇ s.p., Obrtna ulica 30, 6310 Izola, “Plovilo za prevoz potnikov” [Vessel for passenger transportation], 3. Ribisˇtvo-Sˇkoljkarstvo, Mitja Petricˇ s.p., Velusˇcˇkova 8, 6310 Izola, “Plovilo EKO 1” [Vessel EKO 1], 4. PROSUB d.o.o., Zaprta ulica 3, 6310 Izola, “Plovilo EKO 2 [Vessel EKO 2]” ter 5. DELFIN, Milenko Buležan s.p., Ferda Bidovca 1, 6310 Izola, “Sveže iz morja – premicˇni gostinski objekt (vozilo)” [Fresh from the sea - mobile catering facility (van)], 6. Gimnazija, elektro in pomorska sˇola Piran, Pot pomorsˇcˇakov 4, 6320 Portorož, “Aquarium”, 7. FONDA.SI d.o.o., Liminjanska cesta 117, 6320 Portorož, “Nakup fotovoltaicˇnega elektricˇnega hibridnega plovila za prevoz ljudi na oglede sˇkoljcˇisˇcˇ in ribogojnic” [Purchase of photovoltaic electric hybrid vessels for taking people on excursions to discover shellfish farms and fish farms], 8. GASTRO PROJEKT d.o.o., Ul. Sergeja Masˇera, 6000 Koper, “Okusi morje” [Taste the Sea], 9. FONDA.SI d.o.o., Liminjanska cesta 117, 6320 Portorož, “Izvedba in nakup opreme za izvajanje vodenih “zelenih” ogledov ribogojnice in sˇkoljcˇisˇcˇ s kajaki, kanuji in supi” [Design and purchase of equipment for the guided “green” tours of the fish farms with kayaks, canoes or SUP (Stand up paddling)], 10. SAPIENTIS, Stanka Turk s.p., Soncˇna pot 4, 6310 Izola, “Izdelava programa Ribisˇke pocˇitnice” [the development of the Fishing Holidays program], 11. FONDA.SUB d.o.o., Liminjanska cesta 117, 6320 Portorož, “Izdelava in ureditev kuhinje za pripravo morskih jedi – dostava gotovih morskih jedi” [Setting up the seafood kitchen – home delivery of made sea dishes], 12. LEAN FONDA.s.p., Liminjanska cesta 117, 6320 Portorož, “Izdaja in tisk knjige – Podvodni svet Pirana” [Publishing of the book Underwater Piran], 13. FONDA.SUB d.o.o., Liminjanska cesta 117, 6320 Portorož, “Izdelava dokumentarnega filma za promocijo ribogojstva in blagovne znamke FONDA Piranski brancin” [A documentary film for the promotion of aquaculture and trademarks FONDA Piran sea bass], 9.1 Project: Heading Towards Europe 201 implemented through FLAG Ribicˇ while the administrator of the FLAG office reported to the local newspaper:

At the beginning both, the fishermen as well as the local community were somewhat distrustful towards the idea that Slovenia could gain EU funds. But in the end it turned out that this time around the scepticism was unfounded (Vidrih 2013).

Walking along the present-day Slovene coast we are confronted with numerous notice-boards informing us about fishing projects and financial sources for these projects. Most of these projects are tourism-aimed projects connected with gastron- omy, recreation and education. We can for example observe two vessels EKO 1 and EKO 2 (already mentioned on our introductory walk at the start of the book) owned by local fishermen who started to combine their activity with shellfish farming while also offering educational trips on seafood gastronomy, shellfish farming or recreational tours, taking visitors for a scuba-diving in the Slovenian sea. They also cooperate with diverse rescue services and are occasionally involved in the under- water construction work. Three private entrepreneurs led by the members of one sole local family involved in fish farming got for example five projects connected with fish farming, promotion of fish farming, education and ecotourism. They managed to realise the purchase of the ecological vessel and equipment for tourist tours, taking visitors to their fish farms as well as the purchase of the mobile kitchen for educational purposes. Furthermore, they published a book about the underwater world of Piran and produced a documentary promoting their brand, namely the Fonda seabass. Local people even played with the idea that the traditional Piran’s gray mullet will be now replaced with Fonda’s seabass (Mužicˇ 2005; personal conversation, May 2014). Three of the 17 projects were realised by the fishermen who were already involved in combining fishing with fishing tourism; a new boat was bought solely for tourist-aimed activities; one fishing boat was converted into the tourist-aimed vessel while the purchase of a vessel intended as a mobile seafood kitchen was also realised. The purchase of an additional vessel was realised in partnership with the gymnasium Piran and Piran’s aquarium. Three projects were research oriented, covering topics such as the economic and nutritional value of fish of the Slovenian sea, guidelines for fishing holidays and researching fishing as motivation for young people. Two of the 17 projects were assigned to the institute Mediteranum that reprinted a book and expanded on the exhibition on sea shells. It looked like all the objectives proposed within EFF were realised while the eligible activities

