Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Environment

Apocalypse in the Oceans

By Anneli Rufus, AlterNet. Posted May 30, 2008.


With 150 dead zones in our oceans, some the size of Ireland, author Taras Grescoe argues that there's been a massive die out of sea life.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

In pictures, on CSI Miami, and to the naked eye the sea looks the same today as it ever did: blue, green or blue-green, rolling in glassy crashing curls, tormented then serene. It will look this way tomorrow, next year, arguably for eternity. No matter what freaks us out on earth, our species takes great comfort in knowing that the sea always looks exactly the same.

From up here.

But not down there. Not underneath. Under the swells and the sparkles and the froth, fathoms down, the globe's oceans have transformed over the last several decades, transforming even as we sit here into wastelands, ghost worlds, desolate deathscapes that could be filmed in situ for sci-fi films about the post-apocalypse. You won't find this out from a day at the beach. The smiling sea captain depicted on the fish-sticks box is keeping mum. But Canadian food journalist Taras Grescoe tells all in his important new book, Bottomfeeder (Bloomsbury, 2008).

"Rather quickly, the oceans are becoming environments unlike any we have ever known," Grescoe agonizes, giving as his first example the North Atlantic, where he watches Nova Scotian fishermen exulting over a new lobster boom while apparently neither knowing nor caring about its probable cause: human greed.

Yes, climate change plays a part but it's marginal compared to the massive overfishing required to supply restaurants and stores in a world that stuffs itself on tuna sandwiches, salmon steaks, shrimp cocktail and sashimi.

"The shallow waters off Nova Scotia used to be full of swordfish and bluefin tuna, as well as untold numbers of hake, halibut, and haddock. Cod in particular were the apex predators in these parts," Grescoe writes. (Later in the book, he quotes early observers describing "cod mountains" off a once-rich Newfoundland coast where the fifteenth-century navigator John Cabot reported cod populations so thick that they actually blocked his ships' passage.) Cod, Grescoe writes, once "prowled the gullies offshore in dense shoals, using their powerful mouths to suck up free-swimming larvae, sea urchins, and even full-grown crustaceans. But the cod were fished to collapse in the early 1990s. With the cod gone, stocks of lobsters and other low-in-the-food-chain species exploded." By wiping out predator species, the fishing industry screws up ecosystems. As sea creatures high on the food chain disappear, their populations more than decimated in the last half-century, a lobster boom "may just be a tiny blip on a slippery slope to oceans filled with jellyfish, bacteria, and slime."

Meanwhile, overfishing has created some 150 "dead zones" -- oxygen-free patches of ocean that can sustain no life -- around the world: Some of these patches, Grescoe tells us forebodingly, "are now as large as Ireland." In search of seafloor-dwelling species such as the trendy monkfish -- long ignored, then popularized singlehandedly by Julia Child in 1979 -- bottom-trawls weighing more than 26,000 pounds each rake and flatten wildlife-rich undersea peaks, leaving a paved-looking flatness in their wake. Oh, and a large percentage of coral reefs worldwide are dying or already dead. Oh, and those bluefin tuna and halibut steaks you like? Say it with me: Mercury. Those jumbo fried shrimp battened on pesticides and antibiotics in bacteria-riddled Chinese farms, their decomposing flesh treated with borax? How's your health insurance?

It is happening right this minute but not quite right before our eyes. This is exactly the sort of thing our species prefers not to think about. What kind of catastrophe is it? Take your pick. Ecological. Medical.

And ethical: Grescoe started this project as a diner, "a fish lover, but … no fish hugger" who has caught and eaten seafood eagerly all his life. But knowing as he does "that ours might be among the last generations in history able to enjoy the down-to-earth luxury of freshly caught wild fish," his fantasies of sampling Japanese pufferfish and Chinese "drunken shrimp" slam hard against reality:

"I draw the line," he resolves, "where the pursuit or cultivation of my dinner obviously damages the environment, where cruelty is involved, where pollution or adulterants make it unsafe to eat. I would get no pleasure from eating a nearly extinct songbird, wine made from tiger bones, or the last few grams of beluga caviar from the Caspian. For me, a pleasure that diminishes the experience of everybody else on earth is no pleasure at all."

