Oceans/Fisheries

Over-tourism is both part of the problem and the solution. 

Coral reef bleaching episodes have increased in frequency and intensity over the last few decades, and projections indicate that live coral reefs could decline by 70-90% by 2050 without drastic action to limit global warming to 1.5°C. Coral reefs are among the most biodiverse and economically significant ecosystems on earth, and their preservation is essential. When corals become stressed due to higher ocean temperatures, pollution, or some other stressor, they expel symbiotic zooxanthellae, which removes their color and increases their susceptibility to disease and death. 

While climate change and overfishing are significant contributors to the coral reef bleaching crisis, attempts to reach an international consensus regarding such topics have failed. However, the tourism industry, also to blame but often overlooked, has the unique opportunity to influence reef management and conservation practices from the bottom up.

Over-tourism harms coral reefs.

One major concern is direct physical damage. Even well-meaning snorkelers and divers can accidentally bump into coral with their fins or struggle with buoyancy control, causing breakage. Additionally, recreational boats can leave a devastating footprint. Their anchors scrape and break fragile coral structures, leaving lasting scars on the reef.

Beyond physical harm, chemical pollution poses a serious threat. Sunscreens containing chemicals like oxybenzone and octinoxate wash into the ocean as tourists swim. These chemicals disrupt coral growth and reproduction, weakening the very ecosystems we come to admire. Reef-safe sunscreens help to combat the problem because they are made with less harmful ingredients, but very few know about this problem and even fewer are incentivized by government interventions to make the switch. Improper waste disposal and inadequate sewage treatment further compound the problem. This influx of pollutants smothers corals and disrupts the delicate balance of the reef’s ecosystem.

The tourism boom also drives unregulated coastal development to accommodate hotels, restaurants, and infrastructure. This development, in turn, leads to increased sedimentation. Sediment runoff chokes coral, blocking sunlight penetration, a vital source of energy for these organisms. Deforestation to clear land for development further exacerbates erosion and sedimentation problems. 

Well-managed ecotourism could actually benefit coral reefs. 

However, there’s a silver lining. Tourism doesn’t have to be a one-way street of destruction. By adopting sustainable practices, tourists can become eco-warriors and contribute to reef conservation efforts. One way to do this is by supporting eco-friendly tour operators. These responsible businesses prioritize reef-safe diving practices and use mooring systems instead of anchors, protecting reefs from major physical damages. Tourism businesses also have the unique opportunity to educate tourists on proper reef etiquette and limit the number of people near the reefs at a time to minimize crowding and associated stress. Tourists may even be asked by their diving or snorkeling guides to use reef-safe sunscreen. 

Tourism and fishing businesses also have the opportunity to influence behavior and contribute to the preservation of their ecosystems directly through reef restoration projects. Coral rehabilitation, larval seeding, and coral transplantation allow locals and tourists alike to participate in reef preservation, while still being able to enjoy the scenic views and ecosystem services coral reefs provide. Additionally, tourists may wish to make financial donations or volunteer, both of which have significant impacts on the future of these vital ecosystems. Finally, spreading awareness about sustainable tourism practices is crucial. As more people understand the challenges coral reefs face, the greater the collective impact. 

Saving the reefs may seem like a daunting task, but there are many options in the tourism sphere alone that provide hope for the preservation of these underwater wonders. The success of these potential solutions, however, will depend on the coordination of efforts between states, NGOs, and private businesses.

“Exactly what happens in the Galápagos [Islands] happens in locations around the world and it’s terrifying.” These were the words of Mercedes Rosello, director of House of Ocean, a not-for-profit legal consultancy that monitors illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing (IUU fishing), in response to a massive buildup of Chinese fishing vessels off the coast of the Galapagos islands in the fall of 2020. Sadly, this is nothing new. This specific occurrence of long-distance fishing looked to have occurred just outside of Ecuador’s Exclusive Economic Zone, what has become a classic strategy of nations looking to extract ocean resources far from their borders while still maintaining a veil of legality. These vessels often use tactics such as shutting off their transmission responders in order to avoid detection. China’s vast fishing vessel fleet, now the world’s largest, has been found off the coasts of West Africa to Latin America, plundering ecosystems and disrupting coastal communities around the world. In West Africa, for example, a 2018 report by the Environmental Justice Foundation found that 90% of Ghanaian-flagged vessels had Chinese involvement. As detrimental as these vessels can be, the problem persists far beyond the global movement of Chinese fishing vessels, and global action is needed to correct the drivers, access and punishments for such activity. Apart from the environmental concerns stemming from the global overfishing threat, including declining biodiversity and damage to sea beds, overfishing causes damage to developing nations who rely on seafood as a major source of employment and subsistence and lack the monitoring capabilities to adequately protect their seas.

