PLIGHT OF THE OCEANS!
Steve Palumbi, from Stanford University in California: "Unless we fundamentally change the way we manage all the ocean species together, as working ecosystems, then this century is the last century of wild seafood."
Yeah, back again with a save the whales post, but this just out and super scary-
No more fish by 2050.
Fisheries call the areas where they fish, fish stocks.
Over the past 50 years fisheries have depleted nearly 1/3 of their fishing stocks, with an accelerating rate, scientists agree. In their measure of the trend, by 2050, there will be no more- no more fishing stocks, no more fish on the market, and a horrendous effect on the ocean ecosystem. This affects the world; for 4 years scientists from Europe, America, and Australia; various institutes, have been studying catch yeild data for the past 50 (years) trying to find how far the trend spreads.
Dating back to March of 2005, 7 oceans have been named in desperate need of restocking- the Northeast Atlantic, the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea, followed by the Northwest Atlantic, the Southeast Atlantic, the Southeast Pacific and the Southern Ocean. Despite this, production has been raised; meaning an increase in the exploitation of the oceans, due to the increasing demand the world has for fish.
Note: over 2.6 million people rely on fish for 20%+ of their animal protein intake, not to mention however many who rely on fishing as a source of income.
And the demand for fish is further increasing.
But the danger to the ocean lies not singularly on the actions of the global fishing economy. Runoff from farms create deadzones in which fish cannot survive. The largest amounts of oil entering the ocean through human activity is the 363 million gallons that come from industrial waste and automobiles. New elements and bacterias are introduced into the systems by the dumpings of ocean liners and cargo ships straight into the ocean. Every year, fishing nets kill up to 300,000 whales, dolphins and porpoises (collectively known as cetaceans). Experts believe entanglement in nets is the cause of most cetaceans’ death and the greatest threat to the survival of many species.
A cure in mind?
Relying on the evidence of a secluded study; experiments performed in small, relatively contained ecosystems show that reductions in diversity tend to bring reductions in the size and robustness of local fish stocks. This implies that loss of biodiversity is driving the declines in fish stocks seen in the large-scale studies.
The final part of the jigsaw is data from areas where fishing has been banned or heavily restricted.
These show that protection brings back biodiversity within the zone, and restores populations of fish just outside-
More protected zones!
And aquacultures! Fish farms; can help take the pressure off the wild sea stocks.
While governments agree on the cause, and they agree on the measures that need to be taken to prevent this ecological disaster, they are neither speedy or enforcing. They have though (the US), put into legislation a law prohibiting the overextortion of certain species in efforts to allow them to naturally restock. It's up to us to pressure the fishing companies to adopt more responsible fishing measures on a global scale. It's up to us to pressure the environmental agencies to adopt more stringent standards of what goes into our oceans.
Sounds straight from Greenpeace huh? there's a link below-
Take Action:
The world has many environmental problems. The extinction of the rainforest, depletion of groundwater, air pollution, and water pollution; you think sometimes there's no way to stop the trend. Get involved; donate money, personal steps can help slow the progress and, maybe if we're lucky, long enough for congress to implement countermeasures. Follow links to see how you can help, even if its just sending an email to the higher ups.
Donate:
http://www.oceanconservancy.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ta_actionalerts
http://www.hswri.org/getInvolved/donations.cfm
https://secure.environmentaldefense.org/donate/oceansalive/donate1.cfm?sitecode=&pcd=&guid=
Learn:
http://archive.greenpeace.org.au/oceans/solutions/index.html
http://ceakumal.org/bstudy_only_10_percent_of_big_ocean_fish_remainb.html
http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/what_we_do/marine/help/everyone/index.cfm
Take Action:
new jersey coast- http://cleanoceanaction.org/index.php?id=125
letter to the senator- http://ga4.org/campaign/saveouroceans
greenpeace: become an ocean defender- http://oceans.greenpeace.org/en/ (if you want just put your name on the list of supporters, no more asked)
canada- http://www.davidsuzuki.org/About_us/Volunteering/default.asp
texas- https://www.environmenttexas.org/how-you-can-help
?- http://www.activistswanted.org/
student abroad- http://www.universalgiving.org/volunteer/ (for the few I think)
all other volunteer opporatunities- http://www.idealist.org/if/idealist/en/AdvancedSearch/VolunteerOpportunity/default?sid=77015662-65-dbsZA
And look, Ralph Nadar- http://www.countercurrents.org/cc-nader100706.htm
Hope this was an inspirational/motivating article, if you got the time or want a worthwhile cause this was aimed at you.
This is extremely disconcerting and scary. No more seafood restaurants, no more pet goldfish - our children will have a drastically different life than we. How terrible.
I saw this article today as well, and although I think it is a little alarmist, the oceans have been under a lot of pressure. Surely, we need to protect as much of it as we can legally, but we also need to cut down on pollution. One of the biggest dangers is not overfishing of commercial stocks, but rather air pollution raising the acidity of the ocean, making a massive plankton population crash very possible, which would in turn utterly destroy ocean ecosystems. Some things will surive, yes, but it will take potentially millions of years for the oceans to reflect the diversity we have left today.
Also, biodiversity and biomass are different things. Coral reefs have a lot of diversity and biomass because it is a very crowded place (mostly due to being warm, shallow, and calm). Wetlands and intertidal zones have less biodiversity, but they have huge amounts of biomass rivalling coral reefs. This isn't to say we shouldn't do everything we can to save environments that are biodiverse, but all is not lost if we can't either.
You also briefly mention aquaculture, but of its benefits, I am dubious. In fact many of the fish raised on farms are inferior and wrough with disease, and if they invade wild stocks they will degrade the wild stocks and further put them in danger. The focus should be on protecting and sustaining what's in the wild rather than trying to breed more inferior fish. Aquaculture does have some economic benefit, but I do not believe that the facilities should allow aquacultured fish access to the ocean in case their enclose breaks or they manage to get out into wild stocks.
I am very concerned about the fate of the oceans, but we need to do much more than just set aside parts of it to be undisturbed. Many times, poor people live near protected area and poach fish because they have no money, so just setting aside space is not enough. There needs to be reform and assistance on every front, from area protected to safe aquaculture to assistance for the poor to careful stock regulations to reduction in pollution and beyond. There is no simple fix, and it will take a lot of sacrifice to get it done.
Wish there was something we could do, but it will take more respect for the planet.
www.worldcantwait.com