Fair enough. So in this spirit of sad apprehension he set out around the world to report on the state of some of humanity's most celebrated seafoods and the communities surrounding their consumption: from Chesapeake Bay oysters to Japanese sushi to English fish and chips and beyond. Part detective, part adventurer, part whistleblower, he reveals underhanded practices, such as Japan's "scientific" whale fishing, and outright crime, such as tons of cod harvested illegally, exceeding official quotas, during their spawning season by Russian ships that offload their catch to other ships at sea in order to evade detection. (Greenpeace calls this "pirate fishing.") The results end up in myriad English "chippies," doused with salt and vinegar.

And we learn about "finning," the practice of slicing off just-caught sharks' pectoral and dorsal fins -- destined for soup -- with hot metal blades. "Kicked back into the ocean, alive and bleeding," it can take the sharks days to die. Nearly forty million are killed this way annually. Seventeen countries, including the US and Canada, now ban finning, but China and the EU are among the world's remaining avid finners; Grescoe identifies Spain as the most avid of all. Although shark hunting is technically forbidden in Galpagos National Park, a vast marine reserve, some 300,000 sharks are caught there every year. Until the 1960s, whitetip sharks were "the most abundant large animals on earth," Grescoe writes. "Forty years later they have all but disappeared from the Gulf of Mexico," where they once thrived. "Up the length of the Atlantic coast, the story is the same: since 1972, bull, dusky, smooth, and hammerhead shark populations have all been fished to one percent of their former levels." Who cares? Well, it's all about the ecosystems. Sharks eat skates and rays. Sans sharks, skyrocketing skate and ray populations are eating scallops and clams into extinction.

This book is a veritable eulogy. For ecosystems. For the toxic, dead water. For sea creatures. And for many of our fellow human beings, although honestly it's hard to care much at this point about anyone who would eat sharkfins or whale: "Every year, twenty thousand tons of heavy metals and eight hundred tons of cyanide end up in Chinese waters," Grescoe reveals. Unsurprisingly, two years ago cancer has been the leading cause of death in China. Massive quantities of cheap seafood from pesticide-suffused Chinese fish farms is exported worldwide; only a fraction is tested or inspected. Much is infected with salmonella and listeria. Most has lived its life in water thick with fecal bacteria, human and animal: "The fish, in other words, were bathing in shit."

It's also a eulogy for lifestyles, for old-fashioned fisherfolk in those seafaring communities that spent centuries supporting themselves by catching, processing, selling and eating species in the wild: scallops in North Carolina, oysters in Chesapeake, hake in Namibia, shrimp in Tamil Nadu, India. On one hand, you could say, Hey, they did it to themselves: got too greedy, maintained certain tactics that became unsustainable. On the other hand, you could say it's sad -- that these communities fell victim to intrusive large-scale foreign operations, as fishing has gone from local to global: As an example, Grescoe visited a huge Nova Scotia processing plant that used to handle cod from Canadian waters but now gets its cod from Russia, its salmon from Chile, its catfish from Vietnam. The factory outsources labor-intensive tasks, such as skewering salmon, to China. The finished product is labeled "Product of Canada."

You could say too that the residents of these communities are relatively powerless over such government-controlled decisions as the 1.5 billion gallons of urban sewage that pour into Chesapeake Bay every day. Grescoe sympathizes with the Tamil Nadu fisherfolk who, put out of business by industrial shrimp farms, tell him: "Our village is going to die." But an encounter with a Yorkshireman who blusters angrily after being arrested for catching more than his legal share -- and who blames declining salmon and cod populations on "horrible, sliming, stinking, eye-watering bloody seals" -- leaves Grescoe cold:

"This kind of attitude lies at the heart of the problems facing the oceans," he seethes. "It is the ongoing plunder of the seas, done in the name of keeping a boat afloat for another season, and multiplied a hundred thousand times in all the ports of the world .... If this were still the age of inexhaustible cod mountains and endless salmon rivers, such a display of spirit might be admirable. It is the essence of the indomitable, short-sighted, buck-passing Atlantic fisherman: an independent, almost lordly working-class hero, romanticized to death in our culture. As long as there is a single jellyfish left in the ocean, he will be ready to go out and catch it." And jellyfish, down at the foot of the food chain, will be the last edible species out there in a not-too-distant future when our great-grandchildren, Grescoe half-jokes, will eat "peanut butter and jellyfish sandwiches" and "jellyfish and chips."