Out of Sight, Out of Mind

            Overfishing persists largely as a governance challenge. Oceans remain a common pool resource, and therefore present a significant challenge of regulation. Attempts have been made to provide excludability to oceans, but much of our oceans remain like the wild west: lawless and unmanned. Regional Fishery Management Organizations (RFMOs) have primarily been charged with managing and conserving fish stocks in a particular region, but historically, they have been unsuccessful at preventing overfishing and maintaining healthy fish stocks.  RFMOs were not made for and are not able to adapt to today’s plundering of the oceans as a result of their fundamental design structure. Ocean resources are clearly not unlimited, as they perhaps were once thought to be. Fisheries management must adapt as well. Countries such as China have virtually transformed the fishing game with massive fleet sizes that seem to answer to no one. Rethinking ocean governance that takes into account modern technological advances must be implemented to stop as well as reverse the negative impacts of overfishing.

A global fisheries management organization could be an answer to this issue. Borders do not exist in the open ocean, so how should we expect for regional management units to effectively manage the borderless existence of sea life? A global fisheries management organization could effectively convene scientists to ensure that catch limits are made with sound data, countries can coordinate on fishing issues of mutual concern, and create best practices for issues like port-based controls to combat overfishing, among other governance concerns.

Operating with Impunity

            The high seas remain one of few modern wildernesses of our day. While this may sound a touch romantic, this vast swath of our planet is one that remains largely unpoliced with no clear international authority; a perfect place for criminals to operate with impunity. According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), IUU fishing activities are responsible for the loss of 11–26 million tons of fish each year, which is estimated to have an economic value of $10–23 billion. Much of the illicit fishing activity coincides with forced labor and human trafficking. For example, take the case of Thailand, where such abuse is common. Men or boys are offered a job in construction or some other lucrative industry by a human trafficker. The trafficker tells the worker that the debt incurred during passage will be settled at a later time. When the worker arrives at the port and realizes the job is on a fishing boat, the debt the worker accrued is used to sell him to the fishing boat captain, at times keeping these boys and men captive at sea for several years at a time in inhumane conditions. Tackling the issue of illegal fishing as a contributor to overfishing and human rights abuses is essential. Monitoring and enforcement of such IUU fishing should be done in collaboration with organizations like the International Labor Organization along with the International Maritime Organziation.

Grades Matter for a Sustainable Fishing Market

Just as much as the decisions of commercial fisheries matter, so do that of consumers. Providing easily digestible information on the sustainability of seafood to consumers is of the utmost importance to transform demand for sustainably caught sea food. The Marine Stewardship Council has in fact already created an MSC blue fish label, which is applied to wild fish or seafood producers from fisheries that have been certified to the MSC Standard. The global volume of tuna caught to the MSC’s globally recognized standard for sustainable fishing more than doubled from 700,000 tons in 2014 to 1.4 million tons in September 2019. Further work on giving consumers the right information to make smart choices that enhance the market for sustainable fish could also go a long way in motivating fisheries to adopt more sustainable practices. Putting pressure on major international grocers to only buy MSC blue label certified seafood, but also approving the grocer as an MSC certified grocer could make for a strong incentive for grocers to “go green” with their buying choices, as well as arm consumers with information to make good use of their purchasing power.  

Addressing overfishing from a governance, demand, and human rights perspective is needed to shed light on a topic that has not gotten its fair share of attention. At its surface, the term overfishing doesn’t often strike a tone of importance in the minds of your average person, but it should and must. As a consumer, you can use your purchasing power to shop sustainably at your local grocery store, or urge your store to stock such products. At the global level, governance structures need a complete overhaul along with revolutionary information and data transparency to drive informed decision making, and finally, a fundamental transformation of the issue is needed to take into account the grave human rights repercussions resulting from overfishing which persists around the world.

Caroline Corbett

How smart shopping habits can help save the future of the commercial tuna industry

Since the 1970s, tuna fishing has increased by over 1000%. Tuna, a nutritious and widely available protein source, is now the most eaten and second most caught fish in the world.

But purchasing a can of tuna can have disastrous environmental consequences. Some species are even on the brink of extinction, but it doesn’t have to be this way. We can change our consumption habits to promote sustainably caught tuna and species with stable stocks.

Tuna is a low-calorie and low-fat protein source, containing a variety of essential vitamins and minerals. It’s often the sole seafood item on restaurant menus, and even fast-food chains such as Subway promote it as a ‘healthier’ sandwich option, even though their tuna sub may not be tuna at all. Yet, one in four Americans eat tuna weekly, pointing to the fish’s rise in popularity as a healthy alternative.

Gazing down an aisle of grinning fish plastered onto small aluminum cans—reading everything from albacore or skipjack, water or oil, and dolphin-safe or MSC certified—it can be a complex task to select even a single can.

Almost all packaged tuna is wild-caught. But 0.1% of the tuna we eat is raised on a fishing farm. Although farming fish doesn’t kill the species, farming an endangered tuna increases wild fishing demand, ultimately harming that species chance of survival.

