Critical Thinking Paper

Marina Deane-Gonzalez

April 25, 2019

Blue Group
 Critical Thinking Paper

Overfishing is a critical problem that is killing the ocean but is rarely discussed.

Americans consume almost 16 pounds of seafood per person every year and many don’t think

twice about where it all comes from (Fletcher). Over the past few years, more and more fish have

been pulled from the ocean, more than the ocean can handle. Without stricter limits on how

many fish can be pulled from the water, the fish population will never be able to recover.

Without healthy fish stocks the ocean’s biodiversity will be limited, and without biodiversity one

of the most important ecosystems could be destroyed. If that isn’t enough to persuade,

overfishing is having a negative impact on our economy. With less prize fish, the market is being

flooded with cheap “trash” fish, causing a decline in the revenue from fisheries. The United

States Fish and Wildlife Service must decrease the maximum quota of fish that can be pulled

from the water because overfishing is killing our ecosystems, negatively impacting the economy,

and without proper regulation the problem will only get worse.

Overfishing is destroying our ecosystems due to the increase in fish being pulled from the

sea and the depletion of the world's fish stock. Since 1950 the intensity of commercial fishing

has risen substantially (Guénette, Christensen and Pauly 22). Between 1970 and 1989, the

world’s fishing fleet almost doubled. Most of this expansion was fueled by governments seeking

a higher profit from the shores bordering their countries. It's not only the US upgrading its fleet,

between 1983 and 1990, the European Union raised spending on fishing fleets by over $500

million (“National Debate Topic”). Because the U.S. government is allowed to give out subsidies

to fisherman, they are able to pull more and more fish out of the water; however, fish stocks

can’t rebound when being severely depleted and the ocean is in major trouble. According to a
study done by the National Marine Fisheries Service “half of all U.S. fisheries, and a quarter of

the major fish stocks around the world, are in danger of a swift and potentially irreversible

decline” (“National Debate Topic”). In recent years, around 90% of the ocean’s large predatory

fish have been lost (Worm and Myers 282). Without these large predatory fish species the food

chain could become unbalanced, leading to major changes in the ocean’s ecosystem. Predatory

fish aren't what the fishermen are searching for, however. They want prized fish such as tuna and

cod that can be sold to restaurants to turn a profit. The problem is, many of these prized fish are

slow growing and the population of many slow growing Southern Atlantic species are at critical

levels. The reason for these critical levels is because these fish species have been heavily

overfished though they are slow growing and take a long time to regain healthy populations.

Two examples of this phenomena are the Snowy Grouper and the Speckled Hind. Snowy

Groupers are at 10% of of their 1970s population levels and Speckled Hind are at 5% of pre

1970’s population. In perspective, a population between 30 to 40% of pre 1970’s levels signals

overfishing, while lower numbers mean the species is in “critical condition” (Fletcher). The

fishing industry has been growing for years and has been slowly but surely depleting the ocean’s

fish stock. Overfishing is causing the ocean’s fish stock to face consequences and soon those

consequences may become too great to be reversed. So far, overfishing has caused major damage

to many ecosystems due to the immense quantities of fish that are pulled from said ecosystems

each year.

Pulling too many fish from the ocean will damage the economy because of Americas

heavy reliance on the fishing industry and the fact that without fish, there won’t be any profits.

The American economy heavily relies on the fishing industry to keep both citizens and wallets
well fed. The fishing industry contributes $163 billion to the U.S. economy and supported almost

two million jobs in 2008 (Fletcher). Without a strong fishing industry the US economy could be

in for a rough patch. The economy relies heavily on the fishing industry, so cutting back quotas

will be hard and there will be consequences for pulling less fish. Though pulling less fish seems

like it will do more harm than good, that is simply not the case. The consequences of decreased

quotas wouldn’t be nearly as bad as continuing to overfish, or increasing fishing efforts. The

book ​Sunken Billions ​reports that “the world’s currently unsustainable fisheries management

practices have led to globally depleted fish stocks that produce $83 billion less in annual net

benefits than would otherwise be the case” (35). In 2015 the fishing industry contributed $208

billion in sales impacts globally and $97 billion to gross domestic product (“Fisheries Economics

of the United States”). Using these numbers one can determine that annually overfishing could

cause the loss of around 39% of what the fishing industry is making currently. On the flip side,