He agrees with the scientists and activists who now advocate a "slow-fish" movement. It would entail banning destructive fishing methods such as bottom-trawling; "revalorizing" earlier techniques such as hook-and-line; protecting overfished species; and drastically reducing aquaculture -- that is, fish farming -- as well as government subsidies to fishing fleets. And while Grescoe doesn't suggest never eating any seafood again, he now chooses his intelligently: avoiding the farmed, the faraway, the overfished, and those large, long-lived, high-on-the-food-chain species such as halibut, tuna, shark and swordfish whose meat is infused with mercury and other chemicals known to cause eventual nerve damage. Instead, he suggests sardines, sea urchins and squid: In other words: Become a Bottomfeeder -- at least until, and if, the seas stop dying.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: bottom feeder

Anneli Rufus is the author of several books, including "Party of One: The Loners' Manifesto."

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Look on the bright side:
Posted by: hurricane hugo on May 30, 2008 12:14 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
there's always Soylent Green.

jdfu!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Look on the bright side: Posted by: willymack
I don't give a f**k what you religious
Posted by: bitsfick on May 30, 2008 3:41 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
nut cases say, god will not provide. The earth cannot support 6.6 billion people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Take lots of pictures
Posted by: PJAW on May 30, 2008 4:41 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They're likely all that your going to have left of the more beautiful parts of this world before long. But don't despair too much, this world has survived a lot during its history, and it will no doubt make it past this infestation of humans too. The only sad thing is that we could have enjoyed a longer presence here with just a little more forethought and a little less greed. As things stand right now, we appear to be headed toward a "population adjustment" of catastrophic proportions in the not too distant future. Perhaps that's for the best. It will either allow the planet to refresh itself without our interference, or if we're lucky, some of our more evolved members will survive and create a regrowth of humanity that makes more sense and can coexist with its environment.

We've actually accomplished quite a lot in the last two thousand years or so and if we can sustain some of our achievements through what looks like imminent turmoil, we may remain the dominant species on the planet and even make it a bit of a paradise. It certainly has potential. But for now, we're probably fucked.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: good point Posted by: Richard House
» RE: Take lots of pictures Posted by: badkitty
» RE: Take lots of pictures Posted by: willymack
So Long and Thanks for All the Fish
Posted by: Overburdened Planet on May 30, 2008 5:25 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So long and thanks for all the fish
So sad that it should come to this
We tried to warn you all but oh dear?

You may not share our intellect
Which might explain your disrespect
For all the natural wonders that
grow around you

So long, so long and thanks
for all the fish

The world's about to be destroyed
There's no point getting all annoyed
Lie back and let the planet dissolve...

From Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Where are you pfeifer999?

After reading how the Space Station needs plumbing, I wrote this:
Stephen Hawking tells the world we must explore other worlds because we'll destroy this one. Hmmm, let's see, both Biospheres failed, and now we have to fix the Space Station shitter? Can you imagine how dependent we will continue to be on this planet when attempting to colonize elsewhere?

Too much money is spent on wasteful programs when we should be trying to solve our current problems. Put another way, why waste all the resources and effort colonizing space when if we can't fix our problems here, how will we avoid these same socio-political problems on other planets? Wouldn't we be just as likely to destroy ourselves on other worlds as Hawking claims we'll do here?

And to those who say exploration is who we are, don’t forget how exploring leads to conquering. Will you be on the winning side, or be on that spaceship? Who really thinks they’ll qualify for access to limited seats heading for other worlds? Most of us are worthless to the powers that be, and the people in charge are interested because they know they’ll be on those ships…if it happens in their lifetime. As to you and me, we’ll be left here, or shipped off world to be someone’s slave.

Lastly, we’re a long way from succeeding in all these ventures, and imagine if there was life similar to ours on other planets; if they’re anything like us, they wouldn’t welcome us, they’d try to kill us (I mean, wouldn’t you?). And that’s where the whole romantic fantasy of being a white male got us: kill, rape, pillage, then write about it as if it were a good thing.