Different certifications are used on tuna labels, such as the sustainable fisheries partnership and dolphin-safe labels, but these can be difficult to find and decipher. Tuna labels also don’t include certification guidelines, which causes more confusion as to which labels are better than others.

In addition, these certifications are developed by third parties whose goal is profit, not sustainability. Since selecting the sustainable choice is entirely on the consumer, here’s the top three things you need to know to avoid any ‘fishy’ labels.

Catching methods, fish species, and fishing location all determine the environmental impact of your tuna purchase.

1. Pick pole-and-line or Purse Seine fishing methods.

The most important thing to know when selecting sustainable tuna is exactly how the fish is caught. There are three main types of fishing methods: longline, Purse Seine, and pole-caught (or pole-and-line).

Longline fishing accounts for approximately 10% of all tuna caught and is an easier way to bait the deeper water tuna such as albacore, bluefin, and yellowfin. Longline has an alarming 20% bycatch rate. The term bycatch is designated when the sheer amount of hooks in the water accidentally harms other fish, sometimes killing endangered species like sea turtles and killer whales.

Purse Seine is the most common fishing method, catching two-thirds of the world’s tuna. Purse Seine commercial boats utilize a circular net that surrounds entire schools of fish. Bycatch rates in this fishing method comprise less than 1% of the total catch. But some vessels use fish aggregating devices, or FADs, which draw fish closer to the surface, therefore increasing the bycatch even more. If purchasing Purse Seine tuna, be sure to look for ‘FAD-free’ on the label.

Only 8% of tuna are caught by the pole-and-line, or pole-caught, method — which uses fishing poles to catch the fish one-by-one. Pole-and-line fishing has almost no bycatch which is great news for the sea turtles. But its ships burn through the most fuel out of any vessel because it’s the most time-consuming catching method.

2. Basically, skip everything but the skipjack.

The four main varieties of tuna are all overfished, although some do have more stable populations.

Bluefin tuna are critically endangered, exploited, and nearing extinction. Bluefin is so overfished that its populations cannot reproduce fast enough to replace themselves. Even though some bluefin is farmed — Japan farms over 30% of its bluefin — the popularity of the fish type can mean an increase in wild-caught, too. This is why consuming bluefin tuna should be avoided entirely.

Yellowfin, which accounts for 28% of all tuna caught, is also at risk. Increasingly, caught yellowfin tuna are becoming smaller in size — and, the fish are living shorter lives and reproducing less and less — destabilizing the population at large. And because only one method of catching them, pole-caught, can even be considered a more sustainable choice, this fish should be avoided altogether.

Almost one-third of all canned tuna is actually albacore. This tuna’s rapid rise in popularity has increased overfishing and longline catching methods, which are harmful to endangered marine species like sea turtles and killer whales. So, when choosing this fish, it’s important to look for ‘pole-caught’ on the label.

Lastly, skipjack, often described as ‘chunk light’ or ‘light meat,’ accounts for over 70% of all canned tuna. Skipjack is plentiful, reproduces rapidly, and is the most sustainable choice in the tuna aisle.

3. Yes, regulations really make a difference.

A final thing to consider when purchasing tuna is location. Illegal fishing is common within the tuna industry, and only some countries pass laws and use monitoring technology to make sure regulations are followed. For example, President Obama increased electronic tuna monitoring in the Gulf of Mexico, reducing bycatch and protecting bluefin breeding areas. Although the Trump Administration rolled back these regulations, President Biden will likely increase protections for wild-caught tuna.

Global Fishing Watch, a Google platform, uses real-time data to track commercial fishing vessels and fight unsustainable fishing methods.

To locate the most protected marine areas, explore their interactive fishing map. The map can also pinpoint overfished and illegal catch locations.

Overall, there are many environmental concerns with tuna, from killing sea turtles and killer whales to potentially annihilating entire marine species.

But it’s important to note that the tuna industry generates up to $40 billion annually for the global economy and supports over 260 million fishers worldwide. Countries such as Indonesia and Japan rely on tuna fishing for their economies, catching 568,170 and 369,696 metric tons respectively.

Eating less tuna, or deciding to not eat it at all, is certainly a sustainable choice. But, this personal activism does not pressure fishing companies to change their habits or garner enough attention for governments to take notice. Eating tuna can be done with the environment in mind while supporting fishers and promoting sustainable catching. Choosing tuna with stable stocks, such as skipjack, and looking for environmentally sound catch methods, such as FAD-free purse seine or pole-and-line, can increase the demand for sustainable fishing altogether.

By fishing for just the right tuna at your own supermarket, you’re raising awareness for the sustainable tuna industry. This small but important step can save depleted stocks, expand safe catch methods, and help change perceptions of the world’s most consumed fish.

Phil Gurley