by regaining healthy fish populations, the US stands to gain much in its economy. One great

example of how much a healthy fish population can give us is the summer flounder, also known

as fluke. This species has been overfished for decades and is “one of the most important

commercial and recreational fish species in the Mid-Atlantic. The population of this species has

been getting back to healthy levels and “a healthy summer flounder population could add $28.9

million per year in direct economic benefits to the Mid-Atlantic region” (Fletcher). If only one

species regaining a healthy population can add $28.9 million dollars per year to the economy,

than the the US could gain billions helping regrow healthy populations for other popular but

severely overfished species. Overfishing has caused major damage to the American economy

and tightening restrictions will bring that down even farther. One must realize, however, that the
negative consequences of continuing to overfish will cause more loss in the end than tightening

restrictions now.

Overfishing is also causing mislabeling issues in the food industry, making restaurants,

grocery stores, and fisherman sell fish once thought of as gross to their customers under well

known fish names like salmon, or under more attractive names. Because overfishing is depleting

the stock of many popular fish served in restaurants, companies are resorting to mislabeling in

order to continue getting customers to buy fish. Recently, more and more scientists have began

to study the extent of such a problem. One study testing the rate of mislabeling in restaurants,

grocery stores, and sushi restaurants concluded that 33 percent of the fish samples genetically

analyzed were mislabeled. The report also found that snapper and tuna were the most mislabeled

species tested with 87% and 59% mislabeling respectively (Warner 5). So many mainstream fish

have been depleted that almost one third of the fish sampled were not what they were claimed to

be. This study does not, however, consider that many “trash fish” are being sold under more

attractive names, though ten years ago no one would have thought to eat them. One example

would be the slimehead. Scientists originally named this fish for its distinctive mucus canals;

however, in the 1970’s fisherman renamed the slimehead and marketed it as “orange roughy”

(Fahrenthold). The new, more appetizing name allowed fisherman to sell this once ‘gross’ fish to

restaurants for good money. Another example of a once ‘gross’ fish renamed is the goosefish.

Fishermen used to “toss back the toad-colored fish that looked like it was 30 percent mouth and

50 percent stomach. Then somebody noticed that the tail meat could be cut into tasty fillets.”

Then, someone thought of the name "monkfish." After this renaming, harvests of the newly

dubbed “monkfish” increased five times from the mid-1980s to the late 1990s (Farenthold). The
problem lies in the fact that now, after years of overfishing, even these so called trash fish

numbers have dropped. Because trash fish such as dogfish or whiting go for less money than

prized fish such as tuna, fisherman need to pull more and more of them to survive. The more

they pull, the less fish there are, and the harder it will be to make enough money. As can be

inferred from the story of the goosefish and slimehead, fisherman will turn to fishing more and

more obscure fish species in order to make a living. Not only will fisherman be forced fish

weirder species, they will also begin to pull younger and younger fish. Already the effect of this

effort to keep fisherman afloat is being seen, as fish caught now are about half the size of fish

caught in the 1950s. This is because fisherman have resorted to hauling younger and younger

fish due to the scarcity of older ones (“National Debate Topic”). Overfishing is affecting the

oceans, and in consequence what Americans are consuming when eating seafood. Because of

overfishing fisherman are having a harder time finding fish and are resorting to pulling less

prized fish and simply lying about what they are called. Americans are being deceived, and if

something isn’t done about the problem soon, it will just keep compounding, causing the

situation to become even more dire. The reaches of overfishing are being felt throughout the

food industry, as restaurants are turning to mislabeling and fisherman are turning to more

obscure and less appetizing fish to keep stable revenue.

However compelling these arguments may seem there are still many people who believe

the fisherman should be the ones regulating how many fish are pulled from the water. They

argue that fisherman won’t be able to make enough money under these tighter restrictions. One

of these arguments is that if quotas are put on specific species than species often caught together

that exceed the quota would “incentivise discarding behavior.” Discarding is throwing back
unwanted species, though there is a potential for it to “reduce economic benefits and bias stock

assessments” (Woods, Holland, Marteinsdóttir, and Punt). Though the opposing arguments are

strong, one must realize that if stricter measures aren’t taken, there won’t be enough fish to go

around. If the government doesn’t take action about overfishing right now and restrict these

quotas, there will be a greater issue to face than tighter restrictions. Fisherman will be facing the

problem of not having enough fish for anyone, causing even greater damage to the lives the

general public and of themselves. Without stricter laws about fishing quotas, overfishing won’t

get better and fisherman will have more problems than would be created in the first place.