14. , mag. Alesˇ Bolje s.p., Tomažicˇeva 15, 6310 Izola, “Gospodarska in prehranska vrednost rib slovenskega morja” [The economic and nutritional value of fish of the Slovenian sea (research)], 15. Ribisˇtvo, Domenico Steffe s.p., Stanicˇev trg 12, 6000 Koper, “Ribisˇtvo v slovenski Istri kot motivacija, poklic in turizem za mlade” [Fishing in Slovenian Istria as motivation, voca- tion, and tourism for young people], 16. Mediteranum Piran, Ulica svobode 81, 6330 Piran, “Ponatis monografije Nasˇe morje” [Reprint of the book Our Sea] and 17. Mediteranum Piran, Ulica svobode 81, 6330 Piran, “Razsˇiritev razstave sˇkoljk in polžev” [Extension of the exhibition on sea shells and sea snails]. 202 9 European Books Are Too Big for Us connected with basic regulations of EU, such as competitiveness, diversification, infrastructure and protection of the environment were all addressed by these 17 pro- jects. One of the fishermen who was awarded a EU-funded project seemed to be satisfied with the whole development of the events, as he told: FLAG Ribicˇ is a good example of cooperation, with the results being excellent; even looking at the smallest fisherman, you see he made a really nice project” (personal conversation, April 2014). This “smallest fisherman” who won a project, converted fishing boat for tourism- aimed activities, and it seems the measures benefit only those willing to divert their traditional fishing activity into other, mostly tourism-aimed activities or maricul- ture ones. Although many of our interlocutors fishermen did not support the maricultural approach (mostly stressing the negative impact on the environment), it appears that fish farms and tourist boats will in the course of future years slowly replace traditional fishing along the Slovene coast. In one of the latest newspaper articles published in Slovene media Delo (Je 2015) the phrase “fishing communi- ties” was replaced by a newly-minted “fishing and mariculture communities”, announcing this change also at the level of discourse. We became aware of another interesting find, when we presented our contribution at the conference MARE in June 2015 in the panel discussing small-scale fishermen in Europe. Rather simple statistical results of the 17 selected projects are telling of the general situation: only one Slovenian small-scale fisherman (with a boat under 12 m) successfully applied for the EF funds. The financial statistics is also interesting in that it reveals that from the total 28 million EUR aimed at the development of Slovene fishing up until the end of 2014, roughly 10 million EUR is aimed at mariculture, around the same amount at port infrastructure, 2.3 million EUR at the adaptation of fishing vessels for tourism and around 2.8 million at the functioning of FLAG. Project results are thus clear; with the disappearance of industrial as well as traditional coastal fishing, we can imagine the title of the locally famous book written by the Slovene historian Janez Kramar “Izola: the town of fishermen and workers” (Kramar 1987) being somewhat different if written from the present-day perspective. Projects, tourists, seabass and fish farms would certainly have a major place in it. Apart from the project results, this chapter represents also the last period of our ethnographic research and describes recent activities of fishermen along the present-day Slovene coast, which has only recently become part of the EU Medi- terranean coastline. As such the chapter in a way moves our focus most visibly from small places to large issues,4 revealing also the relationship between “sovereignty”, “national independence” and the actual autonomy and agency of the fishermen. This relationship is, on the one hand, specific but on the other, it is part of an important contemporary issue present in all parts of the EU. The chapter refers chronologically to the last decade, to a period when not only did fishermen together with fisheries experts from national and local institutions assume a partial role of

4A metaphor used by an anthropologist Thomas Hylland Eriksen describing the span of anthro- pological research. 9.1 Project: Heading Towards Europe 203 active co-creators of national and local strategies, but also when new supranational discourses and rules had to be followed – or at least understood and tactically adapted for local uses. From this setting new relations between national, suprana- tional and local bodies and individuals arose while state sovereignty, following the Slovene case on fishery, became fragmented and dependent on flexibility and inventive tactics of individuals as well as on the unpredictable relations between the actors. Our ethnographic findings on the one hand point to the important role of the state in accommodating supranational regulations to the local coastal setting, while on the other they also show how this was partly facilitated by the relative smallness of the state that provided opportunities for faster communication between the various actors. In the first phase of our ethnographic work this communication first resulted in conflicts, while in the second phase it moved towards conflict mitigations. In the period from 1991 to 2004 fishermen critically reflected on the role of the Slovene state by pointing to the governance system which, in their view, was not inclusive and was blindly following the supranational regulations made suitable for much larger EU players. In the second phase of our ethnographic research Slovene fishermen, with the support of Fishery Office, connected directly (surpassing the state) with international actors such as MEDISAMAK (Mediterranean Association of Fisheries Organizations) or with a former Commissioner for Fisheries and Maritime Affairs, Joe Borg. Apparently these moves had an impact also on the state administration, specifically on their attitude towards fishermen. In this process several local organisations such as the FLAG or the Fisheries Office in Izola became respective interlocutors included in the governance dialogue. Pushing these observations a bit further, it could be said that the state administration almost needed an impulse from the citizens in order to take a more active role within the EU. But the story did not finish here. We took the next step, the one explored in details within this chapter, and which we termed ‘the projectification of fishing’. Projectification includes the notion of a project as a common form of work orga- nisation being present in all sectors of the economy in recent decades, with all its cultural and discursive dimensions (Packendorff and Lindgren 2014). By introduc- ing the idea of projectification our intent was not to reflect on the general notion of the project within contemporary society but was more to focus anthropologically on the concrete processes of projectification with regards to Slovene maritime fishery. Questions such as the following emerged: What happens when Slovene fishermen fish for (sustainable) projects?; Who benefits from these projects?; Should we understand these changes as permanent or temporary?; What power structures emerge within this new “fishing for projects” context? Without pretention of giving any clear answers we could definitely observe how within the two fields of sustainable development and projects, some fishermen sat comfortably, while others surely did not. This applied also to fish. In contrast to the migratory Piran’s mullet, a farmed Piran’s seabass glides more easily across the waves of sustainable development and projects, while mullets swim more confidently in the heritage discourse. Coming directly from the fish farms owned by the Slovene fishing family 204 9 European Books Are Too Big for Us and partly financed through the EU Fishery Fund projects, a seabass fits in well also with the local development issues while fishing for mullets, on the other hand, links more with the idea of fishing for heritage. The fishing for heritage idea, articulated in the book by Jane Nadel-Klein (2003), could of course also find its way to the heritage project arena, but at the moment Slovene fishermen do not feel like becoming a part of a living history museum. Who dares blame them?

