About Us   •   Public Education   •   Species at Risk   •   Projects   •   Other Activities   •   Membership

When Portuguese sailors first encountered the Grand Banks off Newfoundland, the cod were so thick that the ships were actually slowed down by the mass of fish they had to plough through. Wooden tubs were lowered over the side and cod were scooped up by the bucketful. The supply seemed infinite. Today we know better, we see the cod stocks down to 1% of this pre-industrial level, yet the debate over closure continues.

The Newfoundland government wants to renegotiate terms of confederation based on the perceived failure of the federal government to "manage" the fish stocks properly. The feeling is that if those whose livelihoods depend on the fish are also the managers of the fish, then conservation will be the norm and the stocks will recover over time. Fishing can still continue, especially if the seal hunt is accelerated. This argument is based on the belief that fishermen know more than science; therefore if control of the fishery is passed over to more regional interests the fish populations will benefit and so will the local economies. Unfortunately, a recent study published in Nature tells the other side of the story.

Surveying four continental shelf and nine oceanic ecosystems, the study concludes that the global ocean has lost more than 90% of the large predatory fishes compared to pre-industrial population levels. This is a shocking result. Seventy five percent of global fisheries yields are sustained by the ecosystems surveyed and they account for nearly half of the world's primary production of fish stocks. To effect restoration of fish stocks it is necessary to know what pre-industrial levels were. The study, done by two biologists from Dalhousie University, Ransom Myers and Boris Worm, does this by using standardized trawl research surveys for shelf systems in the North West Atlantic, the Antarctic off South Georgia and the Gulf of Thailand.

Japanese long-line data was used for the non shelf or oceanic systems. The Japanese long lines are the most widespread, existing in all oceans except the circumpolar areas. Long lines operate over huge regions, catching fish in a consistent way, The study limited long line data to the equatorial and southern oceans because industrial fishing was well under way in the North before much of the data was recorded.

Estimates for many species declines are understated. This is a result of the fact that often there were no large scale studies undertaken of pre-industrial activity to use as a benchmark for current management decisions. The cod stock are at 1 to 5% of recorded levels, however these levels were not taken until well into the advent of industrial fishing; therefore the real state of the population is probably much worse.

The result of basing management decisions on the lower estimates of historical populations is to set targets which do not reflect robust, full systems. Another issue is that fish communities can support viable fisheries at less that 10% of full populations, yet be in slow decline. The example of the demise of coastal fisheries bears this concern out. The loss of large predatory fishes as well as reptiles and mammals, have caused major disruptions in structure and function of these communities, causing extinction and rapid changes in the viability of species.

No one knows what the long term effects of the removal of 90% of the large predators from a single shelf or oceanic system are, let alone a global reduction of this magnitude across several ecosystem communities. Against this backdrop, the attempt to keep fishing cod by blaming the federal government for mismanagement is short-sighted indeed.

The typical rate of decline when industrial fishing moves into a new oceanic fishery based on long line data shows that catch rates drop from 6 to 12 fish per 100 hooks to .5 to 2 in the first ten years. That is an 80 to 90 percent drop. Shelf communities showed the same effects. The long line fishery expanded into virgin territory during the 50s and 60s. The Gulf of Thailand lost 60% of large fin fish, sharks, and skates during the first five years alone. The South Georgian fishery experienced the highest rate of decline and was effectively fished down during the first two years.

On average an 80% decline occurs within the first fifteen years in a new fishery. As markets change so do tactics. The increased demand for shark cartilage has caused the practice of "finning" to emerge. This means that sharks are caught, their fins cut off and then they are dumped, still alive, overboard. They cannot navigate without fins so they sink to the bottom, drowning on the way.

There may be a chance to keep a minimal cod fishery. Just how it will relate to the other declines is unclear. The one sure bet is that the best option is to keep the fishery closed and let recovery start. Modern fishing gear, satellite imagery, sonar, side scanning radar, the development of other fisheries are all taking their toll. It has become so bizarre that we are now developing a jellyfish fishery. Anything for fish protein.

To say that different managers will magically bring the fish back, to say that fishing can still be the mainstay of many rural communities is to deny the reality of global declines and local extinctions. The only way for fish stocks to recover is to drastically reduce the catch rate of industrial fishing techniques, not simply shift the decision from one political body to another.

- Dave Neads

More articles in the series, The Other Side of The Story

Cariboo Chilcotin Conservation Society
Unit 201, 197 2nd Ave North Williams Lake, B.C., V2G 1Z5
Phone/Fax: 250 398-7929 • ccentre@ccconserv.org • Coordinator: Marg Evans

About Us   •   Public Education   •   Species at Risk   •   Projects   •   Other Activities   •   Membership

Original information in this web site may be reproduced in any form without permission on condition that it is accredited to the Cariboo Chilcotin Conservation Society, with a link back to this site or, in the case of printed material, a clear indication of the site URL. We would appreciate being notified of such use. Although care has been taken in preparing the information contained in this site, the CCCS does not and cannot guarantee its accuracy. Anyone using the information does so at their own risk and shall be deemed to indemnify CCCS from any and all injury or damage that might arise from such use.

---

^{This site has had  visitors since March 1, 2004}