|
 |
RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #587
February 26, 1998
HEADLINES:
OCEANS WITHOUT FISH
Environmental Research Foundation P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403
Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@rachel.clark.net
Back issues available here or by E-mail; to get instructions, send
E-mail to INFO@rachel.clark.net with the single word HELP
in the message; back issues also available via ftp from
ftp.std.com/periodicals/rachel and from gopher.std.com.
and from http://www.monitor.net/rachel/
Subscribe: send E-mail to rachel-weekly-request@world.std.com
with the single word SUBSCRIBE in the message. It's free. |
 |
OCEANS WITHOUT FISH
The destruction of life in the oceans has progressed farther than
anyone had suspected, according to a new report in SCIENCE
magazine.[1] The causes are overfishing and pollution,[2] but the
focus of the new report is overfishing alone. SCIENCE is the
voice of the American Association for the Advancement of Science
(AAAS).
The world's catch of ocean fish peaked in 1989 and has been
declining since.[3] In the early 1990s, scientists reported that
13 of the world's 17 major fisheries were depleted or in steep
decline.[2] Typical is the Grand Banks fishery off the shallow
coast of Newfoundland in the north Atlantic. There, after 350
years of commercial exploitation, the haddock, cod and flounder
have all but disappeared and the fishery was officially closed a
few years ago.
The depletion of the world's most popular fish species has set
off three trends, each of which is adding to the oceans'
troubles: (1) fisherman are adopting new technologies that (2)
allow them to fish in deeper waters, and (3) they are fishing
lower on the food chain.
New Technologies
- Don Tyson, the Arkansas chicken magnate and supporter of Bill
Clinton, has gone into the fishing business in a big way.
Commercial fishing can be very profitable if conducted on a grand
scale. In 1992, Tyson bought the Arctic-Alaska Fisheries
Company, and three other fishing companies. They operate a fleet
of industrial super-trawlers that each cost $40 million to build
and reach the length of a football field. These trawlers pull
nylon nets thousands of feet long through the water, capturing
everything in their path --400 tons of fish at a single netting.
These super-trawlers stay off-shore for months at a time,
processing and freezing their catch as they go, thus giving them
a major advantage over smaller land-based boats.
Approximately 40 percent of what these super-trawlers catch is
considered trash and is ground up and thrown back into the ocean.
They call it "bycatch" and, according to investigative reporter
Jeffrey St. Clair, it can include endangered sea lions, and
seals, as well as unwanted fish.[4] (In the northeast Atlantic
alone, the bycatch in a year's time amounts to 3.7 million
tons.[1])
- Trawlers are now using technology developed by the military to
fish waters as deep as a mile, catching species that few would
have considered edible or useful a decade ago. Now that the
shallow fisheries are in serious decline, trawl nets fitted with
wheels and rollers are dragged across the bottom of the deep
oceans, removing everything of any size. Squid, skate, rattails,
hoki, blue ling, black scabbard, red crabs, black oreos, smooth
oreos, deep shrimp, chimeras, slackjaw eels, blue hake, southern
blue whiting, sablefish, spiny dogfish, and orange roughy are now
being harvested from the deep ocean and sold in seafood stores,
cooked into "fish sticks" at McDonald's, or processed into fake
"crab meat" for seafood salads.
Part of the problem is consumer ignorance. For example, orange
roughy began to appear in fish stores and on the menus at fancy
restaurants in the U.S. just a decade ago. Yet in that short
time the species has become threatened with extinction. The
orange roughy lives up to a mile deep in cold waters off New
Zealand. Now scientists have learned that species living in
deep, cold waters grow and reproduce very slowly. The orange
roughy, for example, lives to be 150 years old and only begins to
reproduce at age 30. Recently, the principal stocks of orange
roughy around New Zealand collapsed. Still, today in Annapolis,
Maryland, fish stores, orange roughy is available for $8.99 per
pound, and there's no sign telling consumers that the species is
threatened. "People wouldn't eat rhinoceros or any other land
creature that they knew was threatened with extinction. But
they're eating fish like orange roughy without a clue to what's
happening," says Greenpeace fisheries expert Mike Hagler in
Auckland, New Zealand.[3]
Radar allows ships to operate in the fog and the dark; sonar
locates the fish precisely; and GPS (geographical positioning
system) satellites pinpoint locations so that ships can return to
productive spots. Formerly-secret military maps reveal hidden
deep-sea features, such as mountains, which are associated with
upwelling currents of nutrient-rich water, where fish thrive.
