Report: Mediterranean bluefin tuna on verge of collapse 5

Comments View as Flat

1. 

   Clifford Wells Posted 7:51 pm
   14 Apr 2009

   The western Atlantic bluefin do mix with those in the Med and the the eastern Atlantic coast, so depletion there affects us here.  And it's a crying shame.In theory at least, bluefin fishing is closed to all US boats in the Gulf of Mexico where they spawn.  There are a few large tuna seiners off the Northeast but due to the economy, most bluefin hunters on the Eastern Seaboard and 30-foot boats with one or two lines in the water - the old fashioned hook & line method, one fish per boat per day.  That could be sustainable if the big boats were eliminated and the total allowable catch (TAC) as further reduced ... but fishing over in Europe and North Africa continues to decimate the population, unabated.I am not as sure about the Pacific bluefin stocks and am not as versed on that.  -sam 

   Permalink

2. 

   Mark A Powell Posted 10:42 am
   15 Apr 2009

   Tom,  As a commenter, I urged and urge you to avoid blanket statements like "small fisheries are better."  Large industrial fisheries have certainly done much harm to bluefin tuna and other fish.  But small-scale fisheries can do harm too.  The question is not which is better, large or small scale.  The question is how do we evaluate fisheries.  The answer is good fisheries match gear and other practices to the target fish stock and target ecosystem. Relying on the "small is beautiful" mantra for fisheries will work some of the time, but it will fail some of the time.  Some small scale fisheries are sustainable, because they're well matched to the biology of target fish stocks in capacity and fishing practices.  But some small scale fisheries exceed the capacity of fish stocks or otherwise use methods that cause harm because of bycatch or habitat damage. Regarding large scale fisheries, some are certified as sustainable because they limit the number of boats and rely on science-based management.  No single, simple slogan is the answer, and small is beautiful fails too often to be really useful. 

   Permalink

3. 

   Tom Philpott Posted 11:50 am
   15 Apr 2009

   I've got no special problem with what you're arguing, Mark. Fishermen operating small boats and low-tech gear can be scoundrels; giant fleets with high-tech equipment can be saints. Okay. But let me venture an analogy: Who can cause more damage to a city: a bunch of muggers with brass knuckles unleashed on the street, or a a single person in an F-1 bomber flying overhead packing heavy artillery? Try as they might to cause mayhem, the muggers can only do so much -- and not as much as the bomber. Then there's the feedback question. If I'm fishing in my own range, constrained by my boat, I can directly see--and economically feel--the impact of my fishing. If I take too much this year, I'll find less next. If my friend takes too much, I can get in his face later. The system isn't perfect; you can find all manner of places where it has failed; but there is a feedback effect. There is pressure to maintain stocks. Now say I'm operating a giant boat on the deep sea. The signal I'm getting is, the more fish you catch, the more money you make. If I clear out one area this year, I can merely go somewhere else next. I don't live with the consequences of my actions. That is all that I'm saying; and my point is borne out by Daniel Pauly's work, linked to in the Bittman post.

   Permalink

4. 

   Mark A Powell Posted 12:14 pm
   15 Apr 2009

   Tom, You have a point, but the counter-examples are too numerous to make the "small is beautiful" story a productive approach to seafood sustainability. The story has some scientific support and supporters, it's true. But to counter it I need only point at New England groundfish, which is a devastated fishery for both fish and people. Largely because of individual owner/operators who work within the range of their home port like in your example above, not because of some scary, world-roving giant boats. The feedback you hope for regarding overfishing of "local" fisheries is too rarely in evidence to make it useful in maintaining fish stocks by itself. I understand the desire for a simple, graspable principle to sort through fishery crises and know what to buy as an ethical eater. If seafood cards are unsatisfying for some reason, then it's better to support good management through grassroots advocacy on management and politics rahter than relying on a simple but misdirected principle like small fisheries are good. Many groups can guide you in getting active in advocacy.

   Permalink

5. 

   kmp Posted 4:05 pm
   20 Apr 2009

   I grew up in Gloucester, MA.  Although one of the larger (if not the largest?) commercial fishing towns on the East Coast, Gloucester in the 70's was still fished by primarily "small" boats: Dads and sons and cousins going out for 3 to 4 weeks at a time to fish off of George's Bank.  I know surprisingly little about their fishing methods, considering I spent my entire childhood there, but I do know that even back then the controversy raged over the depleting fish stocks in George's Bank, and none of the small fisherman wanted George's Bank closed to fishing, even though they knew that they fishing stocks were being depleted.We're talking about people's livelihood here; closing George's Bank would have put most of the town out of business, and even though the fishing was getting harder and harder, there seemed to be no good answer.  IMO, the "efficiency" of large-scale fishing operations (like large-scale CAFOs and large-scale ag) simply serves to drive down the cost of fish, thereby forcing the small fisherman to catch even more fish; stay out longer, take bigger risks, poach protected areas, etc., because it takes that much more to earn a living.Like everything else, fish-eaters are going to need to learn to adapt; either cut way down on fish, or figure out a way to sustainably raise farmed fish.  Although people still eat wild meat, we couldn't possibly support America's meat habit on wild game alone; farmed meat had to come along, or people would have had to cut way down on meat, or many species would have disappeared altogether.Although catch limits and protected areas may help some, they are simply too easy to get around.  A massive price increase may help to decrease the market for the bluefin tuna, but then again, may tempt more fisherman to break the rules for the big pay-off. It's not easy.  

   Permalink