Human population

growth:
A burden on aquatic
species?

Kaye Maloney
FNR 488 Term Paper
11/18/09

Introduction

From 2000 to 2007, the human population grew from 6 to 6.63 billion people,

according to James Diana’s article, “Aquaculture Production and Biodiversity

Conservation.” In less than a decade, the world’s population added almost a billion more

citizens. A larger population presents many challenges and implications, such as how to

feed everyone. Humans utilize various kinds of resources to obtain sustenance, including

fishing. Fish and fishery products are an important aspect to the global food supply; they

constituted 15.3% of the total animal protein source in 2000 (Allan et al. 2005). Also, for

about 1 billion people, mainly in developing countries, fish is their primary source of

animal protein. With this in mind, we have to ask which problem should be focused on -

preventing human population growth or conserving our global fish supply. Our growing

population is a burden on our water species and puts them in danger of becoming extinct.

Instead of stopping human population growth, there needs to be a solution to relieve the

burden on the global fish supply. There isn’t a clear cut way to sustain the world’s fish

populations or eliminate human population growth, but it is feasible to focus on

protecting fish resources.

The problem

The world population is growing, without a doubt, and everyone has to share the

earth’s resources. The Population Reference Bureau projected the world population will

double its current number of 6.5 billion in about 58 years, based on the current growth

rate of 1.2% (Pimentel 2005). That’s a lot of people to care for, when we are already

2
struggling with the resources we have.

In addition to more people, in the past, humans have been responsible for modifying

the landscapes and ecosystems of the planet. People cause these changes by direct

exploitation of natural resources or through activities such as damming rivers or

introducing alien species (Humphries and Winemiller 2009). Humans turn to the sea as a

source of food and wealth, but the environmental costs are high. In the past, people have

overharvested whales, fish, and oysters that caused coastal ecosystems to collapse. In all

of the cases, a species was harvested to the point of extinction and the wide ranges of

effects are still evident today (Humphries and Winemiller 2009). In addition,

overharvesting is an issue in freshwaters as well. People are not limited to living on the

coasts; they move around and settle everywhere.

Fishing provides food, but it is also a driving force for many economies, especially

local ones. In the article “Overfishing of Inland Waters,” the authors explain that fishing

and the activities surrounding it are important at every scale. Fishing is a crucial source of

livelihood for people in developing nations, particularly for low-income families in rural

areas where job options are limited (Allan et al. 2005). Instead of stopping people from

using fish as a staple to their diet or local economies, we need to find a way to make the

fish supply sustainable.

State of restoration processes

Before the global fish supply can become sustainable, the resources need to replenish

themselves. Freshwater ecosystems deal with growing human populations that need water

for irrigation, transportation, discharge of waste, and water extraction (Humphries and

Winemiller 2009). On the other hand, ocean ecosystems are at risk for habitat destruction

3
and overharvesting. Even though these problems won’t go away in the near future,

commercial fishing of freshwater fish is at an all-time low in many industrialized

countries. In many of the cases, commercial fishing has been banned in conservation

efforts and fishing regulations (Humphries and Winemiller 2009). Although

commercialized fishing might be down in industrialized countries, it doesn’t stop people

from fishing for pleasure nor does it deter people living in developing nations from

fishing for food. Another factor is that restoration goals cannot be met without everyone

participating. Which leaves the goals to be driven by social values and sociopolitical

trade-offs when they need to be based on scientific principles (Humphries and

Winemiller 2009).

Society values and politics determine what happens to restoration goals, but there are

also a lot of misleading facts. In the article “Effects of Aquaculture on World Fish

Supplies” the authors explain that aquaculture can improve the sustainability of the world

fish supply, but some types put stress on wild stocks of fish. In the 1990s, global

production of farmed fish, shrimp, clams, and oysters more than doubled in weight and

value while wild-caught fish remained level (Naylor et al. 2001). It was believed that this

relieved pressure on wild stocks. But, “by using increasing amounts of wild caught fish to

feed farmed shrimp and salmon, and even to fortify the feed of herbivorous fish such as

carp, some sectors of the aquaculture industry are actually increasing the pressure on

ocean fish populations” (Naylor et al. 2001). If aquaculture is depending on wild stocks

to feed the farmed stocks, it’s not going to eliminate any problems. Since some areas of

the industry do not harm the wild species, it is a common misconception that aquaculture

is the perfect solution.