Combined with larger nets made from new, stronger materials,
modern fishing vessels guided electronically can sweep the oceans
clean --and that is precisely what is happening. As a result,
the ocean's fish are disappearing, and so are the family-scale
fishing operations that used to dominate the industry.
- Because modern fishing equipment is immensely expensive, the
stakes are high. With big money on the line, the fishing
industry has curried political favor. As a result, modern
fishing factories like Tyson's are subsidized by federal and
state governments. Tyson's company has received more than $65
million in low-interest loans from the federal government, to
help build 10 of these super-trawlers. According to Jeffrey St.
Clair, the Seattle-based factory-trawler fleet has received $200
million in federal subsidies.
Furthermore, because so much is at stake, deep-water factory
trawlers cannot afford to let up. They must keep fishing until
the last fish is gone.
But it gets worse. The new report in SCIENCE shows that humans
are now fishing not only in deeper waters, but also lower on the
food chain.[1] This has ominous implications, because as the
lower levels of the food chain decline, the chances of revival at
the top of the food chain are diminished even further.
Scientists are now discussing the "wholesale collapse" of marine
ecosystems.[5] "It is likely that continuation of present
trends will lead to widespread fisheries collapses...," says
Daniel Pauly, the author of the new study.[1] "If things go
unchecked, we might end up with a marine junkyard dominated by
plankton," he says.[6]
Pauly's new study examined the diets of 220 fish species, then
gave each species a numerical ranking in the food web, between 1
and 5. Those assigned a 1 are plankton --tiny floating plants
that photosynthesize, using the energy of sunlight to convert
water and carbon dioxide into carbohydrates, thus forming the
bottom of all aquatic food chains. Level 2 is zooplankton --tiny
floating animals that eat plankton. Top predators, such as the
snappers inhabiting the continental shelf off Yucatan, Mexico,
receive a ranking of 4.6.
These data were combined with Food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO) data on fish landings worldwide. The result is an estimate
of the average place in the oceanic food web (the average
"trophic level") where humans are harvesting fish. The new study
reveals that the average trophic level has been steadily
declining for 45 years, meaning that humans are progressively
taking fish from lower on the food chain. The steady decline has
been about 0.1 trophic levels per decade. "Present fishing policy
is unsustainable," says Pauly. Of the 220 species studied, at
least 60% are being overfished, or fished to the limit.[6]
Pauly believes that the true situation is somewhat worse than his
study indicated, principally because many countries under-report
their fishing harvest.
Even if a fishery does not collapse completely, fishing down the
food chain can have serious consequences. In the north sea, the
cod population has been so depleted that fishermen are now
concentrating on a second-level species called pout, which the
cod used to eat. The pout, in turn, eat tiny organisms called
copepods and krill. Krill also eat copepods. As the pout are
removed, the krill population expands and then the copepod
population declines drastically. Because copepods are the main
food of young cod, the cod population cannot recover.[5]
Fish farming might seem like a way out of this problem, but it is
not --at least not as presently practiced --because farmed fish
are fed fish meal made from unpopular fish such as herring or
menhaden.[6] It would seem to be only a matter of time before
the herring and menhaden too are depleted.
Dr. Pauly believes that in 3 or 4 decades, many oceanic fisheries
will "collapse in on themselves." The result will be a loss of
high-quality protein for humans, even before the fisheries
collapse completely. Humans eat somewhere between trophic levels
2.5 and 4. Lower then that, there isn't much that people eat.