Overfishing is a critical issue that is killing the ocean. Pulling too many fish is causing

major problems for fish species and many are in critical danger because of the recent boom in

commercial fishing. Overfishing is also impacting the United States economy. Fishing generates

much revenue for the U.S economy and overfishing is starting to whittle down that sum, causing

the economy to lose millions of dollars. Because prized fish are getting harder to find, fishermen

and restaurant owners alike are turning to mislabeling fish. Aside from mislabeling, trash fish are

causing a greater issue (trash fish sell for less, making the fisherman need to pull more of them).

Once they run out, fisherman will turn to even less prized fish and have to pull more of them just

to turn out a profit. This cycle could continue and cause irreversible damage if it isn’t stopped

soon. Though there are people who say that the government shouldn’t be handling affairs as this

because they will pick a quota that's too small for fisherman to live off of, continuing to overfish

will cause more damage than the smaller quotas. Overfishing has been plaguing the ocean for

years and it’s time the United States do its part to help save the most important ecosystem on the

planet. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service needs to crack down on fishing quotas in
order to keep overfishing from ruining ecosystems, draining money from the economy, and from

getting worse.
 Works Cited

Fahrenthold, David A. "Unpopular, Unfamiliar Fish Species Suffer From Become Seafood." ​The

Washington Post​ [Washington], 31 July 2009. ​The Washington Post​,

www.washingtonpost.com. Accessed 27 Mar. 2019.

Fletcher, Christine. "Overfishing 101: Why Ending Overfishing Pays Off in the Long Run." ​Pew

Charitable Trust​, 23 May 2011, www.pewtrusts.org. Accessed 28 Mar. 2019. T

Guénette, Sylvie, et al., editors. ​Fisheries Impacts on North Atlantic Ecosystems: Models and

Analyses​. Report no. Vol 9 Num 4, Vancouver, The Fisheries Centre, University of

British Columbia, 2001. ​University of British Columbia Library.​ Accessed 28 Mar. 2019.

"National Debate Topic 2003-04: Marine Resources: Resolved: That the federal government

should establish an ocean policy substantially increasing protection of marine natural

resources." ​Facts on File: Issues and Controversies,​ Infobase, 29 Aug. 2003,

icof.infobaselearning.com. Accessed 27 Mar. 2019.

Office of Science and Technology. ​Fisheries Economics of the United States, 2015 Fact Sheet​.

NOAA, 29 Sept. 2017. ​National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration​,

www.fisheries.noaa.gov. Accessed 28 Mar. 2019.

Pamela J. Woods, Daniel S. Holland, Guðrún Marteinsdóttir, André E. Punt,

How a catch–quota balancing system can go wrong: an evaluation of the

species quota transformation provisions in the Icelandic multispecies

demersal fishery, ​ICES Journal of Marine Science​, Volume 72, Issue 5, May/

June 2015, Pages 1257–1277, https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsv001

Warner, Kimberly, et al. ​Oceana Study Reveals Seafood Fraud Nationwide​. Oceana, Feb. 2013.

Oceana​, oceana.org. Accessed 28 Mar. 2019.

World Bank. 2017. The Sunken Billions Revisited : Progress and Challenges in Global Marine

Fisheries. Environment and Development;. Washington, DC: World Bank. © World

Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org

Worm, Boris, and Ransom A. Myers. ​Rapid Worldwide Depletion of Predatory Fish

Communities​. ​ResearchGate,​ www.researchgate.net. Accessed 28 Mar. 2019..

WOR 1: 2010​. ​World Ocean Review​, worldoceanreview.com. Accessed 28 Mar. 2019.

 Bibliography

Brummett, Randall. "Troubled waters: ensuring sustainable fishing and healthy oceans." ​The

World Bank​, 10 May 2016, blogs.worldbank.org. Accessed 27 Mar. 2019. This is an

article about how bad the over-fishing problem has gotten in the US. It provided valuable

information on the situation of the worlds oceans and over-fishing as a whole.

