Has overfishing of the oceans reached the point of no return?

Question

They announced at Monteray Bay Aquarium that populations of jellyfish are exploding due to overfishing and destruction of the fish stocks in the ocean.I believe this announcement because I saw the population of crabs dramatically increase in the North Atlantic after the codfish were exterminated by overfishing in the 1980's.Is there a global ocean ecological crisis happening?

Answer 1

I pretty much agree with Masked Masala

I have spent some time commercial fishing and understand their point of view.  It can be a wonderful life of independence, adventure and doing a job that feeds people, not unlike farming in a way.  And a life upon the sea.  

This is particularly true on smaller boats with small crew.

And it can also be very dangerous.  People who eat fish should appreciate what it takes to put that on the table.  If you've seen those Most Dangerous Catch shows on TV you have some idea.  And most fisherman don't make what those guys make.  

But the oceans have definately been overfished.

Don't blame it all on fishermen though, there are other causes.  Particularly with salmon, which depend so much on healthy streams and rivers to spawn.  

One study said 90% of food fish stocks worldwide were gone.

High tech large fishing vessels have become extrememly efficient and the fleets worldwide are huge.

Someone mentioned fish inadvertently caught getting dumped overboard. That is mostly on draggers, that drag nets.    They catch indiscriminately and they tear up the bottom.

Mid water trawlers are similar but don't drag on the bottom

Most of the fishing I did was pretty species specific so we didn't have much incidental catch.

Longlining on the bottom in Alaska.  10 miles of line with 10,000 hand baited hooks.  

Because of the depth where black cod (or sable fish) live, about 200 -400 fathoms (or 1200-2400 ft) we didn't catch many other species.

It's efficient at catching fish but is otherwise ecologically sound.  And really really labor intensive.

Some of the salmon fisheries in Alaska are set up in a way that they can manage the species better than most fisheries.  Because the salmon run on each river or estuary to spawn at a certain time of the year, they count how many fish go upstream and stop the fishing to let the fish catch up, if the count is low.  They only fish 5 days a week to let some fish upstream.  These are short season "openings" that may run a few weeks or more in a given location.  Then there is another opening somewhere else.  Anyway it does a decent job of preventing overifishing.  This is the red sockeye and pink humpie salmon fisheries I'm talking about.  It's done with purse seiners.

This is fishing bays and inlets mostly, near the mouths of rivers and streams.

Yes we need to let the fish stocks recover.

Answer 2

wouldn't this better fit into the coservation section? That said, I would agree, overfishing will eventually cost us most of the sea life... Oceans have almost no rules, and even those few rules are almost impossible to enforce in the vast area of the ocean.

Answer 3

the ocean is a little too big for us to overfish it, in my opinion.  Larger species shouldnt be takin out of the ocean, but your everyday food fish like tuna or pollock are fine.

Answer 4

No.  I can't think of a single salt water species of fish declared extinct in the last hundred years.  In fact, fishermen continue to find species thought to have been extinct for hundreds of thousands of years.  Commercial fishing will become unprofitable long before the fish they're after die out.  Pollution would be a bigger danger than fishing....just look at the mercury warnings for tuna as an example.

Answer 5

I have spent the last 15 years sailing around the world, and I am still only half way around (maybe I should get a faster boat eh?) I arrived in the South Pacific in 1999 and in 2003 and also 2005 spent the South Pacific cyclone season in the solomon islands. Just an incredible place, (you should check it out on google earth). I have never been anywhere as diverse. The fish and bird life is just incredible. We have sailied through 'boils' of tuna for hours and hours. Not just once but several times. Just amazing. I imagine that the Atlantic and Mediterranean used to be like that 20 years ago. Anyway, after the recent 'unrest' there the E.U. and the Australians lent a hand with some very generous Aid packages....with some strings attached....with hooks on the end....Yep, they basically 'bought' the fish stock. I won't attach any links, you can check it out yourself and make your own conclusion. I have a friend that is a Solomon Islander that recently helped to complete a report for the WWF. I wonder how a similar document will read in 20 years time?

I feel that commercial fishing should be drastically cutback to allow the fish stocks to build up. I heard this morning that in a decade the chinese will be needing 200 million tons of fish a year.

    The sea is not a bottomless source of food. I think a major issue with large scale commercial fishing is not just the huge quantities that are taken but the 'by product' that is thrown back, and damage to the sea bed and coral.

    One final point that I have mentioned on this site before but I feel it is worth bringing up as many times as I can. The concept of Dolphin safe Tuna as we understand it is a total joke. What do people think Dolphins eat? Tins of Dolphin food? The only Dolphin safe Tuna is the one in the sea that Dolphins can eat. Take it from me the Dolphins are starving to death out there. We may as well catch and eat them while they still have some meat on them....

     Commercial fishing is currently such a challenge that they use helicopters to look for birds diving into the water and just put nets around the area and take everything. I actually think we should have a ban on commercial fishing to let the stocks build up. The jelly fish are also blooming because of the huge amounts of fertilizer in the water that is fertilizing the ocean. The whole balence is getting totally messed up.

So, what can be done? Don't catch fish . What will be done? Nothing..... ;=(

Answer 6

It depends on what you mean by "point of no return."

In one sense, yes--fishing has clearly reached the point at wich it cannot be sustained for very long.  A few years at best.

But the question is: can the populations of marine species eventually recover after the fisheries are stopped by mandate--or go broke for lack of fish to catch?

As long as a minimal population of a species srvives, they have a chance to recover--eventually. But we are going to lose some species.  The long term consequences of that will be some changes in the long-term balance andecology in the oceans.

If its pushed to o far, there will be far more profound and permanent shifts--and we are not likely to like them.

One thing you can count on: any corporation that relies heavily onn ocean fishing for its revnue will be out of business soon--most by the end of the next decade. It won't take a government edict to make that happen (though that would help to contain the damage and is sorely needed). Nature will take care o fit--because there aren't going to be enough fish left to keep those companies in business.

Its hard to make exact predictions--but I think we'll start to see that -- and the economic repercussions--within 3-5 years.

Answer 7

If it leads to the extinction of certain species of food fish then of course we cannot reverse what we've done.

There was an interesting study on the effects of fish populations bouncing back in the northwest Atlantic during WWII because there was no fishing in that area during war time.

I suggest you check out History Channel's documentary Life After People.

What do we do about it? Honestly, I can't think of an answer besides limiting the catch of fishermen through legislation. Seafood is the main source of protein for water-bordering countries because of the large amounts of land needed to raise food animals.