This week, we hand the editor's pen to Max Mossler, the Managing Editor of Sustainable Fisheries UW. This column is a shortened version of one he wrote this week for his blog. The link to that is at the bottom of this piece.
In my early 20s, I didn't eat seafood because I thought nothing taken from the ocean was sustainable. That belief was partially inspired by David Attenborough, who has long been a hero of mine. His documentaries influenced my academic and career path and helped shape the values I hold today, including a deep care for the ocean and its future.
His latest film, Ocean with David Attenborough, is beautifully shot-the bait ball scenes are as incredible as the bycatch images are brutal. The imagery is powerful and the film's call to action appeals to my 20-year-old self, whose passion for ocean conservation was grounded in idealism and the allure of silver bullet solutions. That passion fueled me to graduate school at the University of Washington where my naïve idealism gave way to an appreciation for complexity, nuance and the process of uncovering truths. It is through that (scientific) lens that I watched Ocean with David Attenborough last night.
In this post, I examine the science behind some of the messaging and claims in Ocean with David Attenborough. Though Attenborough and I share the same goal for the ocean-we want a thriving and abundant one-we disagree on the path to get there.
To be clear, fishing does have impacts. Fishing produces food, and all food production has impacts and tradeoffs. I started eating seafood again when I realized fishing is not just an ocean issue, but part of a global food system (and now I encourage others to eat it as well). I believe in maximizing sustainable food production from the ocean because that means there are fewer forests cleared for livestock farming, fewer dietary emissions contributing to climate change, and more people getting access to healthy, lean protein from the sea. Despite the tragic scenes portrayed in Ocean with David Attenborough, the animals harvested for seafood also probably lived much better, more natural lives than most farm animals.
The ocean is generally a much better place to get food than land. When a forest is cleared for farming, nearly all of the native biota is destroyed, and it takes centuries to return that land to its natural state. The ocean is different: aside from rare deep-sea coral and sponge beds, nearly every ecosystem in the ocean regenerates in months or years. Attenborough does a brilliant job demonstrating this point. The messaging in the film on the ocean's resilience and capability for abundance is strong and encouraging.
Well-managed bottom trawling is sustainable
In Ocean, Attenborough acknowledges the importance of seafood for feeding billions, but casts bottom trawling, responsible for about 26% of wild-caught seafood, as the main villain in the film. The footage focuses on scallop dredging and bycatch-heavy hauls, highlighting the most dramatic and destructive examples of the gear type. It's a powerful narrative device, but not an accurate representation of bottom trawling globally.
When poorly managed or deployed over sensitive habitats like deep-sea coral or sponge beds, bottom trawling can be destructive. But most bottom trawling occurs on sand, mud and gravel which are relatively resilient. Benthic communities in these areas recover quickly, especially when trawling is well-managed.
That's the key: sustainability is a function of management, not gear type. Well-managed bottom trawl fisheries use tools like seasonal closures, gear modifications, habitat protections and monitoring systems to minimize impacts. Poorly managed fisheries, like the ones depicted in Ocean, with high bycatch and discards, are not representative of bottom trawling as a whole.
Certifying and rating bodies reflect this nuance. The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) has certified over 80 bottom trawl fisheries worldwide. Seafood Watch, the Monterey Bay Aquarium's influential sustainability rating system, lists several bottom trawl fisheries as "Best Choice" and even "Super Green"-its top designation for environmental and nutritional performance.
A science-based lens
David Attenborough still inspires me, and his legacy has contributed to incredible progress in sustainable ocean management. I admire his commitment to abundance so that sustainable fisheries can continue to supply protein to a growing population, and so that beautiful marine ecosystems can continue to thrive. I hope that the call to action that this documentary inspires can take on a scientific lens that pushes us towards science-based solutions that value sustainable food production in harmony with healthy ecosystems.
If we care about the ocean and its biggest threats, we must care about how to feed the world. To me, and many others, feeding the world with the ocean's abundance is one of the most powerful tools we have to reduce carbon emissions and protect biodiversity.
Read the full, unedited version of Max's blog.
About Max:
Max manages the website Sustainable Fisheries UW, as part of his work at the University of Washington.
Before joining Sustainable Fisheries UW, he received a Master of Marine Affairs (MMA) from the School of Marine and Environmental Affairs at the University of Washington, where he studied environmental perception and policy communication.
Ray Hilborn and Max Mossler write a monthly-ish newsletter about the science of sustainable seafood. You can sign up here.
