MOTHER JONES BY E-MAIL

The Fate of the Ocean

Page 5 of 12


TOOLS

EmailE-mail article
PrintPrint article




BACKTALK

E-mail the editor





Google


RELATED ARTICLES


THE TECHNOLOGIES WE USE ABOARD Oceanus are the same employed by at least some of the 4 million commercial fishing vessels plying the ocean at any given moment. Not long ago, the growth of seagoing technologies paralleled the growth in the annual global fish harvest. But 2000 marked a decisive turning point when the global wild fish catch, which grew 500 percent between 1950 and 1997, peaked at 96 million tons despite better technologies and intensified efforts by fishers. Thereafter it has fallen by more than 3 percent per capita a year, declining to 31 pounds per capita in 2003, a rate last seen 40 years ago. Even more alarming, a 2001 reassessment published in Nature suggests the annual catch has actually been falling far longer, about 400,000 tons a year since 1988, a fact concealed by China’s misreporting of its annual catch.

Paradoxically, fishing has become so efficient as to be supremely inefficient. One of the biggest culprits is long-lining, in which a single boat sets monofilament line across 60 or more miles of ocean, each bearing vertical gangion lines that dangle at different depths, baited with up to 10,000 hooks designed to catch a variety of pelagic (open ocean) species. Each year, an estimated 2 billion longline hooks are set worldwide primarily for tuna and swordfish—though long-liners inadvertently kill far more other species that take the bait, including some 40,000 sea turtles, 300,000 seabirds, and millions of sharks annually. Thrown dead or dying back into the ocean, these unwanted species (bycatch) make up at least 25 percent of the global catch, perhaps as much as 88 billion pounds of life a year.

All told, pelagic longlines are the most widely used fishing gear on earth, and are deployed in all the oceans except the circum- polar seas. But whereas they once caught 10 fish per 100 hooks set, today they are lucky to catch one, evidence the seas are running dry. Abetting their destructiveness are the trawl fisheries, which drag nets across every square inch of the bottom of the continental shelves every two years, trawling some regions many times a season. By razing vital benthic (seafloor) ecosystems, trawlers—the brutal equivalent of fishing the seafloor with bulldozers—level an area 150 times larger than the total area of forests clearcut on land each year.

Adding to longlines and trawlers is the technology of drift nets, the nearly invisible curtains of monofilament blindsiding the life of the ocean. In the North Atlantic, shark and monkfish nets up to 150 miles long are set 1,600 feet below the surface, then left untended to sail and randomly ensnare life. In the course of operations in stormy seas, many nets are lost or abandoned—though they continue to fill with prey, which attracts predators, which likewise become trapped, die, and decay, attracting more predators. Composed of nonbiodegradable synthetics, deepwater ghostnets fish with nightmarish efficiency for years.

Fishing provides a vivid illustration of the differences in our attitudes toward the land and the sea. Nowadays we refrain from indiscriminately mowing down wildlife for food; imagine slaughtering lions by the hundreds or bears by the hundredweight, along with all the antelope, deer, wolves, raccoons, and wildebeest around them, in government-funded operations, no less. Yet that’s what we do at sea, with the world’s nations subsidizing 25 to 40 percent of total global fishing revenues. The National Marine Fisheries Service estimates that $8 billion in revenue and 300,000 jobs could be created simply by better management of U.S. fish stocks, not by continuing subsidies of fishers, their boats, and their gear.

Despite its promise, aquaculture is no better, since three pounds of wild fish are caught to feed every pound of farmed salmon sent to market—creating entirely new fisheries, which deplete hitherto unscathed wild fish populations, including krill, a critical corner-stone of the marine food web and essential to the survival of Antarctic species such as penguins. Furthermore, farmed salmon become severely contaminated by pollutants in their feed chow; some European aquacultured salmon is so badly tainted that people have been advised to consume it only once every five months [for more on which seafood is safe to eat, see here.].

