Back to news article list

No Place For Tuna To Hide ff

28 October 2005 United States

Numerous popular and once prolific U.S. fish species have been reduced to 1% to 10% of their original populations, according to Oceana, an international ocean protection organization.

With the global market for fish growing and improved technology to find what fish are left, “there’s basically no place left for a fish to hide,” not even for highly migratory fish like tuna says Michael Hirshfield, Oceana’s chief scientist.

Things started to go downhill for U.S. fish populations in 1976 with the passage of the Magnuson Act, which was meant to protect fisheries (ocean regions where fish are raised and caught). But it had the paradoxical effect of harming them, says Bill Hogarth, director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Fisheries Service.

The law was the fruit of concerns that foreign-based fleets were sucking fish out of the sea that rightfully should have gone to U.S. fishermen. To protect those fish, the United States extended its jurisdictional limits to 200 miles from the coast.

But the U.S. fishing fleet simply wasn’t big enough to fish that large an area, so the second part of the law assisted the industry by providing government-subsidized, low-cost loans for boats and gear.

The number of fishing vessels bloomed, says Barton Thompson of the Stanford Institute for the Environment. “We did a good job of (helping the fishing industry) — in fact, we did too good a job.”

As fish became harder to find, fishermen began to take advantage of technological advances, including sonar, sea-floor mapping and global positioning satellite data.

Today, endangered fish include yellowtail flounder, Atlantic halibut, speckled hind (grouper), red snapper, Warsaw grouper and Atlantic cod. The flounder is at the top of that government list because only 1% of original stocks remain. The halibut is close behind at 2%.

Fishing fleets were built up beyond the capacity of the seas to provide that much fish, Thompson says. But scaling back means taking away people's livelihoods, he adds.

“This is not a story of evil, money-grubbing people going out and destroying a resource. Those fishermen have boats they have to pay off and families they have to feed.”