References

Council Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006 (2006) Official Journal of the European Union L 409/11. http://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/eur68324.pdf. Accessed 29 Jan 2016 Glesˇcˇicˇ K (2014) Najdražje je biti ribicˇ v ribisˇki obcˇini [The most expensive is to be a fisherman in a fishing municipality]. Primorske novice, August 11. http://www.primorske.si/Novice/Istra/ Najdrazje-je-biti-ribic-v-ribiski-obcini. Accessed 24 Aug 2015 Je G (2015) Za slovensko ribisˇtvo 32,6 milijona evrov do leta 2020 [For Slovene Fishery 32,6 millions of EUR until 2020]. Delo, July 29. http://www.delo.si/gospodarstvo/kmetijstvo/za- slovensko-ribistvo-32-6-milijona-evrov-do-leta-2020.html. Accessed 24 Aug 2015 Kramar J (1987) Izola mesto ribicˇev in delavcev. Lipa, Koper Levstik S (2005) Primeren model organiziranosti morskega ribisˇtva na slovenski obali. Projektna naloga. Pisarna za razvoj in koordinacijo morskega ribisˇtva, Izola, [manuscript] Levstik S et al (2004) Predstavitev stanja v morskem ribisˇtvu in Predlog strategije ureditve osnovnih pogojev za delovanje ribisˇke panoge. Projektna naloga. Pisarna za razvoj in koordinacijo morskega ribisˇtva, Izola, [manuscript] Mužicˇ J (2005) Namesto cipljev brancini [Sea-basses instead of mullets]. Dnevnik. February 23. https://www.dnevnik.si/113938. Accessed 25 Aug 2015 Nadel-Klein J (2003) Fishing for heritage: modernity and loss along the Scottish coast. Berg, Oxford NSPDFRS (2008) National strategic plan on the development of fisheries in the Republic of Slovenia 2007–2013. http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/eff/national_plans/list_of_national_stra tegic_plans/slovenia_en.pdf. Accessed 10 Feb 2016 OAS Ribicˇ (2013a) Lokalna strategija trajnostnega razvoja ribisˇtva. http://www.oasribic.si/en/ cilji-lokalne-strategije-trajnostnega-razvoja-ribistva.html. Accessed 2 Sept 2016 OAS Ribicˇ (2013b) 17 izbranih projektov. http://www.oasribic.si/en/17-izbranih-projektov.html. Accessed 2 Sept 2016 OPDFDRS (2014) The operational programme for fisheries development in the Republic of Slovenia 2007–2014. http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/eff/op/list_of_operational_ programmes/slovenia_en.pdf. Accessed 10 Feb 2016 Packendorff J, Lindgren M (2014) Projectification and its consequences: narrow and broad conceptualisations. SAJEMS Spec Issue 17:7–21 RadJemRibe.si. http://www.radjemribe.si/. Accessed 11 Feb 2016 Smith E (1995) Kaos, konsenz in zdrava pamet. Cˇ KZ XXIII(176):225–234 Taylor K, Grandits H (2010) Tourism and the making of socialist Yugoslavia. In: Taylor K, Grandits H (eds) Yugoslavia’s sunny side: a history of tourism in socialism (1950s–1980s). CEU Press, Budapest/New York, pp 1–25 Uredba o spremljanju ulova in prodaji ribisˇkih proizvodov, Uradni list Republike Slovenije 54/2008. http://www.uradni-list.si/1/objava.jsp?sop¼2008-01-2272. Accessed 24 Aug 2015 Vidrih P (2013) Ribicˇem uspel dober ulov denarja iz EU [Fishermen caught a great amount of money from EU]. Primorske novice. November 18. http://www.primorske.si/Primorska/Istra/ Ribicem-uspel-dober-ulov-denarja-iz-EU-.aspx. Accessed 25 Aug 2015 Chapter 10 Small Fish in a Big World