The truth is that the full consequences of modern fishing methods are brutal and far-reaching, and they were not really understood before the release of a seminal study published in 2003, detailing how industrialized fisheries, in a manner akin to virulent pathogens, typically reduce the community of large fish by 80 percent within the first 15 years of exploitation. Co-authors Boris Worm and Ransom Myers of Dalhousie University in Nova Scotia concluded that in the wake of decades of such onslaughts, only 10 percent of all large fish (tuna, swordfish, marlin) and groundfish (cod, halibut, skate, and flounder) are left anywhere in the ocean. Their study was based on factors modern fisheries managers ignore: historical data; in this case, the catch reports from Japanese long-liners dating from the 1950s, when the global tuna catch was less than 500,000 tons, compared with 3.7 million tons today.



 

Post a Comment

Your Name: 

Your Comment: 
 
Please press "Submit" only once to avoid double-posting.
All HTML formatting is removed from comments.
Read the Mother Jones community rules here.

Comments:

How long do you it'll take before were at a point of no return?
Posted by:Melissa AlvarezJune 5, 2007 1:36:21 PMRespond ^
Thank you Julia Whitty for this very deep look into the Ocean, and the not so kind relationship we humans are so profoundly having on it. Your words are filled with wisdom to which we should all pay close attention to before it is to late.
Posted by:SashaJuly 17, 2007 5:40:33 PMRespond ^
What could be the last signs before life ends within Mother Sea ? What are the signs to watch for us who live and work ashore, especiallyfor us deep inside any continents? Life may well survive the Homo sapiens sapiens species. Yet I «pray» for a genetic mutation affecting the whole species, a miracle to have us learn not to polute and kill our only spaceship/home and all life that is connected and that is sustained by Grand Mother Earth, Grand father Sun, Mother Sea and Father Air . A miracle to have us be gardeners instead of suicidal abusers of our host, Grand mother Earth. Was'nt the Homo sapiens species a social animal, (like ants, thermites and bees) Yet survival of the strongest and /or the fittest seems to always bring the Homo sapiens and his developed mind, to use that tool more to eat up or ABUSE at hi$ profit the weakest link of the social chain than to support and reenforce it. Yet I believe we could think of our social chain of life as extending to all living beings ! We are not there yet Another thousand years ?...
Posted by:C C DUBUCAugust 11, 2007 5:08:17 PMRespond ^
Is this required reading for all our politicians and policy makers?
Posted by:Leslie ChristensenAugust 12, 2007 7:51:50 AMRespond ^
I'm sure that the fishing industry and its lobbyists can find experts that will dispute everything in this article.I'm afraid the only way humanity can learn any lessons will be the very hard way.
Posted by:Scott ParsonsAugust 12, 2007 3:42:04 PMRespond ^
How long do you it'll take before were at a point of no return? Posted by:Melissa Alvarez onJune 5, 2007 1:36:21 PM Mellisa, the answer to you question is simple. We're already there. Matt
Posted by:MattAugust 26, 2007 4:08:52 AMRespond ^
Unless the global energy consumption is reduced rapidly—by mid 2006—to levels below 60 exajoules (6E+19 joules) annually (this level is about 12.4 percent of global energy consumption in 2005), our studies show that the runaway positive feedback loops that are destroying Earth’s ecosystems including ozone holes, global heating, extreme climatic events, toxic pollution, resources depletion, war, unethical behavior, and disease pandemics would reach the point of no return and overwhelm our life support systems rendering most of our cities uninhabitable by as early as 2015, possibly earlier. Failure to rein back the global energy consumption to the levels below 60 exajoules annually by June 2006 would render the concept of sustainable management redundant (it seems highly unlikely that post industrial civilization would voluntarily sacrifice its perceived privileges and values in favor of sustaining life on Earth). MSRB is replacing its current program with a disaster rescue operation. http://msrb.wordpress.com/stop-burning-earth/
Posted by:MSRBSeptember 7, 2007 10:39:02 PMRespond ^