Under the title:
"NASA's Waste is our Waste" or "Hawking, go F Yourself"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: So Long and Thanks for All the Fish Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
» Demographic Winter = Catholic Agenda? Posted by: Overburdened Planet
» RE: agenda or statistics? Posted by: Overburdened Planet
Missing information
Posted by: Last Chance on May 30, 2008 5:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm surprised the Article didn't mention the tons of illegally dumped garbage, the river run-off and the massive plastic subsurface area in the Pacific Ocean northeast of Hawaii. There was an article on this some few months ago titled "Landfill In The Sea". Thousands of sea birds that habitually eat whatever the Ocean offers have been eating bits and pieces of plastic, and garbage is washing up on beaches around the World. People look for some local polluter, but it could be from anywhere in the World. It is a global dilemma.

This is happening partly because the big cities are already surrounding themselves with mountains of layered garbage on the assumption that they compost harmlessly. But they fail to estimate the ever-growing amounts as the human population keeps on growing to 7, 8, 9, 10 billion people all producing more and more garbage. So, the waste disposal site of last resort is the oceans. Yet, they assume "a growing economy is a healthy economy". Far from it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Environmental Movement Can Be Rightly Proud of The Massive Improvements To Our Rivers & Seas
Posted by: opmoc on May 30, 2008 5:45 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But articles such as this do it an enormous dis-service.

Of course there are still serious problems in many parts of the world - but this article totally exaggerates and distorts to the negative side.

Where exactly are "these 150 dead zones in our oceans, some the size of Ireland" "-- oxygen-free patches of ocean that can sustain no life "?

Whilst there have been disasters like the Aral Sea, the impression this article gives is totally wrong.

Presumably the author considers the North Sea to be one of these "dead-zones". No one disputes that the North Sea has been overfished - but it is far from dead - and fish stocks are rapidly recovering. linked text

In fact the improvements in water quality of both rivers seas across Europe have been completely phenomenal over the past 20 years. I know this from personal experience. Places that were once heavily polluted are now crystal clear and teeming with a great diversity of fish. We even get whales swimming up English rivers - a sight that hasn't been seen for hundreds of years.

I know a lot of our pollution has effectively been exported to places like India and China - and I am disgusted at the state of some parts of the world - but it is not all bad news. Even in areas of heavy pollution - the extent of it is nothing like the size of Ireland. Just 3 miles offshore even off the coast of India - you will find crystal clear waters and healthy fish stocks - and coral. Yes I know that coral has been mined to make concrete - and you can't get much sicker than that.

There is no mention in the dramatic recovery of coral - across much of the world - after the bleaching of 10 years ago. We'll keep that little secret to ourselves.

Preaching doom, doom doom all the time is not only totally depressing - but its also only giving one side of the story. It is not an objective assessment of the real state of the world's oceans.

The principles of conservation are spreading throughout the world and have become extremely effective and successful. Local communities want unpolluted waters and over-fishing means they will starve to death. Of course they are outraged when their waters are invaded by commercial trawlers from international companies - that decimates their livelihood. They are equally outraged when unregulated mining and pollution of rivers and seas has the same effects. Sure its got to stop.

The ocean is an enormous place - and it is also very resilient and forgiving. Recovery can happen very quickly where we stop - over-exploiting and polluting.

And what exactly is the problem with fish farms. The arguments against fish farms are totally ridiculous. They are a solution rather than a problem.

Of course the real problem in all such matters is overpopulation but we are not allowed to talk about that or the Pope et al will be offended. Tough - lets offend away.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You're kidding, aren't you ? Posted by: Last Chance
» OMFG let's blame the moms AGAIN Posted by: stellabloo
» Reagan Posted by: EJW
» recovery of the oceans? Posted by: ptown
» RE: recovery of the oceans? Posted by: Last Chance
» RE: out to lunch Posted by: wittler youth
» RE: out to lunch Posted by: opmoc
» RE: Quannah Posted by: Overburdened Planet
» Your link and fish farms Posted by: leafsong1
Dont Give up on Fish
Posted by: billgee on May 30, 2008 5:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Its all we got.

Grescoe aint wrong.

