Thriving Oceans

It’s good to be back and I must say I miss writing about the ocean world.  If you’re curious what I’ve been doing check out my post: Joining Earth Island’s Conservation Ranks.

Now on with the show…I happened upon this Associated Press article that popped out of Boston the other day and I didn’t realize that I was in for quite a laugh.  So the writer goes on to describe a series of natural and regulatory circumstances that had created a situation by which fish stocks were being underfished (oh the overfishing irony!), and how, as an example,  haddock numbers were booming because an area had been closed to U.S. fishermen. Wow, sounds like a great conservation plan and one that had been properly implemented, right?  My thoughts exactly!  But intertwined amongst the words were two ecological gems that I just had to share with all you ocean aficionados and conservationists.  I hope you appreciate the perspective as it is actually quite sad and telling…

Steve Ouellette, a fisheries attorney in Gloucester, talking about underfishing:

“I think it’s just a tragedy.”

“Hundreds of millions of dollars of fish are being wasted.”

Yep, allowing healthy fish to remain in our oceans, contribute to biodiversity, balance ecosystems, and  simply exist unexploited are such catastrophes and a waste of life.  Somehow I doubt that underfishing will become my new mantra.

As the weekend rolled to an end and the inevitable Monday workday loom overhead, I moseyed on to the bedroom and turned on the radio. Expecting to encounter a little paranormal lullaby, I was incredibly surprised to find the guest host of Coast To Coast AM, George Knapp, tackling the overfishing crisis.  In his interviews with Rupert Murray (The End of the Line) and Rick Moonen (RM Seafood), George brought this important topic of conservation concern to an international audience.  Since Coast to Coast AM is broadcast on over 500 United States affiliates alone, I was elated  to hear the notion of sustainable seafood practices being promoted to millions and perhaps recruiting some listeners to ultimately make informed and responsible meal decisions.

 And sprinkled throughout their conversations was a discussion, or warning if you will, about a vanishing act recently perpetrated by Alaskan King salmon.  Well, after a little online digging I managed to come up with an AP report (Aug. 2, 2009) on CBS News describing the failure of king salmon to return to a number of Alaskan rivers…again.

“One Alaska river after another has been closed to king fishing this summer because significant numbers of fish failed to return to spawn. The dismally weak return follows weak runs last summer and poor runs in 2007, which also resulted in emergency fishing closures.” AP

And as the salmon continue to vanish from our waters year after year, we are left speculating whether the problem is ocean currents, food availability, bycatch, aquaculture, or overfishing.  Yet over the last decade, ” the incidental number of king salmon caught has skyrocketed, reaching over 120,000 kings in 2007.” AP

Hmmm!  Perhaps a connection?  Instead of embarking on another version of the blame game and debating whether (or to what degree) the lack of salmon returns is caused by natural phenomena, such as changing ocean currents, river conditions or available prey, or human activities, we need to institute a little fisheries management tough love. 

For in the end bycatch may not be the only culprit, but as opposed to the actions of Mother Nature, it is the factor that we can definitely control.  And of the 120,000 kings killed in pollock trawl nets in 2007, an estimated 78,000 adults would have returned to the rivers of western Alaska.

AP Article: King Salmon Failing to Return to Spawn

It definitely took longer than I expected to get back in the swing of a daily routine after a one week stay in Maui, followed up by a weeklong business excursion to San Diego (of which began 14 hours after returning home), and finally returning home to a rather unproductive work week that culminated with a celebration of independence.

So with that said, and my apologies to delayed email responses, I decided to start anew with some information that may or may not have already circled through the web.  Just as I left for the islands, The End of the Line officially premiered, bringing the plight of our fisheries to the big screens of the world.  And wouldn’t you know it, but I missed the local showings while I was traveling.  However, I like the message so I am looking for any feedback from those you have managed to catch a viewing.

Additionally, the film is more than a movie but a campaign of which is self-described:

The End of the Line is not against fishing. It is not against eating fish. But it is for a responsible attitude  towards the oceans. The film has three messages for consumers, citizens and companies:

Ask before you buy: only eat sustainable seafood.
Tell politicians: respect the science, cut the fishing fleet
Join the campaign for marine protected areas and responsible fishing

So check out the website to find a local screening, make sure you grab a safe seafood list, and ‘Sign Up and Claim Your Piece of Ocean’.

