Swim Against This Tide

This post was written by Salman Shaheen on February 19, 2010
Posted Under: Environment,India,News

This article, which I co-authored with environmental lawyers Ambika Hiranandani and Roland Miller McCall, was first published in The Times of India

“Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day,” goes the old Chinese proverb. “Teach him how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” Nowadays, with massive trawlers dragging 60km nets scooping up a dozen jumbo jets worth of fish in one go, that adage is looking rather shaky. Not only is overfishing the single greatest threat to the ecosystems of our oceans, but as fish are caught much faster than they can reproduce, it is driving traditional fisherman, who can no longer rely on their skills to feed themselves for a lifetime, out of business. Such is the scale of the problem that in recent days Cheers star Ted Danson has weighed in to slam the subsidies that promote unsustainable fishing practices. But we shouldn’t need American TV icons to tell us we’re on a bad path.

As many as 20 million tonnes of fish are caught every year by bottom trawling. It’s a non-selective method that takes no prisoners. Powerful boats trudge metal-weighted nets across the ocean floor, scooping up turtles, sharks, dolphins, endangered species and young fish. “The holes in the mechanised nets are very, very small and so fish don’t get a chance to breed,” says Narendra R Patil, general secretary of Machimar Kuti Samhiti. “There are no fish left for traditional fishermen.” According to a 2004 study by the United Nations Environment Programme, almost a quarter of the fish pulled from the sea never even find their way to market. Meanwhile the oceans, once considered an inexhaustible resource, are running out of fish. “The fish don’t stand a chance,” says the World Wildlife Fund.

It is, however, another old Chinese proverb that tells us, “It’s better to light a candle than curse the darkness.” If we act now to bring overfishing under control by using restrictive gear, closing areas to fleets and limiting the total allowable catch, there is hope. A study published this year in the journal Science found that in a few select regions such as Iceland and Australia, careful management of marine ecosystems has allowed fish-stocks to recover. “Our oceans are not a lost cause,” says Professor Boris Worm, a marine biologist at Dalhousie University and a co-author of the report. However, he cautions that the trend, although far from irreversible, is far from being reversed. “Across all regions we are still seeing a troubling trend of increasing stock collapse,” he says.

Efforts to deal with the problem are continually hampered by ineffectual regulation at an international level. According to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, every nation maintains sole fishing rights within their Exclusive Economic Zone. The high seas, however, are known as the common heritage of mankind, a heart-warming term evoking images of international co-operation, that in reality has entirely the opposite effect. In many areas, illegal and unregulated fishing is on the rise, undermining national and regional pushes towards sustainability. “Regional Fisheries Management Organisations, the cornerstones of international fisheries governance, are struggling to fulfil their mandates despite concerted efforts to improve their performance,” the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation found. The problem arising, in part, from “a lack of political will to implement decisions in a timely manner.” It is, after all, hard to light a candle in the wind.

An international consensus has emerged on the need to combat the environmental crime of Illegal Unregulated and Unreported fishing by blocking illegal fish from entering international trade, thus removing financial incentive. However, eliminating illegal fishing, whilst a necessary first step, is not enough to avert the coming crisis.

As Abbie Hoffman once said, “murder in a uniform is heroic, in a costume it is a crime.” When the criminal element has been removed, what remains to be challenged are the legal methods which continue to devastate the oceans. As such, it is imperative that we eliminate bottom trawling, by-catch and discards. In the state of Maharashtra, a ban on fishing is in place from June 1st to August 15th. “This should be increased to 90 days nationwide to allow fish stocks to replenish,” says Rambhau Patil, president of the National Fishermen’s Forum. At the same time, marine sanctuaries must be established in which fishing is prohibited. “Cat fish, Bombay duck and promfret and now rare, and hammerhead sharks are diminishing,” Patil says. Whilst governments around the world have responded to the pressing need to preserve endangered species and habitats on land, existing marine parks account for less than 1% of the world’s oceans. Increasing this percentage is the only way to ensure breeding grounds for fish are maintained and the only way to ensure the livelihoods of fishermen for generations to come.

Of course, it is not simply a problem of production. It is one of consumption. Only by reducing demand – eating less fish, avoiding species like cod and tuna, or cutting it from our diets entirely – can we end the reliance on destructive methods of mass fishing. If we all light a candle, there’ll be no darkness left to curse.

Like this article? Print it, email it, Stumble, Facebook and Tweet it:
  • Print
  • email
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Mixx
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Live

Reader Comments


What do you think the left should be saying to fishing communities though, many of which have been devastated by limits. Look at Scotland for example, where working communities have, as a result of EU legislation, disappeared and given rise to mass unemployment. Ok, so this is a problem, but at the moment you are sounding rather too much like the time Climate Camp had a “no coal” march through an old mining town.

Written By Jacob on February 20th, 2010 @ 8:04 pm

The point is though, with dwindling fish stocks, if you don’t place limits, livelihoods will be irreversibly damaged in the the long run anyway. It’s not an issue of what the left should say to fishing communities. It’s an issue of protecting fish stocks for future generations and of protecting jobs in the future. Although I agree with the Climate Camp marchers – at the end of the day the long-term sustainability of the planet is more important than the short-term sustainability of an industry, as bad is it is for the people whose jobs are put at risk – this is not an environemntalist argument.

Written By Salman Shaheen on February 21st, 2010 @ 4:37 am

I’d like to see 30-50% of British Waters become ‘no catch’ zones, where no fishing of any type takes place. This would allow stocks to replenish, and also would improve the takes in the 50-70% of remaining seas, by providing high-population breeding areas, from which fish ‘leak’ due to population pressure. It would create some difficulty in the short term, but if you include fishermen and their communities in managing the system, they will be keen to participate, and eventually end up running it, for their own welfare, as a steady supply of fish enriches them. Take Iceland for an example, I forget the details, but it’s on the interweb somewhere.

Jacob – where did Climate Camp do that? sounds frickign hilarious.

Written By Owain on February 21st, 2010 @ 11:55 pm

Add a Comment

required, use real name
required, will not be published
optional, your blog address

Please leave these two fields as-is:

Protected by Invisible Defender. Showed 403 to 491,135 bad guys.