Fahrenthold, David A. "Unpopular, Unfamiliar Fish Species Suffer From Become Seafood." ​The

Washington Post​ [Washington], 31 July 2009. ​The Washington Post​,

www.washingtonpost.com. Accessed 27 Mar. 2019. This article is written about

mislabeled fish and how ugly fish got new, more appealing names. This article was

extremely helpful and I used many quotes form it to help support my claims.

Falby, Patrick. "In a Perfect Ocean: The State of Fisheries and Ecosystems in the North Atlantic

Ocean." ​Journal of International Affairs,​ vol. 59, no. 1, 2005, p. 308. ​Global Issues in

Context,​ http://link.galegroup.com. Accessed 27 Mar. 2019. This source is an article

talking about the state of over-fishing at the time of its writing. It was helpful to me in the

early stages of the paper by giving me some context as to how the problem as developed

of the last couple of years.

Fletcher, Christine. "Overfishing 101: Why Ending Overfishing Pays Off in the Long Run." ​Pew

Charitable Trust​, 23 May 2011, www.pewtrusts.org. Accessed 28 Mar. 2019. This was

an article on why ending over-fishing now will benefit our economy in the future. The

source provided me with valuable data that I used in my paper and an argument that

supported my claim.
Guénette, Sylvie, et al., editors. ​Fisheries Impacts on North Atlantic Ecosystems: Models and

Analyses​. Report no. Vol 9 Num 4, Vancouver, The Fisheries Centre, University of

British Columbia, 2001. ​University of British Columbia Library.​ Accessed 28 Mar. 2019.

This source is a research report on the state of fisheries in the North Atlantic. This source

was an amazing help to me in understanding over-fishing and finding research to back up

my claims.

"National Debate Topic 2003-04: Marine Resources: Resolved: That the federal government

should establish an ocean policy substantially increasing protection of marine natural

resources." ​Facts on File: Issues and Controversies,​ Infobase, 29 Aug. 2003,

icof.infobaselearning.com. Accessed 27 Mar. 2019. This source is an article about the

debate topic on how to handle over-fishing in the United States and the world. It has been

especially helpful because it helped guide my argument and also gave supporting facts

for many of the arguments I am making in my paper.

Office of Science and Technology. ​Fisheries Economics of the United States, 2015 Fact Sheet​.

NOAA, 29 Sept. 2017. ​National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,​

www.fisheries.noaa.gov. Accessed 28 Mar. 2019. This source is a research report on the

state of the oceans in 2015. It was helpful for background research and for learning what

NOAA's numbers had to say on the issue of over-fishing.

Pamela J. Woods, Daniel S. Holland, Guðrún Marteinsdóttir, André E. Punt,

How a catch–quota balancing system can go wrong: an evaluation of the

species quota transformation provisions in the Icelandic multispecies

demersal fishery, ICES Journal of Marine Science, Volume 72, Issue 5, May/
 June 2015, Pages 1257–1277, ​https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsv001​This was an article

about how the quota system as a method of countering overfishing has many flaws. It

was a valuable look into the other side of the overfishing debate, and that knowledge

helped me strengthen my arguments in this paper.

Warner, Kimberly, et al. ​Oceana Study Reveals Seafood Fraud Nationwide​. Oceana, Feb. 2013.

Oceana​, oceana.org. Accessed 28 Mar. 2019. This was a research report detailing the

extent of over-fishing's impact on restaurants. The source provided me with many quotes

and evidence that I used to support my arguments and thesis.

World Bank. 2017. The Sunken Billions Revisited : Progress and Challenges in Global Marine

Fisheries. Environment and Development;. Washington, DC: World Bank. © World

Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org This was a book/report detailing how

over-fishing has impacted the ocean and the United States economy. It was really helpful

for finding quotes to support my thesis and for gaining important background on the

issue.

Worm, Boris, and Ransom A. Myers. ​Rapid Worldwide Depletion of Predatory Fish

Communities​. ​ResearchGate,​ www.researchgate.net. Accessed 28 Mar. 2019. This source

is a report detailing the current state of many predatory fish species. It gave me valuable

information that I used to help support my arguments as well as providing graphics which

I also used for information and citation.

WOR 1: 2010​. ​World Ocean Review​, worldoceanreview.com. Accessed 28 Mar. 2019. This

source is a compilation of data from various sources detailing the state of the world
oceans. This source provided valuable knowledge on how the oceans are doing and it was

particularly helpful during the early research phase of the paper.