Abstract The concluding chapter looks back and reflects on the overlapping spaces and discourses regarding five (mashed-up) levels of reality as proposed by Tom Selwyn (forthcoming 2017); the material, socio-economic and ideological levels, alongside the insistent themes of identity and relations between self and other and comments on how knowledge is gathered. Within these five levels, which are in no sense separate or autonomous, authors place actors related to the fisheries in NE Adriatic and draw the unpredictable lines between them that importantly connect these five levels into a more or less coherent whole. The chapter discusses how local details are not only interlinked with bigger stories but live alongside them, growing together, influencing each other.

Keywords Slovene fisheries within EU • Recent socio-economic circumstances in Europe • Mashed-up layers • Reorganization • Innovation

One of the mantras that runs through the ethnography of this book is that of smallness – expressed whether in concerns to adjust to the EU rules that resulted in big investments (transferring 4 Slovene boats to the electronically led fishery diaries), presented in “zero numbers” (such as 0.014% for GDP1) or in numerous request for exemption from following a certain rule directed from Slovene Minis- tries to the EU governmental bodies (such as the request for the first-hand sales of fish at the pier). Its smallness apart, Slovene fishery has acquired a rightful place within the bigger picture of tourist imagery, sustainability discourse and neoliberal economics and has had to cope with new challenges and opportunities at different levels while standing on its specific local ground. In the book we have shown how these external forces call for adaptations at local and national levels and how these adaptive actions can be creative, are almost always far from being simple and can be also very difficult. As anthropologists we used an advantage of openness when it comes to the methods we used, and flexibility when it comes to the use of information in order to understand and describe these interlinked pieces of a puzzle. Such contextualised knowledge became very useful in understanding complex

1Contribution of fishing to the Slovene economy is providing only about 0.014% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Faoadriamed.org 2016).

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 205 N. Rogelja, A. Janko Spreizer, Fish on the Move, MARE Publication Series 11, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-51897-8_10 206 10 Small Fish in a Big World situations with all the connections between “small places and large issues”, bor- rowing the expression from anthropologist Thomas Hyland Eriksen (2001) for explaining anthropological way of thinking. Mapping these mashed-up layers, actors, places and issues is, we would venture to say, the main advantage of anthropological research in understanding the complex whole that can easily escape in reductionist approaches. As Niels Einarsson wrote: “The complex whole makes up people’s lived reality has the disconcerting habit of tending to escape the shallow net of mono-disciplinary and reductionist paradigms” (2011). The leitmotiv of the book was thus at once modest and ambitious, aiming to link global, regional, national and local issues on the subject of maritime fishery in order to understand people’s everyday realities along the present-day Slovene coast within the context of processes that have impacted them.