Here’s the trailer…

“Killing too many loggerhead sea turtles” is the phrase that bent me out of shape once again. After a moment of Zen I did resort to just a shaking of my head in disbelief, but I am still reeling from catching red-handed a three person crew illegally dumping their trash in an open field.  License plate recovered, police informed, and wheels in motion for cleanup so enough said on that topic.

Every time I turn around there is yet another fisheries report or statistic that make its way to the surface and forces me to wonder why we have not yet mandated and end to destructive fisheries techniques.  OK, I know the big box fisheries can’t possibly have any legislative influence, so the blame must solely lie with…the consumers?  Tongue and cheek aside it is definitely a commercial and consumer issue as the circle of fisheries life wouldn’t be complete if restaurant and shelf demand did not exist for species harvested in an unsustainable manner. But, this is something worth repeating yet again as apparently the masses still haven’t downloaded the latest safe seafood lists.

As far as the loggerheads are concerned, appreciation would abound it our morality and diets came together in unison. A mandate;  well if JFK can set a moon directive that the entire country lines up in favor of reaching (and we do with flying colors of patriotism), I must say it is not 1960s rocket science but fisheries science with the backing of 5 decades of technological achievement.

But that technological achievement has instead delivered unprecedented catches of all that our oceans have to offer.  On April 29, NOAA established emergency protections for sea turtles in the Gulf of Mexico as observers documented “the reef fish longline fleet was incidentally catching and killing too many loggerhead sea turtles.”  This ruling establishes a buffer zone for the threatened turtles by forcing longliners further out to sea and protecting feeding areas for the next 180 days. 

So, being the eternal optimist that I am it appears we have indeed set a mandate for permanent sea turtle protection solutions which by law is 180 days with a potential extension of an additional 186 days.  Let’s stay tuned and watch the launch of a new era in fisheries management, reduced bycatch, and sustainable fishing techniques.  I won’t hold my breath just yet, but a word of advice is that solutions are not in emergency rulings but in formal regulations, consumer action, and commercial responsibility as the future of their jobs depend on it as well.

Just happened to be thumbing through an April 2007 NatGeo and came across a few stats about our fisheries that caught my eye:

• Estimated 40 million sharks killed annually for their fins
• Global fish catch ~100 million tons (as of 2004)
• Bluefin tuna fished at 4x sustainable rate in the Mediterranean for sushi markets
• In longline fishing, discarded bycatch makes up nearly 30% of the take
• 12 species of shark are commercially extinct in the Mediterranean
• Catches in the northwest Pacific have been declining by more than 3% per year since 1998
• Closed since the early 1990s, the Grand Banks cod fishery shows few signs of recovery
• More than 33% of the world’s fish stocks are overfished
• World tuna catch in 2004 reached 6 million metric tons

It’s unfortunate that administrations and politics have such heavy and far reaching hands when it comes to directing government departments (Does that make any sense?) as I would like to believe in a eco-utopian setting by which they always acted in the best interest of the nation’s natural resources.

Now since we clearly know this is not the case, it is still unfathomable that at the end of an 8 year reign the outgoing Administration is diligently working to slash fisheries protections. In a move that is clearly no treat (blatant Halloween pun intended), a National Marine Fisheries Service rule is undergoing final review that would eliminate the current SOP involving environmental impact statements for certain commercial fisheries operations. In fact, according to the Washington Post, the rule would “give review authority to regional councils dominated by commercial and recreational fishing interests.”

Has not history taught us leaving management of our fisheries to commercial organizations a dire move? Plus, it was only 4 years ago, mind you the midpoint in the term of same Administration, that The U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy warned of the deleterious state of our fisheries.

Experts estimate that 25 to 30 percent of the world’s major fish stocks are overexploited, and a recent report indicates that U.S. fisheries are experiencing similar difficulties. Of our nation’s 259 major fish stocks—representing 99 percent of total commercial landings—roughly 25 percent are either already overfished or experiencing overfishing (Ocean Commission, 2004).