"There is a lower limit for what can be caught and marketed, and
zooplankton [at trophic level 2] is not going to be reaching our
dinner plates in the foreseeable future," Dr. Pauly wrote in
SCIENCE.
Solutions? Government could limit the kinds of fishing
technology that are allowed --to give the fish a chance --but
this would put "the public interest" up against the likes of Don
Tyson. In today's political climate, with private money
dominating our elections, Don Tyson would win because he's
wealthy and he supports all the right politicians. Dr. Pauly
believes there is an urgent need to create protected areas where
fishing is simply not allowed. He sees no-fishing zones as
easier to implement and enforce than fishing quotas, limiting
fishing time at sea, restrictions on allowable fishing gear, and
controls on pollution --though these steps, too, are needed, he
believes. No-fishing zones can be created quickly and can be
enforced. In Britain, the fishing industry has begun to accept
no-fishing zones as a way to save the industry in the face of
declining fish stocks.[7]
The most important idea, proposed in SCIENCE magazine February
6th, would be to shift the burden of proof onto the fishing
industry.[8] Those who profit from public resources such as the
oceans should have to demonstrate, before they can begin fishing,
that their activities will not harm the public resource. At
present, it is assumed that fishing will not damage life in the
oceans, and the burden is on the general public to prove
otherwise. At this point, abundant evidence has come to light
indicating damage, so it is definitely time to shift the burden
of proof onto the fishing industry. For example, owners of
super-trawlers should have to show that their yield will be
sustainable before their ships can put to sea.
Here again, it seems unlikely that the present Congress
--snuffling around in a trough of filthy lucre, as it is --will
act to protect the public interest. Therefore, it is urgent that
we get private money out of our elections completely. Elected
officials need to be answerable to the people who elected them,
not to wealthy benefactors.
Otherwise our children will inherit oceans without fish.
--Peter Montague
(National Writers Union, UAW Local 1981/AFL-CIO) |
 |
| [1] Daniel Pauly and others, "Fishing Down Marine Food Webs,"
SCIENCE Vol. 279 (February 6, 1998), pgs. 860-863.
[2] Timothy Egan, "U.S. Fishing Fleet Trawling Coastal Water
Without Fish," NEW YORK TIMES March 7, 1994, pgs. A1, B7.
[3] William J. Broad, "Creatures of the Deep Find Their Way to
the Table," NEW YORK TIMES December 26, 1995, pgs. C1, C5.
[4] Jeffrey St. Clair, "Fishy Business," IN THESE TIMES May 26,
1997, pgs. 14-16, 36.
[5] William K. Stevens, "Man Moves Down the Marine Food Chain,
Creating Havoc," NEW YORK TIMES February 10, 1998, pg. C3.
[6] Susan Diesenhouse, "In New England, Battle Plans for Survival
at Sea," NEW YORK TIMES April 24, 1994, pg. F7.
[7] Nigel Williams, "Overfishing Disrupts Entire Ecosystems,"
SCIENCE Vol. 279 (February 6, 1998), pg. 809.
[8] Paul K. Dayton, "Reversal of the Burden of Proof in Fisheries
Management," SCIENCE Vol. 279 (February 6, 1998), pgs. 821-822.
Descriptor terms: fish; fishing industry; fishing technology;
oceans; grand banks fishery; newfoundland; don tyson; ar; science
magazine; daniel pauly; burden of proof; precautionary principle;
atlantic ocean; orange roughy; new zealand; fao; studies; |
 |
NOTICE
Environmental Research Foundation provides this electronic
version of RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY free of charge
even though it costs our organization considerable time and money
to produce it. We would like to continue to provide this service
free. You could help by making a tax-deductible contribution
(anything you can afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00). Please send
your tax-deductible contribution to: Environmental Research
Foundation, P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403-7036. Please do
not send credit card information via E-mail. For further
information about making tax-deductible contributions to E.R.F.
by credit card please phone us toll free at 1-888-2RACHEL.
--Peter Montague, Editor
| |