4
 The authors also point out that aquaculture as it’s currently practiced degrades the

marine environment and diminishes the ecological support it gives to fish, mammals,

humans, and seabirds (Naylor et al. 2001). The environmental impacts include:

• destruction of thousands of hectares of mangrove forests and coastal

wetlands for the construction of facilities
• use of wild-caught rather than hatchery-reared finfish or shellfish fry to
stock captive operations (a practice that often leads to high levels of bycatch)
• heavy fishing pressure on small ocean fish such as anchovies for fish
meal, which can deplete food for wild fish such as cod, seals, and seabirds
• transport of fish diseases into new waters and escapes of non-native fish
that may hybridize or compete with native wild fish
In other words, if the aquaculture industry proceeds with the same methods, its

reliance and impact on ocean species are likely to increase. If the goal is to produce more

fish for consumers than can be produced naturally, it will become counterproductive to

farm carnivores that need to be fed wild-caught fish that form the foundation of the ocean

food chain (Naylor et al. 2001). Aquaculture can be used to help feed the growing

population and take stress off of wild stocks, but the methods need to be revised and

more research needs to be done before it can be effective.

Developing nations

A complex issue with the exploitation of the global fish supply is the impact

developing nations are having. Much of the growing population is occurring in

developing nations, where more people need to eat and earn a living. Fishery products are

valuable for local food production in developing countries, because it produces money

and a food supply. In 2001, seafood exports valued at $56 billion generated more money

for developing nations than exporting coffee, tea, bananas, rice, and meat combined

5
(Diana 2009). By 2004, the total value of seafood exports grew to $71.5 billion.

However, despite the high export value of fish products, about 75% of the harvested

seafood was consumed locally (Diana 2009). This is evidence that fish are in demand as a

food supply, but in danger of being stressed. For now, people might be able to depend on

the wild fish stocks to eat, but there’s no telling how long it is going to last. Plus, more

than half of the fish being caught are going to local consumers rather than being exported,

which isn’t helping their economies.

Conclusion: aquaculture as a solution

The facts we have are that the world population is growing and it is stressing our

aquatic species. One solution is aquaculture; it works similar to agriculture by converting

land into ponds to grow aquatic organisms, just as land is changed to produce crops

(Diana 2009). We know that some forms of aquaculture are counterproductive because

they exploit the environment by raising species that need to be fed with wild species and

ruin habitats to build facilities. In order to prevent the growing population from

diminishing our global fish supply, we need to be resourceful with aquaculture as a

solution. It can be done, if it is done right. More research needs to be completed, but there

are few techniques we can use now. We can farm species that are lower on the food

chain, improve feed management, and develop integrated fish farming systems that use

multiple species to reduce costs and wastes (Naylor et al. 2001). If solve these issues

now, it could prevent larger problems in the future with an overpopulated earth.

6
References Cited

Allan, David J.; Abell, Robin; Hogan, Zeb; Revenga, Carmen; Taylor, Brad W.;
Welcomme, Robin, L; and Winemiller, Kirk. 2005. Overfishing of Inland Waters.
BioScience 55: 1041-1051.

Diana, James S. 2009. Aquaculture Production and Biodiversity Conservation.

BioScience 59: 27-38

Humphries, Paul, and Winemiller, Kirk, O. 2009. Historical Impacts on River Fauna,
Shifting Baselines, and Challenges for Restoration. BioScience 59: 673-684.

Naylor, Rosamond L.; Goldburg, Rebecca J.; Primavera, Jurgenne; Kautsky, Nils;
Beveridge, Malcolm C. M.; Clay, Jason; Folke, Carl; Lubchenco, Jane; Mooney, Harold;
and Troell, Max. 2001. Effects of Aquaculture on World Fish Supplies. Issues in Ecology
8: 2-12.

Pimental, David. 2005. Over Population and sustainability. The Ecological Society of
America. www.frontiersinecology.org Accessed November 12, 2009.