Thriving Oceans

Sometimes it takes a meal  to get some notice.  And the next time you try to order fish and chips and the basket comes back heavy on potatoes don’t blame the waiter or waitress.  Our ocean gluttony has decimated the popular batter-dipped fish over the last 40 years.  Gluttony is the key word as our fishing practices are less than sustainable to say the least and the result of consuming a species faster than they can reproduce should not surprise any of us. 

The fact is that cod are vanishing, which is why the European Union is calling for sharp cuts to fishing quotas.  But are “sharp” cuts up to 25% in some fishing areas enough to ensure the species fully recovers? I’m not convinced!

Here are a few points to consider:

• In the 1970s more than 250,000 tons of cod were estimated to fill fishing zones in the North Sea, eastern British Channel and Scandinavia’s Skagerrak Strait
• Stocks are now hovering around 50,000 tons, a mere 20% of historical estimates
• “…will seek to cut the catch in some fishing grounds around Britain, France, Spain and much of Scandinavia from 5,700 tons this to 4,250 tons in 2010″
• “The scientific prognosis for most stocks is not encouraging, with many in a worse state than last year,” Britain’s Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
• “Overfishing off Canada’s maritime provinces exhausted the world’s richest cod grounds and forced the government to impose a fishing moratorium. The collapse wiped out more than 42,000 jobs, and 18 years later the fish have still not returned. Some Canadian scientists believe the collapse of cod stocks off Newfoundland and Nova Scotia changed the marine ecosystem so dramatically that it may be impossible for cod to recover.”
• In the U.S., the two major New England cod fishing waters have witnessed steep declines with catches totaling only 3,868 metric tons in 2007. This is about 19% of historical catches in the 1980s (20,000 tons annually)

Reference: EU officials warn of disappearing cod

 “The United States today announced that it will seek the strongest possible management for the conservation of Atlantic bluefin tuna, a fish which is in serious trouble.

This action has two components.

First, we are sending a clear and definitive statement to the international community that the status quo is not acceptable. 

Over the past 40 years, the international body that manages bluefin tuna, the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), has overseen a 72 percent decline in the adult population of the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean stock of bluefin tuna and an 82 percent decline in the adult population of the western Atlantic stock. 

In recent years, the countries that fish the eastern stock, which spawns in the Mediterranean, have done so at two to three times the sustainable level, causing a significant and rapid decline in the last decade. The status of the western stock, which spawns in the Gulf of Mexico and is fished primarily off the North American coast, has recently stabilized due to the establishment of well-enforced, science-based quotas. 

A sustained lack of science-based management for the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean stock of bluefin tuna, and concerns about slow recovery in the west, have brought us to this point. As a member in ICCAT, the United States calls for strong and definitive action at the November 2009 meeting in Brazil. This includes establishing management measures that end overfishing such as setting responsible science-based quotas, stronger enforcement of these quotas, and closures during spawning periods. 

Second, the United States strongly supports Monaco’s proposal to list Atlantic bluefin tuna under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) to prohibit international trade of the species. The United States will consider amending or withdrawing support for the Monaco proposal if ICCAT adopts significantly strengthened management and compliance measures. 

Improving international fishery management and ending illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing are high priorities for the United States government, Congress, commercial and recreational fishermen, and conservationists.”

-Statement from Dr. Jane Lubchenco, Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and NOAA Administrator, Announcing Support for Listing Atlantic Bluefin Tuna on International Trade Endangered Species List

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

As the fisheries war continues to rage amongst conservationists, commercial entities, and international politics, it is always good news when a species in peril gets what perhaps can be called a break. Just a few months back the IUCN reported, “The global conservation status of 64 species of open ocean (pelagic) sharks and rays reveals that 32 percent are threatened with extinction, primarily due to overfishing.”

And can we honestly be surprised at the findings when we have all seen the photos displaying mounds of confiscated shark fins not unlike the old west pictures showcasing a day’s work hunting bison?  But, it is not only pelagic species that are feeling the pressure of overfishing as the small coastal blacknose shark is on an unsustainable road towards collapse.

A recreationally and commercially harvested fish, the blacknose shark was hauled from the ocean at a rate of over 27,000 individuals (62 metric tons without head, guts, fins) per year from 1999-2005.  Because they bear few young and were unable to cope with previous fishing pressures, NOAA is proposing a change in the status quo of lumping blacknose sharks in with other coastal shark quotas and effectively reducing their loss by 78%.  Thus, blacknose sharks would be separated from the general coastal shark quota, and under the proposal the annual quota would fall to 6,065 individuals or 14.9 metric tons.  Additionally, the shark would only be available for landing by commercial fishermen with directed permits.

“To help rebuild the blacknose population, NOAA’s Fisheries Service is also proposing to prohibit the landing of all Atlantic sharks with gillnet gear—the primary way blacknose sharks are caught—from South Carolina south, including the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea.”

“Because they are frequently caught with other small coastal sharks, there is also a proposed annual quota for the non-blacknose small coastal sharks, including finetooth, Atlantic sharpnose, and bonnethead sharks.  The proposed quota would be significantly reduced from the current 454 metric tons dressed weight quota to 56.9 metric tons dressed weight. The proposed quotas for blacknose and the non-blacknose small coastal sharks represent an overall 76 percent reduction in landings by weight of small coastal sharks.”  (NOAA, July 24, 2009)

Last Saturday my wife and I made the 2 hour journey to the Monterey Bay Aquarium, which marks our first visit in about 4 years.  As with each and every time before, I left wondering why it took me so long to get back, and most importantly how can I swing a personal 28 foot tall kelp forest aquarium…OK I admit I’m a fish lover.  But the show was not only within the confines of the plexiglass walls as the wildlife visible from the outside amphitheatre at the Great Tide Pool was amazing.

In the distance wrapped in kelp were approximately 9 sea otters. Kayaks would approach (all at a distance to prevent disturbance) and then wander away after a few minutes of enjoying the view.  Throw in a couple harbor seals, cormorants, murres, and sea lions and the bay becomes a picturesque wildlife refuge. 

Interestingly enough though, on June 30th the U.S. Geological Survey reported a 3.8% drop in sea otter numbers during the 2009 census.  A decrease of 106 individuals may not seem like a terribly large decline overall, but it keeps them below the criteria needed to remove them from the Endangered Species Act (the 3-year running averages would have to exceed 3,090 for 3 continuous years), it represents a population growth plateau for the last three years, and according to Dr. Tim Tinker of the USGS,

“This year’s census results demonstrate that sea otters continue to experience levels of mortality sufficient to limit their recovery. This highlights the need for continued efforts to understand and mitigate threats to sea otters and other species in the nearshore ecosystem.”

A more in depth examination into the cause of the declining sea otter population trend was sought out by the San Francisco Chronicle.  In a July 1st article, it was reported that deceased otters have been testing positive for bacteria, viruses, and parasites often associated with sewage, urban, and farm runoff.  Thus, are we witnessing the first signs of a pollution problem along the California coast?

And what about overfishing?  Well an inadequate amount of available favored invertebrates may be limiting nutritional intake, resulting in otters that are more susceptible to diseases and preventing the population from reaching a healthy status.

Although there are currently more questions than answers, it would not be surprising to find that the southern sea otter of California is being hindered by a combination of multiple factors.

**USGS: To reduce the influence of anomalously high or low counts during any particular year, three-year running averages of the survey results are also used to assess whether the population is growing or declining. Factors that can influence the count include viewing conditions, abundance and species composition of surface canopy kelp, observer experience, and distribution and movements of the animals.

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…