Maybe WE are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

TOFU!
Posted by: ptown on May 30, 2008 6:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I gave up eating animals and animal products decades ago for this very reason-unsustainability, eco-demise. I know many folks can't tolerate soy but there are other high-protein ways to not eat what remains from our toxic-ocean-toilet. Legumes have lots of protein, are low in fat. Omega-3 can be had in flax oil. Why do we have to destroy everything we touch?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: TOFU! Posted by: Last Chance
» RE: TOFU!idiot Posted by: wittler youth
» wrong about flax Posted by: frantaylor
» RE: wrong about flax Posted by: ptown
» screw flax, go with hemp seed. Posted by: rafaeltoral
» RE: screw flax, go with hemp seed. Posted by: oceanwaves99999
» RE: TOFU! is terrible Posted by: rafaeltoral
A Dead Zone Like Ireland
Posted by: PGR88 on May 30, 2008 6:39 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I resent your comparing Ireland to a DEAD ZONE. You should apologize for inference and discriminatory remarks against Irish. What's next, you bigots, that Irish are drunks and wife-beaters? That Irish eat their young? How dare you!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A Dead Zone Like Ireland Posted by: Overburdened Planet
» RE: It takes money Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
» RE: A Dead Zone Like Ireland Posted by: Quannah
» RE: A Dead Zone Like Ireland Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: A Dead Zone Like Ireland Posted by: HoboHomo
well
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on May 30, 2008 7:21 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There goes the idea that we just need to fix that pesky global warming thing and then we can just continue on the same way we have.

www.greenanarchy.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ZZZZzzzzzzzz
Posted by: Blammo on May 30, 2008 7:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once the M-pyre is gone things should come back around in about 200 years..........

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The die-off is everywhere
Posted by: jeffrey7 on May 30, 2008 10:05 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is massive die-offs on land and sea. Mostly caused by our thoughtless advances in industry and technology. In not truly caring about the uses of land and sea we've given ourselves a recipie for extinction.
For this very reason we need to shut down the engines that feed this extinction. The jobs lost can be regained in restoring the Environment. Cleaning the oceans,stopping the pollution caused by industry, becomming more in balance with our Planet.
The oceans are a mess,there no denying it. So
are a lot of other places. When you fly over the Midwest,on clear days, you can see landfills outpace farms and towns. There is a massive job that needs being done and we're the only ones around to do it.Will we be remembered as the people who saw what was needing to be done and did nothing or will the great-great grandchildren we will never know call us the ones who insured their survival by
cleaning up the mess.
Draft Jeffrey7 for Prez '08

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The die-off is everywhere Posted by: Last Chance
» RE: wow Posted by: PaulC
It's this stuff you should be really concerned about. It's even worse than CO2
Posted by: opmoc on May 30, 2008 10:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» IT IS WATER Posted by: opmoc
So Why Exactly Has The Young Hillary Clinton Video Been Removed From Youtube???
Posted by: opmoc on May 30, 2008 12:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's not even THAT funny

But it is funny

Just because it has been deleted from Youtube - just makes it even more popular

http://www.maniacworld.com/young-Hillary-Clinton.html

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Permanent Ban on Fishing is Needed
Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com on May 30, 2008 12:50 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In pretty much every other way human beings farm raise their food, from fruits, to vegetables, to chickens, turkeys, cows, pigs, and other animals.

The exception is fish. It is here that we consider it ok to just take and take and take from the oceans and rivers of the world.

We need to ban commercial fishing and require fish to be grown in tanks and man-made lakes or ponds separated from nature's waterways.

Will it cost a lot more, hell yes, but it should help prevent the dieing off of the oceans fish and mammal species.

(Assuming we stop the pollution as well.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We can STILL turn all this around
Posted by: willymack on May 30, 2008 2:05 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But first, we've got to get rid of the bushies, and make damn sure they NEVER come back.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Level 1 Fix For This Problem
Posted by: PaulK on May 30, 2008 2:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Given:

1. We've heated up the atmosphere and we can't stop that process.

2. We've dumped megatons of nitrates and phosphates into the world's rivers, killing the rivers, killing the oceans.

3. Our oceans are losing oxygen for both of these reasons.

Then we need one person, just one, to stand up and say:

"This is environmentally nuts. The government, our government, sits and barely looks at the problem and does nothing. My water smells like dead clams and a cove full of dead fish are all washing up on shore, where lazy seagulls are taking their fill.