10.1 Mashed-Up Layers

As we come to the end of our walk along the coastal landscapes of North-eastern Adriatic, let us reflect a bit on what we have learned. We have experienced and travelled through different realities embodied in the landscape we have stopped at more than one destination but also stepped back in time. In order to get a sense of the coherence between the different actors important for this complex, layered and ambiguous story, we had to leave our cosy ethnographic focus on fishermen and go beyond the regional/local borders to account for the existence of much larger and not so cosy forces affecting today’s Slovene coast and its maritime fishing. Some- where in the midst of our writing process we decided to undertake a small exercise. We drew a scheme of all the actors and the relations between them that were important for our fieldwork setting. These included UN bodies and regulations, EU institutions and directives, national ministries and other governmental bodies spreading their branches to municipalities, regional offices and development agen- cies which were in turn established with reference to EU or UN bodies and action plans. We needed to take into account the various NGOs, state and independent scientific centres, initiatives, individuals, names and voices that gave shape and sense to these abstract entities. Surprisingly, we soon discovered that our piece of paper was much too small to be able to carry all these local, national and interna- tional institutions, individuals, groups, states, cities, imaginaries and discourses but also the fish, the sea and the land of the region, as they too had their share in the story. In a moment of weakness, we crumpled up the piece of paper, ready to chuck it in the bin. But in the end we did not. We began to discuss the actors and layers that were now mashed up together and suddenly it made more sense to observe the actors and layers important for our fieldwork precisely from this mashed-up perspective. In the following lines we will look back and reflect on these overlapping spaces and discourses regarding five (mashed-up) levels of reality as proposed by Selwyn; the material, socio-economic and ideological levels, alongside the insistent themes 10.1 Mashed-Up Layers 207 of identity and relations between self and other and comments on how knowledge is gathered (forthcoming 2017). Within these five levels, which are in no sense separate or autonomous, we will place actors which we had earlier scribbled on our small piece of paper, as well as draw the unpredictable lines between them that importantly connect these five levels into a more or less coherent whole. This network is often not clear, lacking exact dots and lines. Observing our paper ball, it is rather a wild territory of unpredictable relations spreading out in various directions, appearing, disappearing and reappearing in a never-ending process. In the following lines we will move back and forth, up and down through these five mashed-up layers, following Latour’s notion of unexpected things (2005: 106). Fish on the Move starts and finishes in the material world of the sea, the land of the region with its flora and fauna, but also sharing its space with physical objects such as boats, houses, factories, shopping malls, EU information boards, piers and gates that we encountered on our walk. Materiality as used here has two interrelated meanings; its physicality and its social biography that reveals the relational issues. The Gulf of Trieste has, for example, a mild Mediterranean climate and carves most deeply into the European mainland while a part of the hinterland is relatively low and easily traversed, opening as it does to Postojna’s Gate, the lowest and one of the widest transition valleys between the interior of central Europe and the northern edge of the Mediterranean, smaller but similar to the Rhone Valley. Such a bay is naturally a welcoming one, inviting paths to be carved into its interior. The social biography of a gulf carved so deeply into the European hinterlands and interlinked with the open-wide corridor has provided, and continues to provide, numerous opportunities and advantages for voyages, trade routes and leisure activities (e.g. the Habsburg tradition of spas and health tourism can be seen in the built-up environment, namely the villas and hotels from that period). Putting up a roadblock on the route connecting Koper with Central Europe is another way of “using” this corridor. Fishermen for example organised a protest at Cˇ rni Kal on 24 June 1994. They articulated their claims in a joint petition and blocked the main road leading towards central Europe. That summer, the police removed the protesters and while their demands were left mostly unresolved, the place (and time) was right; they got the attention they wanted. While writing these lines, a potential sale of the Port of Koper (together with the Slovene railway operator) to German or Chinese investors was being debated, while several “trade corridor projects” were already being financed by the EU, such as the Fresh Food Corridor (FFC) project anticipated in autumn 2016, consisting of four experimental shipments of perishable goods (peppers and tomatoes) transported via three project corridors (Koper in Slovenia, Venice in Italy and Marseille in France) (Port of Koper 2016). Workers and managers from the Port of Koper, as well as local inhabitants protested against the selling of the port, accusing state politicians of blindly following the neoliberal global market. Some of them may have noticed the pair of red Tomos factory skyscrapers and reflected on the previous position of workers in SFRY, when motorcycles produced in Koper were being shipped to the Global South in the opposite direction as the peppers and tomatoes in the FFC project. 208 10 Small Fish in a Big World