The MSRB Index of Human Impact on Nature (HIoN) currently stands at a terminally high level of 171.40 that is 71.4 percent higher than the planet could cope with resulting in the collapse of the population centers by as early as 2015, possibly earlier. http://msrb.wordpress.com/its-1100pm/
Posted by:MSRB -2September 7, 2007 10:41:32 PMRespond ^
Time for us all to think of all life on our planet as one being - LIFE - and for us to realize that we all live together, essentially in one house - one habitat - inter-related, interdependent, and that we all need to : stop breeding, since human overpopulation is the sole reason for the loss of quailty of life on Earth and for the massive and growing pollution (greening a few things won't help at all unles we all go vegan) and also - go vegan - the more people going vegan, the more chance we have for life to continue with any quality at all. Read this: http://environment.newscientis t.com/channel/earth/mg18825304 .800-its-better-to-green-your-diet-than-your-car.html
Posted by:Jake MooreSeptember 10, 2007 2:19:07 PMRespond ^
Great informative & heartfelt program by Julia Whitty. Along with the stark reality of the downfall of nature & our environment here are two thoughts that could be brought into the equation of saving our planet (of course there are many others also!) There are two vital changes for mankind to begin to address these huge problems. One is reduce our population. The second is to convert to vegan, vegetarian diet. I am vegan & know that it is a challenge, but the benefits & increased health are worth the perceived sacrifice. It is the ethic of "ahimsa" or non-violence toward all creatures that share our beautiful planet. It is good for us, the dear creatures & our environment. Thank you all for presenting this vital information. larryskanda@yahoo.com
Posted by:Larry GibsonOctober 31, 2007 9:12:36 AMRespond ^
Thank you for expanding my horizons on the wonderful oceans and what damage has been done by irresponibility, may we all wake up and smell the salty air before it is too late.
Posted by:Paul GrinderJanuary 3, 2008 3:16:39 PMRespond ^
Science has shown the success of no fish zones. These zones repopulate the rest of the ocean. Also, large fish need to be thrown back. They have healthier roe and produce exponentially more roe. By throwing these large healthy fish back we preserve a superior gene pool, produce more fish, and avoid the more polluted older fish as is seen from the contamination of the large and old blue fin tuna. The younger fish also taste better.
Posted by:skarpknutJanuary 27, 2008 11:03:38 PMRespond ^
I had a little casa on the Baja just south of San Felipe Mexico. In the early '80s The brilliant Government of Mexico, for unknown monies, let the Japanese come into these pristine waters with processing ships and trawlers, and within six months you couldn't catch a decent mess of fish. The local Mexican fisherman would go out in their boats to their fishing grounds they had fished for generations and return with only a minuscule remnant of what they had been harvesting for decades. World focus on the endangered oceans is desperately needed but it will be a monumental task to get all the parties in agreement
Posted by:Gary HansonJanuary 29, 2008 2:49:38 PMRespond ^
Oceans need to be stop being polluted!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by:Breanna HauseFebruary 6, 2008 8:04:37 AMRespond ^
why are we not doingany thing to help our oceans
Posted by:kassiApril 25, 2008 10:16:46 AMRespond ^
we aren't doing anything because our goverment sucks
Posted by:loriApril 25, 2008 10:18:04 AMRespond ^

Jail.org - Inmate Search
Criminal records, instant public records & people search & current court records. www.jail.org

U.S. Public Records Search
Search County & State Court Records, Criminal records, Vital and Adoption Records www.PublicRecordsInfo.com

Records.com - People Search
Public Records and Background Checks. Instantly Search Criminal Records, Addresses and Court Records www.Records.com

Court Records & County Records
Find Instant Public Records, Criminal Records as Well as County Property Records Search. www.PublicRecordsIndex.com
















bookIN PRINT

CLICK HERE
for more great reading

headphones IN TUNE
New music every issue

CLICK TO LISTEN


This article has been made possible by the Foundation for National Progress, the Investigative Fund of Mother Jones, and gifts from generous readers like you.

© 2006 The Foundation for National Progress

About Us   Support Us   Advertise   Ad Policy   Privacy Policy   Contact Us   Subscribe   RSS