"If the government actually cared, they could (short term) oxygenate the water, solving the problem.

"Now hear this! I don't give a flying leap at the moon what the government doesn't think and doesn't say. Tonight, underneath my own boat dock where no one will look, I'm putting in an oxygenator that blows air through the water of my bay. Now my cove will have enough oxygen in drought periods. It will be healthy. I do this as a service to my neighbors."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: OMG..... Posted by: macdon1
No Single Problem
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman on May 30, 2008 2:36 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While this was a great article about overfishing, that's only one of many serious problems affecting the oceans and the life in them. At least equally harmful are the massive human emissions of CO2 that began during the industrial revolution, which are acidifying the oceans, making it harder for skeletal species to survive, and thereby causing the oceans to devolve into what they were about 200 million years ago. Jellyfish will be the most predominant fish under this scenario.

Another major problem is water diversions from rivers, which is a huge problem in the western U.S. These massive, ecologically devastating diversions are probably the main cause of the salmon collapse on the West Coast.

So, while this is an excellent article, its author wrongly downplays other major harms that humans are doing to the oceans, either directly or indirectly. Solving only one problem will not fix our oceans. If only the overfishing problem is fixed, our oceans, as we know them, will still be destroyed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Intergration not Capitulation
Posted by: SquareheadXYZ on May 30, 2008 9:54 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find the book review intriguing on these topics I have been long-concerned with. And there are some good comments on something that seems a fundamentally disturbing thing: using the oceans as a toilet. It is an anguish and outrage for many.

As far as sustainability and the lack thereof, I recall reading of, in I believe it occurred in the late-1970s, the overfishing-induced collapse of sardine fisheries off the coasts of W. South America. While noted at the time, and while local people remained voiceless politically, the large factory ships were installed and completely subsumed local aquaculture. These floating plantations forced all local fisher-labor on board and sailed out to 'harvest' and destroy with absolutely zero forward-thinking in a confluence of political and economic lassitude and sellouts by 'landed' interests (read: especially in South America, Oligarchs).

It seems to me ...oh don't go there, don't exhibit any concern for human and environmental suffering ...too controversial, too "marxist."

But these factory ships are the kind of behemoths capitalism so 'successfully' employs all the time. Only huge corporations can generate and operate them. They are entirely ubiquitous and banal as to now go virtually unquestioned that different models might work better. And the book appears to address that in calling for the slow-fish thing and 'revalorizing' the erstwhile self-sufficient people and not force them into urban slums and onto plantations floating or otherwise because they have no access to the once-shared harvest, no product to sell or even eat, and their 'village has died.'

A sad state of things that Malthusian existential fears foisted by often obese Westerners cannot remedy. After all, 'white', Kristian societies have 'been allowed' to proliferate their reproductive prerogatives - often on other people's lands. Wassup?! Massive pollution and natal population collapses in the seas and lands have been the result. And there is of course China. I like what the author cautions about consuming Chinese aquaculture, truly a witch's brew.

There is too the overarching issue, seemingly sacrosanct, that Agro-industry (and associated oceanic exploitation), in its flowcharts sees, say, phosphorous or calcium merely as one commodified element to be acquired and reused (and they take huge 'green' credit - undeserved - for their insularity) from anywhere. They don't care. It can come from chicken-coop scrapings and go into animal feed for example. And vital fisheries, especially of anchovy off of W. Mexico, are ruthlessly harvested for the fish meal that comprises fertilizers and feeds elsewhere in the system. This too cannot continue.

Whereas I too enjoy seafood, I am less-concerned with this author's penchant for aligning his conscience with his belly, but that's a start - and maybe a 'doable' program really, as appeals to the belly are so much more compelling than to the mind and soul where marketing paradigms might be buffered. But they seem to penetrate the belly and the detached grey matterlurking there as they also quickly short-circuit critical thinking. I suspect this has occurred for the Pollyanna writing above, delighted in seeing the charming Thames whales. Cheerio. Everything is just fine, great in fact. As long as I, not someone with 'too much' melanin can continue my game of grab-ass at the expense of all.