While Koper and Izola are surrounded by mild slopes or flat surfaces which lend themselves to development, the town of Piran thrusts out into the sea and is hemmed in at the tip of a small peninsula, from which there is a good view over the Gulf of Piran – where the contested border runs, where the mullets gather in winter and where seabass is grown in the fish farms. The two fish, the one swimming in fish farms and the nomadic mullets are both important actors within this Piran’s land-sea setting, interacting as they do with the economies and with people involved in fishing. As we showed in the book, their lives (and deaths) are closely linked to the human social world of the Slovene coastal area. Piran’s mullets are migratory fish that travel without passports, feed on waste, are sold without product information labels and are not the easiest to cultivate in fish farms. “These fish are smart”, the local fishermen like to say. Yet the health of the mullets’ flesh is in close relation with the level of sea pollution, whether from local toilets or distant sources. Seabass, on the other hand, is predatory fish, recently protected by EU measures and easily adjustable to a life in the fish farms. The fish is not just fish, food, an object, but through its relations with humans, it produces events. Catching mullet is labour-intensive group work, while harvesting seabass requires fewer people but more formally educated experts; mullets swimming across the contested border provoke quarrels, while farmed seabass lives quietly on the Slovene side of the bay, successfully interacting with EU Fisheries Fund opportunities. Mullets have been swimming in the Bay of Piran for centuries, but their relation with other actors in the bay has changed. The two fish interact with different ways of life, different economies and different worldviews. Fish on the Move also speaks about complex processes interlocking fishing production not just in the sense of pure economy but also encompassing politics, social systems, ideas about the good life, past events and recent socio-economic circumstances in Europe. Pamela Ballinger wrote how the Adriatic has long been defined by its position as a frontier space contested by competing empires and states (2013: 424) and Emilio Cocco observed how in the contemporary moment, the Adriatic’s role as a border zone (between Ottoman/Muslim East and the Christian West, between the communist east and capitalist west) has gone from that of a wall to that of a bridge (Cocco in Ballinger 2013: 435). Our interest, however, was more in the question of what goes on under this bridge. We indeed discovered numerous paths surpassing, avoiding or ignoring the main road over the bridge that suppos- edly connected the two (or more) separate entities. These small paths interlinked different actors into an unpredictable volatile whole, breaking the stereotypical image seen from the bridge above, about the existence of the two worlds, about “us” (in this case the East) and “them” (the West). About us having chaotic lives, full of borders, empires and conflicts and them living in a tidy, clean and peaceful world. Coming to the end of our walk we can still claim that the territory of Istria is characterised by too much of everything, but we also argue that this too much of everything should not be confused with stereotypes of the “wild Balkans” (“cranky Istrians” in our case) versus the “tidy West”. NE Adriatic holds similar character- istics as ascribed to the Mediterranean region by Charles Tilly, who argued that the Mediterranean region has always been one of the world’s most cosmopolitan ones, 10.1 Mashed-Up Layers 209 despite expressions of provincialism, isolationism, nationalism and sub-nationalism (2004: 229–232; 2008). We might easily find places “in the West” that are full of borders, conflicts and cultures, but it might be less easy to call them chaotic or having too much of everything, as this image is somehow reserved for the rest of the world. Too much of everything as well as quarrels (Everybody quarrels around here) would have happened on the surface, on the bridge, along the main roads. What we discovered beneath were surprisingly stable everyday tactics of people living under the bridge. Their routes were stretching across borders and between discourses – routes of mullets coming for a hundreds of years to the Bay of Piran or those of people trying to survive and enjoy life as it is, implying their own logic of survival and enjoyment, living under the bridge. People explained to us how they were under Austria, under Italy, under Yugoslavia, under Slovenia, under Lju- bljana, under EU and they charted their routes for us. Sometimes their routes ran parallel to those running across the bridge, sometimes they crisscrossed them. That is to say, the active role of individuals is not always that of subverting or challeng- ing the main routes but is also that of consolidating them. Fish on the Move is also concerned with how fishermen position themselves in relation to others and how they see themselves. After the break-up of SFRY and after seeing new EU rules regulating traffic across this Adriatic bridge, some fishermen started a new business (mariculture or passenger transportation), some did not, some even quit fishing and sailed into other waters. All this is Slovene maritime fishing and all of them are Slovene fishermen even if they are at the moment working as builders, living on state support, are involved in administrative work at the Fishery Office, cleaning toilets after tourists, enjoying the sunset over the Gulf of Trieste (together with their passengers or alone), fishing for mullets (or mulling over mullets), catching forbidden tunas (as Slovenia did not get any tuna quotas) or harvesting seabass. Although their stories were numerous and discordant, their everyday tactics were similar – ignoring, adapting to changing political circumstances, and staying out of the spotlight. Those who remain on the fence (between the “real” and “unreal” fisherman) have the possibility to be creative, to be unclear and to be more things at the same time. Being shifty becomes possible and appropriate. Being fixed is on the other hand not advantageous. The fishermen with whom we talked for example have no interest in the local fishing museum. They said they alone can tell the visitors about fishing, about fishing gear, about how to prepare and eat sardines. Who needs a fixed history? From their experiences, their visitors surely do not. However, this shifty position is also part of the wider story, combined with other discourses. Slovenia is part of Europe (and the West), but it also has roots in the Balkans, it is also part of the East (socialist history), it touches the Mediterranean Sea but its access to open waters is still not resolved. In a turbulent world, where fixed identities can be a burden or a threat, there is an advantage to not being just one thing. The fishermen have known this for a long time. They did not want a quarrel with Croatian fishermen and when asked about them, they just brushed it aside saying that this was a media war, not their own. Instead they accused the Slovene police of not being able to protect them from a few extremists, without pointing out their nationality. They do not hope to be saved by the 210 10 Small Fish in a Big World

Slovene police. Rather, they came to rely on technology and camaraderie for their safety at the sea. With mobile phones everything changed, they explained to us, as they can now simply warn each other if there are any trouble-makers around. Being caught into the nets of the EU administration, their view and their relation with the state is likely to change also in the future. With the support of the Slovene Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food, the fishermen succeeded in legalizing a few exceptions (e.g. first-hand sale on the pier) and it also seems to us that the relation between the state administration and fishermen has warmed up somewhat, showing mutual understanding. Could it be due to the fact that the state too is thinking about what goes on under the bridge? State sovereignty is becoming fragmented, dependent on creative individuals (not only those working in the Ministries) and their abilities to build unexpected relations and take fresh moves from which new exceptions in the form of an under-the-bridge jurisdiction are emerging. The symbolic realm, the interest in ideas, values and beliefs was also important for this book as it stretches from (and towards) the material environment (the sea), concrete individual experiences (e.g. peasant women at the seaside) and ideas about the imaginaries of sea and fishing coming from the tourist trade. The idea of imaginaries as processes is accentuated in the book, proposing that tourism is the context from which the construction of new relations and identities is possible. We argue that the type of fishing tourism as presented in the book is on one hand a modified form of trade-unionist holidays developed in Yugoslav tourism and on the other it constitutes fishermen’s innovative tactics and resilience developed in the period of the demise of Slovene fishing. It was precisely the promotion of authenticity, cohabitation with nature and genuineness that allowed, supported and rendered such innovations possible. From this perspective, the book contributes to the debates on authenticity by pointing out local uses of authenticity within a specific regional context of the NE Adriatic, describing how locals themselves perceive, use and transform tourist representations and other external images which impinge upon them in the context of contemporary coastal development in Slovenia.

10.1.1 What Can We Learn from the Small Example?

Ethnography is the art of gathering knowledge by waiting (for mullets in our case), hanging around, observing, talking, eating, drinking, laughing and crying with the people. All this takes place within certain locations that need to be reflected upon not just in historical and geographic terms, but also in the light of numerous relations spreading out from that location. These relations (nowadays multiplied and enforced by technology and infrastructure) form the effect of co-presence. Local details that we have been able to observe are not only interlinked with bigger stories but live alongside them, growing together, influencing each other. We are 10.1 Mashed-Up Layers 211 left with co-existing mashed-up realities, interlinked through unexpected relations. The role of anthropologists in this wild territory is to chart the relations between actors and layers, to understand each layer by reference to the other and to remove these layers at the end in order to present a coherent whole based on unifying themes. Three unifying themes of the book: fishing through the histories, fishing for tourists and fishing for projects are informed by the same methodological and conceptual aim of understanding external forces and how these are adapted to at local and national levels. These three themes are discussed through the chronolog- ically given outline following four steps: orientation, transformation, innovation and management, which have been broken further down into chapters. Fishing through histories explores how Slovene fishery is a part of a bigger historical picture placed within the geopolitical place of NE part of Istria or NE Adriatic that is represented primarily as a border region. It presents the use of recent histories represented as imperial legacies and past fragments (attached mostly to the twen- tieth century) in a contemporary perspective. From the anthropological point of view, it is extremely important to understand how history and the narrative of the original Slovene fishing is for example creatively incorporated into everyday speech in a way that certain details (those that do not tally with the dominant narration) are simply left out, ignored or treated as unimportant. Fishing for tourists theme brings to light a case of “tourist imagery in action”, trying to avoid the trap of seeing people (fishermen) merely as passive recipients of external influences. We demonstrated how fishermen are not only aware of the external images based on themselves, but they are also trying to cooperate actively with them, to their advantage, making them part of their daily activities. Drawing on our ethnography of fishing and tourism in Slovenia, we explore how fishermen take an active part in the fashioning of these global topics which found expression in local settings, in the collective appraisal of these ideas and in establishing a local alternative develop- ment model. By enjoying the idea of beautiful sea, of freedom, of healthy sea food as presented in tourist discourse, they took an active part in promoting it and even realizing it. A case in point would be the notion of “healthy Mediterranean food”. The third theme, namely Fishing for projects focuses on sustainable development issues, projects, policy regulations and fishermen in the context of EU and neolib- eral economics that all brought influential changes to Slovene fishery. We show how it became quite difficult to think about work outside of the project framework even if you were a small-scale fisherman. Again, this does not mean that fishermen are passive objects. The processes along the present-day Slovene coast involve constructive local responses coupled with dynamic cultural setting and personal worldviews of all the actors involved. All three themes are further linked with a rather simple question; is Slovene fishing collapsing and disappearing or does it have the capacity to withstand the stress? And if so, how, and in which form? We could observe that instead of the fact that there has been a substantial change in a management system of Slovene fishing, the reorganization and innovation also brought new opportunities for tourism and 212 10 Small Fish in a Big World mariculture. We could understand those processes as a sign of adaptability where community did absorb changes while retaining somehow a similar structure (for example those fishermen who combined fishing and tourism already in 2000 only in an embryonic form, took on the role of the risk-takers and enlarged their business through the project system). We could also observe how these adaptations were active at several levels: the national (request for the exception directed from Slovene Ministries to EU responsible bodies), local (the establishment of the Fishery office, a mediator between fishermen and the relevant Ministry and the establishment of FLAG Fisherman) and individual (renovating family business in the new context of mariculture). But we could also observe the collapse and transformation of Slovene fish processing and canning industry in Izola (being moved to Pivka, an inland town where imported fish is now canned), and the decline in fishing as such, alongside a shift towards a new mind-set of creative enterprise, which could also be understood as in keeping with the neoliberal shift in ethics and values. Creativity and innovation are, as stressed by Icelandic anthropologists, repetitive themes in public discourse during the acceleration of neoliberal enterprise culture and are cherished in the production of various images (Gre´tarsdo´ttir et al. 2015: 94). In this context of fishing, if it wants to survive, it has to communicate with tourism, environmentalism and projectified politics (Sjoblom€ et al. 2013), and it has to be creative, innovative and enterprising in a specific way. While some individuals organized themselves according to these creative conditions (combining fishing with tourism or becoming only tourist workers; starting up mariculture enterprise, etc.) others did not see sense in these new opportunities (some find mariculture ecologically questionable, some did not want to convert to tourist operators due to the lack of individual qualities for such business or other reasons), didn’t have enough investment money to apply for EU grants, or simply didn’t know how to cope with new challenges (how to apply for projects for example). In this new situation not only are fishermen’s tactics seen to change but also the Slovene iconic fish, the migratory Piran’s mullet, always on the move, got its substitute, Piran’s seabass, a “sedentarized’ prey fish, now living “safely” in a fish farm on the Slovene side of Piran’s bay. As such, as a “prisoner fish”, it doesn’t cross the border, it is predictable and can be inserted into the schemes of economic growth of an ideal neoliberal company. Finally, as some would have it, the farmed seabass is safe food, fed with selected fodder. Could we then say at the end that Slovene fishery has finally reached the ideal of sustainability? The bigger industrial fleet is no more, the total catch has diminished drastically, Slovene fishermen are involved in tourism and the farmed seabass has taken over from the mullet. In our early ethnographic discussions of Slovene fishery crisis, back in 2000, the Slovene fishermen often put blame on a number of individuals from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food, or more generally on Ljubljana, the inland Slovene capital. Over the time fishermen organized themselves and connected with local and national bodies entering the new system of project-oriented financing as well as other EU regulatory frameworks. In doing so, the role of local and national respon- sible bodies became very important (negotiating for exceptions within the EU 10.1 Mashed-Up Layers 213 regulatory framework or mediating a dialogue between responsible Ministry, EU bodies and fishermen as well as other local actors) and the relation between the fishermen and national bodies became less conflicting. On the basis of these exam- ples we would suggest that it is the national governments who can give local regions certain power of resisting the crisis. The role of mediators, namely the Fishery Office, was also considered important in this process as it started to organize individuals and took, in a certain period, the role of spokesmen for the fishermen. On the other hand, we could also observe how the new system of projectified politics and large regulative frameworks such as The Common Fisheries Policy cannot cover the complexity of different situations and individuals. Sometimes these politics remain hidden for numerous individuals (they give privilege to the enterprising ones and exclude others that might have equally “sustainable” ideas about for example fish farms having a negative impact on the environment) and are absurd in certain specific local settings (such as the system of electronically led fishery diaries in the case of Slovenia). Nevertheless, smallness has its disadvantages and advantages. In one of our interviews with the responsible authorities at the Slovene Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food, we were informed how fishermen sometimes communicate directly with the responsible authorities at the Ministry, suggesting to them (over the phone) possible solutions or explaining their problems. Some problems are furthermore addressed by the Slovene Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food towards EU responsible bodies and as our interlocutor from the Ministry told us: ...mostly we strive for the exceptions. [...] ...for example electronic fishing diary fulfills two functions, one is control and the other is administrative simplification. True, this should be simplification, but only for big administration. What is simplification for them [states with big maritime fisheries] is complication for us [Slovene maritime fisheries] (personal communication, March 2015). How complicated will it become in the future is a question we might ask. Despite all the recent relatively positive relations between the Slovene fishermen and national authorities, they still perceive themselves to be under threat from part- time professional fishermen, recreational fishery, management regimes, tourist industry, to name a few. They are also well aware that they could lose in this race as coastal municipalities are also striving for development and growth and could give preference to tourism over fishing. Nevertheless, the sudden changes (the loss of fishing territories in present-day Croatian waters back in 1991, the demise of the fishing industry or the new projectified politics of financing) were perceived by our interlocutors in the context of the known history of Istria. It is the history of instability, poverty, border changing events, struggle and survival, and despite of all the pessimism many remain confident that they will somehow adapt to the future situation. It seems like the Istrian border region had reached the ideal of flexibility long before it became a neoliberal virtue. The question is, will the farmed seabass also adapt to these rather unstable Istrian conditions? 214 10 Small Fish in a Big World

References

Ballinger P (2013) Liquid borderlands, inelastic sea? Mapping the Eastern Adriatic. In: Bartov O, Weitz E (eds) Shatterzone of empires: coexistence and violence in the German, Habsburg, Russian and Ottoman borderlands. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp 423–437 Einarsson N (2011) Culture, conflict and crises in the Icelandic Fisheries an anthropological study of people, policy and marine resources in the North Atlantic Arctic. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Uppsala Studies in Cultural Anthropology 48. 1. http://rafhladan.is/bitstream/ handle/10802/9432/FULLTEXT01.pdf?sequence¼1. Accessed 10 Feb 2016 Eriksen TH (2001) Small places, large issues: an introduction to social and cultural anthropology. Pluto Press, London/Sterling Faoadriamed.org (2016) Country Fishery Information Slovenia. http://www.faoadriamed.org/pdf/ CountryP/SLOCProfile06.pdf. Accessed 7 Sept 2016 Gre´tarsdo´ttir T, A´ smundsson A, La´russon H (2015) Creativity and crisis. In: Durrenberger P, Palsson G (eds) Gambling debt: Iceland’s rise and fall in the global economy. University Press of Colorado, Boulder, pp 93–105 Latour B (2005) Reassembling the social. Oxford University Press, Oxford Port of Koper (2016) The second test reefer train via Koper. https://luka-kp.si/eng/news/single/the- second-test-reefer-train-via-koper-7553. Accessed 20 July 2016 Selwyn, T (forthcoming 2017) Tourism, travel, pilgrimage: anthropological approaches. Encyclo- pedia of anthropology. Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken. Sjoblom€ S, Lofgren€ K, Godenhjelm S (2013) Projectified politics–temporary organisations in a public context. Scand J Public Adm 17(2):3–12 Tilly C (2004) Contention and democracy in Europe, 1650–2000. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Tilly C (2008) A general introduction to the special issue: Mediterranean political processes. In comparative historical perspective. Am Behav Sci 51(10):1467–1471