A Plethora of Fishing in a Conversation Vacuum

Similar to other sustainability conversations, the two sides of an argument are coming from activist organizations and powerful corporations that are economically invested.

Unlike other sustainability topics, there actually is a path of regulation and control offered by conservation organizations that still allows the corporations to continue with their business and prosper economically. But, these businesses aren’t giving any leeway or accepting any compromise. A lot of them aren’t even defending overfishing allegations and just completely avoiding the conversation which makes the topic obsolete for people who don’t engage with academic media.

Scientific and sustainability minded organizations all take a pretty similar stance on overfishing as an issue. First, they agree that it is a major issue and creates a threat that will heavily affect the health of the entire planet.

Over ⅓ of fish stocks have been overfished (Monterey Bay Aquarium, 2024), which not only can heavily decrease biodiversity, but catalyze a collapse in food chains around the world killing even more marine life species indirectly. If humans fail to implement sustainable fishing practices, then the world could easily run out of seafood by 2048 (Oceanic Seafoods, 2023). Additionally, “85% of the world's ocean life is either exploited, depleted, or in a fragile state of recovery after being depleted…there are no signs of this improving” (The World Counts, 2024). 2048 may seem far away, but it is within most people’s lifetimes. Furthermore, it’s harder for already fragile ecosystems to bounce back because of ocean warming and oxygen depletion resulting from long-term climate change.

‍

If the conversation doesn’t start in the major corporations, a total crash of ocean life will become the next generation’s reality.

‍

The disparaging effects don't stop in the ocean, and will effect billions of people around the globe.

Almost half the planet relies on seafood as their primary source of food (Monterey Bay Aquarium, 2024). So, if overfishing creates an empty ocean, 3.5 billion people won’t have food on their plate. Not only will people starve, but they will lose their ability to provide for themselves and their families: “Almost 38 million people are directly employed in the wild capture seafood sector. Figures from the 2020 UN FAO State of the World Fisheries Report show 10% of the world’s population rely, at least partially, on fishing and aquaculture for their livelihoods” (Marine Stewardship Council, 2024).

Clearly it is agreed upon by the scientific community that overfishing is a massive threat for both the ocean and humanity; but, these organizations aren’t even asking for a complete halt. Their second argument is that fishing itself isn’t always inherently bad for the ocean, and there is a world for sustainable fishing. Fishing can be done in a way that leaves oceanic populations stable and healthy, whether it’s avoiding catching fish during their spawning season, size limits, precautionary measures for vulnerable populations, or setting restricted areas (Marine Stewardship Council, 2024). The problem has just arisen because of poor management of fisheries and illegal practices. Address these, and the ocean and the people can not only coexist, but prosper.

This seems like a win for fishing businesses and a chance to continue in the face of a changing world; however, they don’t seem to care at all. Major fishing companies around the world either completely ignore overfishing as an issue that they are directly linked with, or brush off any discontent with vague statements about sustainable practices, like with Thai Union Tuna.

Tuna is an example of a species that is being overfished. Yes, tuna provides sustenance and employment for many people, but more importantly they are at the top of the food chain (WWF, 2024). This means that if tuna collapses, everything under it will also topple. One of the largest tuna companies in the world, Thai Union, is facing allegations of overfishing, shark finning, and unethical practices (Shark Guardian, 2024). In response to this, they created a sustainability page on their website. But, under closer scrutiny, the page doesn’t address anything about overfishing. They have very generic claims about reducing greenhouse gas emissions and protecting biodiversity: for example, “driving a positive transformation around the globe,” “deploying actions to reduce GHG emissions,” and “safeguarding life” (SeaChange, 2024). And yes, these are important, but the real issue facing that company is glossed over. Quite frankly, these statements are just disingenuous and are avoiding the main component of a sustainable future that they are playing a role in: a properly respected ocean as a system of the earth and a critical source of food.

Similarly, Red Chamber Group, the largest shrimp company, is facing overfishing allegations. However, they don’t even attempt to open up the conversation. They don’t have anything about sustainable fishing practices anywhere on their website, just a home page and a list of products (Red Chamber Group, 2024). They don’t even have a side of the overfishing discourse because they just avoid it all together.

In a world where sustainability is almost exclusively paired with polarity, the fishing industry is comparatively lucky. The ocean conservancies and sustainable organizations are doing everything right with the conversation—acknowledging the importance of oceanic harmony for its own benefit, but also acknowledging that so many people rely on this system that it cannot become obsolete. Fishing corporations need to start listening to scientific facts and know that their company will likely go out of business within their lifetime if they continue practicing the way that they are. There shouldn’t be an impasse because oceanic organizations are already considering both sides. And yet, the impasse is working out quite well for these corporations who continue with the same old practices while wrapping themselves in the garb of sustainability.

There isn’t perfection required on either side for this to be resolved. Luckily, imperfection still leads to victory. In Joelle Gergis’s “A Climate Scientist’s Take on Hope,” they elaborate on how human nature is supposed to continue in the face of the giant challenge of perfectionism associated with sustainability. Well, the answer is that you don’t have to go all the way in one direction to make change: “What gives me hope is that human history is full of examples of people across the ages who have risen to face the great challenges of their time and succeeded against all odds. Victory is not the arrival in some promised land; it is a series of imperfect victories along the way that edge us closer to building the critical mass that eventually shifts the status quo” (Gergis, 2020).

In order to actually encourage major fishing corporations to change their practices, there has to be a promise of an economic benefit. So, the discourse of overfishing could be partially resolved if major fishing corporations had a requirement to look at models predicting fish populations within the next few decades, and knew that working towards the goal is still progress, instead of not trying at all because they don’t think they will fit the standards. This isn’t a long-term problem like some other climate discourses; it is going to happen quickly which makes it more likely for change to happen. There are already statistics and regulations against illegal fishing practices, but maybe if they were to come to the conclusion on their own, like a required long-term model report, change would happen. Additionally, education is one of the most powerful tools of activism. Once these companies are more open about their overfishing practices, then the public will likely hear more about the potential crash of all sea life right around the corner. Then, maybe more people would treat the seafood industry with as much weight as the beef industry. With open communication, sincere action, and education, there is a place for a healthy discourse about overfishing that will hopefully lead to a stable ocean for the sake of everyone on the planet.

‍