Until we see massive popular disillusionment with capitalistic models ONLY and until more food production in Agri- and Aqua-culture is resumed by coops and villagers with some local say - and less-dependent on the huge use of fuels to make mega-harvesting (and shipping to remote markets) profitable, we're stuck and worse, slipping.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Take the money and run?
Posted by: Sojourner on May 30, 2008 10:07 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So long as there are places to run to, our economies will be managed to allow those who can to take their money there.

Our Earth is too big to prevent the heartless from doing whatever they please.

When resources were abundant and development was small, that is the plan that was put in place. Times have changed. We have not changed. So time is no longer on our side. "Out of sight, out of mind" still rules. Exactly how long is now the question. No one has a convincing answer, and even if they did, we (as a species) would likely not listen.

How many Americans were listening to Al Gore?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» NDK Posted by: oceanwaves99999
» Silly you! Posted by: oceanwaves99999
Dead zones not from overfishing
Posted by: donkey on May 31, 2008 12:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I haven't read the book, so don't know if Grescoe made this claim or if it came from the reviewer, but dead zones are the result of an excess of nitrogen, not from overfishing -- a lot of it from farm fertilizer runoff, but also from sewage disposal and vehicle emissions.

It creates a bloom of plankton which depletes the oxygen in the water.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: HOLY CRAP Posted by: PaulC
Save the Earth for us and the future.
Posted by: two on Jun 1, 2008 9:04 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For me, a pleasure that diminishes the experience of everybody else on earth is no pleasure at all." good for you! You are other-directed and probably think in terms of us then them
You did not mention, however, that the problems is not only Greed, but also Poverty and Over-population.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Plants
Posted by: two on Jun 1, 2008 10:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Plankton is mostly animal and part plant, you can tell by the internal green. We have poisoned the water system as well as destroyed the plant system on the continant and ocean. Thus we are destroying the oxygen that took 3 Billion years or so to accumalate and make the pretty blue sky. Our economy is indeed based on Greed instead of solving the problems of the Earth and its people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Uh...... Posted by: PaulC
The fact is........
Posted by: oceanwaves99999 on Jun 2, 2008 12:28 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that this planet does not NEED ANY humans..........it needs to lay fallow from humans' trespassing, trashing and turmoil!

Only humans argue that we need more babies, more population and that the planet can support more of us. The less of us the better!

Only humans with their human ethnocentricity, their selfishness, their greed and their self adulating creeds keep pronouncing how wonderful we are. Fact is we are not needed here. You don't like hearing that, do you? Sounds a lot like the Native Americans wanting the whites out, doesn't it? And you come up with all those contorted and self agrandisement cookie cutter denunciations for those who agreed with the Natives' views. Sounds a lot like the people who smear the people who want us out of Iraq, doesn't it? Those people who come up with all those tatered tales of why we SHOULD be there.

No, friends, we are NOT needed on this planet. I say, let us all die off............the planet is FAR more important than us. I see no benefit of humans being here. I see the natural cycles of ecology on this planet being restored to their primal and pristine conditions without our interferences any longer. We just don't fit into the ecology that existed here on planet earth for millions of years before our fateful ascent. It has now come full circle. We are on the verge of imploding everything on this awesome sphere. But, not to worry, the planet WILL recover, and we'll narry be a memory in the minds eye of all the other species who are patiently waiting for us to disappear.

Forget population increase. Forget the lowering of population quality, better babies and all that crap............its all just human wishful thinking. Whether its Muslims or Christians or Hindus or Buddhists who control everything, the wars between them for supremacy and choice population demographics and who controls what regions on this poor, abused planet doesn't mean a damn thing anymore. Let the seas recouperate without us also!

Planet recouperation without us is what I'm all about. I'll leave with the rest of you. When that time comes. In the meantime, I'm letting go slowly, so don't friggin' push me with the obvious negative posts that I can already predict in answer to this!

No, I'm NOT being negative here. I'm actually being positive, because a happy planet is far better than billions of us disenfranchised, discontent, dysfunctional and depressed despots of duplicity running amoke over everything any longer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The fact is........ Posted by: lil ole me
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement