The Last Chance - Part 2: Overfishing

By Mitch Paine

Our oceans are some of the most bountiful places on Earth. Fish swim in schools so thick that “islands of fish” are created. Coral reefs teem with life from coral and sponges to dolphins and sharks. Estuaries are the birthplace of so many ocean-dwelling creatures and land-dwelling creatures. The open ocean is seemingly deserted until dolphins, tuna, sharks, seabirds, swordfish and humpback whales come across and feast on a school of herring.

All of this may soon become history. Schools of fish may cease to be islands and become mere handfuls; the tremendous diversity of coral reefs may soon disappear; estuaries may become dead zones; the open ocean may become permanently deserted.

The problem of overfishing affects every part of the ocean, every part of 75 percent of our Earth’s surface and much of the land surface as well. Overfishing is the perfect example of an incredibly important environmental issue. The causes resemble most other issues and the effects appear in everyday life. A lesson clearly can be learned and must be learned from our overexploitation. The human race has one last chance to solve these problems; there is no second chance.

Environmental issues

In any environmental issue, the human-caused element includes an improper resource use. A resource is defined as the means available to fulfill an end, i.e., a stock or supply that can be drawn from. Almost anything can be considered a resource. Various resource properties can be used to evaluate the use of a resource, proper or improper.

A major problem in resource use that leads to a resource collapse is the tragedy of the commons. A resource that is open to all humans can suffer from the tragedy of the commons. The oceans are the ultimate example of this scenario. Almost 50 percent of our planet is governed by no one; therefore, few restrictions can be set and even fewer are ever enforced. The failure of the human race in the tragedy of the commons is our failure as individuals to act for the common good, for future generations.

Theodore Roosevelt once stated about our use of resources, “The nation behaves best if it treats the Natural Resources as assets which it must turn over to the next generation, increased and not impaired in value.”

To imply an environmental issue, the improper resource use must have an effect on biodiversity. The benefit to humans of biodiversity is multifaceted. We gain biological resources, genetic variety, tourism and recreation, and ecological services, such as water filtration. There are also unknown resources that may lie somewhere in the biodiversity of the planet: a cure to cancer, AIDS, malaria or other disease.
As we destroy habitat, introduce species, overexploit, pollute and compete with natural species, nature risks extinction. These plants, animals, bacteria, fungi and protists that are pushed to extinction serve as the biological, genetic, recreation, ecological, and unknown resources for humans. However, extinction is forever. There is no second chance for extinct species; extinction is permanent.

Overfishing

The ocean species on our planet are facing this reality of destruction. As humans encroach on the coasts, habitats are lost for many breeding sea animals. As we discharge our pollutants into the ocean, we create dead zones.
The greatest harm that we’ve caused to our oceans is overexploitation. Humans have taken advantage of rapid technology growth to be able to haul in more fish than ever before. The growth is astronomical; the number of fish caught by commercial fishermen has increased by 500 percent from 1950 to 1997. These numbers are far beyond the sustainability of fish populations. According to George Leonard, senior scientist manager for the Monterey Bay Aquarium Seafood Watch Program, 20–25 percent of United States’ seafood stocks are overfished.

The technology that has been used to fuel the fisheries growth is multifaceted. The problem with technology growth is not just the overuse of the intended resource but also the bycatch, or unintended catch through commercial fishing practices, which is thrown back dead or dying.

An abysmal fact hangs over the issue of bycatch: 25 percent of all organisms caught during fishing are bycatch. One in four animals are thrown back in the ocean dead or dying. In the shrimp industry, the bycatch rate is 80 percent. Shark species in the North Atlantic have declined 50 percent and white-tip shark populations have receded by 99 percent, due in part to bycatch.

By taking out the large organisms at the top of the food chain, such as sharks and large fish, the remaining ecosystem is destabilized and the effects filter down to more “useful” fish in the ocean. Estimates have been made that only 10 percent of large fish at the top of the food chain still exist.

Each technology contributes in a different way to the problem of bycatch and overexploitation of the intended species.

Drift nets or gill nets are huge nets that span nearly 150 miles and reach to 1,600 feet below the water’s surface. These nets are virtually invisible. Anything that might swim into these nets is assured capture and death. The intended target by commercial fishermen is swordfish, thresher shark and mako shark, says Leonard.

These nets are also nonbiodegradable. When used to catch fish, these nets also capture other free-swimming creatures; however, the danger lies in the unintended consequences. As these nets age, they often will detach from the fishing vessel to become “ghost nets.” These ghost nets drift in the open ocean forever. Seals, sea lions, sharks, rays, dolphins, whales and other fish are inevitably caught in the nets. The most often caught animal is the sea turtle, and the greatest menace for sea turtles are the drift nets.

The United Nations passed a law banning the use of drift nets, but enforcement in the open ocean is a virtually impossible task. Unfor­tunately, many ghost nets are still adrift around the world, catching and killing.

Long-lining, another devastating fishing practice, can be linked to overexploitation as well. In the practice of long-lining, fishermen string out 60-mile long nets with over 10,000 hooks. These hooks typically attract such fish as yellowfin and albacore tuna, swordfish and sharks. Over­exploitation and the decreasing fish population is very clear when stories are told of 10 per 100 hooks being filled in the 1960s, and today seldom is one hook out of 100 filled.

The problem with long-lining again lies not in the purposeful use but rather the catch of the animals that don’t belong. Countless other fish species are caught on these lines that are subsequently thrown back in the ocean to die; among these species, the practice of long-lining is most detrimental to bluefin tuna. The long-lines typically catch juvenile bluefin tuna, which are not old enough to reproduce. When commercial fishermen catch juvenile fish, the adult population is severely threatened.

Each year, long-lines also catch an estimated 40,000 sea turtles (in the United States, all sea turtles are endangered or threatened); 300,000 seabirds; and many millions of sharks. These numbers are appalling. Much of our yellowfin tuna and swordfish catch comes from these long-lines.

“The most detrimental of all fishing technologies is bottom trawling,” says Leonard of the Seafood Watch Program. During the practice of bottom trawling, fishing vessels drag heavily weighted nets along the bottom of the ocean to catch everything in the net’s path. The practice of bottom trawling is comparable to simply bulldozing the seafloor. Leonard says the bottom trawling, when coupled with sonar, is very efficient at catching fish and is like a “vacuum cleaner” on the ocean floor.

Bottom trawling destroys the entire bottom of the ocean. All coral, starfish, sea slugs, fish, sharks and rays, among other animals, are decimated by the trawling nets. In the shrimp industry, bottom trawling is to blame for bycatch rates of almost 80 percent. The nets also catch the juveniles of many types of animals, which further hurts recovery efforts. Each year, trawling clears 150 times more area than clear-cut forestry techniques.

The primary goal in trawling is shrimp, crayfish, and groundfish such as Atlantic cod, rockfish, flounder and haddock. On the East Coast, many of these groundfish have been overfished, but on the West Coast, better standards have led to better stocks.

In 2006, a proposed ban on trawling was introduced at the United Nations. The evidence of the destructive nature of the practice was overwhelming, yet the ban did not pass. The commercial fishing industry had too much pull over the United Nations to allow the ban.

Recovery

These are the bad things that we’ve done, and allowed to be done, to this date. But let’s look at the good things. Drift nets are gone and never supposed to be used again. Long-lining has become more selective, and various strategies to reduce bycatch have been implemented, which helps limit the effect on biodiversity. For instance, special lines are used to scare away seabirds from the bait hooks. Some fishermen also fish at times when seabirds are not active, primarily at night. If the longlines are placed far enough under water, the birds do not go for the bait, and some fishermen are using this strategy.

Legislation also has been passed making mandatory the use of Turtle Excluder Devices, which are used in the shrimp trawling industry. A TED is an innovation that has a grid of bars attached to the net. Small animals pass through these bars, but larger animals, such as turtles, release the bars and are let out through an opening. Although fought against bitterly by the shrimp industry, TEDs have saved hundreds of thousands of endangered turtle species and, even though initially thought to be a burden, has caused shrimpers little hassle. Cynthia Vernon, vice president of education programs at the Monterey Bay Aquarium, says that the TEDs are a great success in the bycatch issue. The National Marine Fisheries Service has encouraged other countries to do the same, and now 13 other countries employ Turtle Excluder Devices in the shrimp industry.

Vernon also makes mention of new technology to research pelagic, or open-ocean, fish, such as tuna. Stanford University has been part of a tagging program for tuna. The program has determined that, instead of two distinct populations of blue-fin tuna, there is only one population worldwide, which is a huge discovery for tuna conservation. Other technology has been used to research fish so that better conservation strategies can be achieved.

Another part of the solution is aquaculture. Aquaculture is raising seafood species in captivity, basically “farming” them. Currently, we raise about 265 species in aquaculture, including shrimp, salmon, tuna, tilapia, catfish and trout. Some think that aquaculture is the solution to overfishing because wild-caught fish are not taken. But the reality is that for carnivorous fish, such as salmon and tuna, wild fish have to be caught to feed these “captive” animals. In reality, three times more fish are caught to raise salmon and 20 times more fish are caught to raise tuna, according to George Leonard from Seafood Watch. But, says Leonard, if we raise simply those that are not carnivorous, then responsible aquaculture surely can be part of the solution.

In response to the issue of overfishing, another success can be found in the Marine Stewardship Council, which evaluates fisheries and rewards environmentally responsible fisheries with a MSC label. One of the MSC-labeled fisheries raises Alaska wild-caught salmon, which is a great alternative to farm-raised salmon and comes from an environmentally friendly source.

Another great mark for both the fishing industry and the environment is the creation of Marine Protected Areas or Marine Reserves. These areas are set up for seasonal fishing for certain species. This helps protect the stock so that fishermen may be able to keep jobs and helps the environment by allowing regeneration. California has done a great job in setting aside Marine Protected Areas, hopefully expanding them along the entire coast within the next decade. Leonard says, “We have enough science to move in precautionary ways” and says we need “global networks of Marine Reserve Systems.”

Fishing can be regulated by fisheries managers through these systems, jobs can be created, the environment can be helped, and fishermen can stay in business.

The way forward

Among all the talk of the bad things, good deeds are done every day for the ocean. But what can we do, here in the Midwest, to help overfishing and the oceans? The most important thing to keep in mind is the power of the consumer. The consumer has the power to choose the best use of a resource. We are consumers no matter where we live, and in the Midwest we can have a huge effect on overfishing issues by using our power to choose the most sustainable seafood. How? The Monterey Bay Aquarium provides Seafood Watch Guides—perfect, wallet-sized guides to sustainable seafood that one may order here in the Midwest. They can be obtained free from www.montereybayaquarium.org.

Consumers here and elsewhere need to be mindful of the choices. Already, we know that purchasing wild-caught salmon is better than buying farmed salmon; purchasing U.S.-farmed shrimp is better than purchasing imported shrimp (due to strong U.S. environmental regulations; flounder from the Pacific is a better alternative to flounder from the Atlantic. All of this information can be found in the Seafood Watch Guide. Our purchasing decisions are essential to solving the problem of overfishing.

We have already been warned as to what will happen if we don’t change our ways. In 2006 a study conducted at Dalhousie University found that if we don’t change fishing techniques and consumer preferences, by 2048 all seafood species will be eliminated from the ocean. George Leonard says this scenario speaks volumes to the issue of biodiversity. When we have a more biodiverse ocean, Leonard says, “it is more stable and yields higher ecosystem services. We need to focus on the whole rather than just a single species.” We have the power as consumers, whether in the Midwest, East or West Coast. Everybody can make a small adjustment—and we must. We have one last chance.

Related: The Last Chance - Part 1: Our Attitude Toward the Ocean

Visit these Web sites and check out these books for more information.

Monterey Bay Aquarium Seafood Watch Program
Seafriends
MarineBio.org
Blue Ocean Institute
Institute for Fisheries Resources
Marine Stewardship Council
National Marine Fisheries Service
Song for the Blue Ocean, Carl Safina
Marine Conservation Biology, Elliot Norse and Larry Crowder

Bookmark/Search this post with:

Delicious  •   Digg  •   StumbleUpon  •   Propeller  •   Reddit  •   Magnoliacom  •   Newsvine  •   Furl  •   Facebook  •   Google  •   Yahoo  •   Technorati  •   Icerocket