The New documentary Seaspiracy has brought in a lot of attention to what is happening underwater, and If I’m being honest, the documentary is great. I think it nicely encapsulates what goes on in the fishing industry. I also believe that it’s a wakeup call for many people to reconsider their consumer choices. It is in some sense, an indirect invitation to embrace veganism.

Although Seaspiracy is informative, there are a few things that I wish it expanded on. I will mention the things that the documentary nailed, but I will talk about things that are not as publicly discussed; mainly subsistence fishing. As someone that lives in Western Europe, I’m very much disconnected from the farfetched realities that many individuals experience on a daily basis. As such, part of this blog will highlight the discrepancies of our food choices, and their effects on others. But first, let’s talk about the positives of Seaspiracy.

Sentient Beings:

I’ve had people question my decision to abstain from eating fish because they think that they’re not smart or that they don’t feel pain. Truth of the matter is, none of these claims are entirely true. Many people are disconnected from the animals that they consume, and fish are no strangers to this predicament. Most people don’t interact with fish to understand their being, so all they can do is assume. Nonetheless, there is numerous research that shows that fish can feel pain, and have a perception of their sentience. Fish can also feel stressed, which triggers their flight or fight receptors.

Ikejime is a Japanese method of killing fish. If done correctly, it can render the fish unconscious and unaware of its death. Traditional Japanese fishmongers use this method to retain a fish’s “rich flavour”, and show respect to the animal as well. Ikejime is described as being a “humane” way of killing fish, and although I disagree with the terminology, it highlights that fish perceive the world around them.

Understanding Sustainable Fishing

Sustainable fishing pops up a lot in Seaspiracy, which makes it look like a Get Out of Jail Free Card. Meat stakeholders are tackling this exact same issue. They would like to prove to people that “sustainable” livestock farming is achievable on a large scale. However, here are some points to consider:

1. The global population is increasing, with projections estimated over 10 billion by 2050. Trying to maintain a sustainable global food system becomes more difficult when you have more mouths to feed.
2. Resources are finite. Farmers require a lot of water, land and feed to make livestock reach a desirable weight for slaughter.
3. Livestock farming affects the environment. It puts pressure on the air, water and soils, which in the long-run abates the environment’s quality.

Whether livestock farming happens on a farm or in a massive concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO), there are many factors to consider. This is why stakeholders are looking for an alternative–a sustainable way of some sorts. I’ve already written extensively about sustainable livestock farming, so I won’t go into detail here.

Is Sustainable Fishing Achievable?

When considering sustainable fishing, the issue is trickier. The UN proposed 17 goals targeted by 2030 known as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). SDG number 14 seeks to “conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development”. At the moment, it’s extremely hard to find fisheries that are sustainable. The documentary highlights that fisheries are overfishing, and that regulations are hard to follow.

A concept that I’ve seen recently circulating as a defence for sustainable fishing is the maximum sustainable yield (MSY). The concept is straightforward. MSY is the largest yield that can be taken from a growing stock without reducing the overall population. The theory considers that fish stocks are always replenishing and as such, one can fish a certain quantity that doesn’t impede on the overall population growth. In reality, the theory doesn’t consider constraints on reproductive rates when populations are small. Simply put, the theory puts populations at risk, it doesn’t account for spatial variability in productivity and it doesn’t consider bycatch. The model is constantly misused by fisheries, which leads to overfishing and lower stock supply.

The collapse of the Atlantic northwest cod fishery in 1993 is largely due to the overzealousness of fisheries and legislative bodies. To put a long story short, technological advancements such as radar and better ships, drastic increase in trawlers and undermined statistical analyses, led to a gloomy collapse of the cod’s population. Additionally, increased bycatch exacerbated cod population loss, which added further pressures on the ecosystem. Scientists tried to push for the implementation of the model, but to no avail. Estimations indicate that the Atlantic cod population will bounce back by 2030, which is ages from now.

Saying No to Fish

Seaspiracy did a really good job in showing the audience why food choices matter. From the opening scenes in Japan, to discussing ethical food labelings, and even the horrors shown throughout the movie, Seaspiracy put massive efforts at exposing the dark side of the fishing industry. Labels such as “Dolphin Safe” fish, as the documentary highlights, are nothing more than a means to alleviate consumer guilt since they don’t guarantee that dolphins are spared from bycatch.

I think another important bit to note from Seaspiracy is that there seems to be a weak regulating body at sea. The documentary showed that it’s hard for organisations to watch what fisheries are up to since they can bribe and even kill observers. This pretty much makes fishing hard to control because of how far fisheries are from land. This goes back to what was said about sustainable fishing. It’s hard to follow a theory that has potential when it’s inapplicable in reality. Bycatch due to overfishing endangers animals like the sea turtle, which causes further sociopolitical and ecological problems as well.

A final thing to note is how none of the interviewed organisations mentioned reducing fish consumption as a way to alleviate plastic waste. The discussions revolved around plastic waste, especially in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, mentioned that consumers should use less plastic straws, rather than focus on their food choices. This mentality severely impedes any real progress since the proposed remedy is just a smokescreen. Save the environment? Eat more meat. Reduce plastic? Eat more fish. Although it’s much deeper than that, stakeholders won’t argue against their products, even if their personal beliefs say otherwise.

Livelihood Fishing

One thing that I wish Seaspiracy spoke more about is the fact that subsistence fishing is losing grounds to large-scale fisheries. Subsistence fishing means that individual households, which are small-scale and low-tech, are fishing everyday for survival. In short, imagine a person, usually male, out on a small boat fishing for their food. During the documentary, a fisherman was gesturing to the camera crew that he’s hungry, which I found really powerful. In truth, this is the kind of reality for many people around the world that can’t cope with globalisation. International waters are open target for fisheries that outcompete smallholders. This is the epitome of David and Goliath. Multinational fisheries versus individual breadwinners.

Somali Piracy

A textbook example of this dichotomy would be the rise of Somali piracy in recent years. I’m certain that many people are unaware of the intricacies behind this complicated situation. One point of view that’s interesting however, is that piracy in the Horn of Africa occurs because of globalisation. In an article discussing this matter, which is aptly titled as Justa Piratica: the ethics of piracy, international fisheries have a large role to play in fuelling the problem. Part of the issue is that due to Somalia’s inadequate handling of its domestic affairs, the country has become vulnerable to international exploitation. This has led ships to dump waste on Somali shores, and more obviously, take over the country’s fish stock.

As such, desperate fishers started to take up arms and join gangs in order to reclaim back their waters. However, the valiant efforts of fighting against one’s oppressor eventually leads one to choose between good and evil. Some of the pirates understand that they can make more through ransom, and have abandoned their humble beginnings. These same pirates are the ones that engage with foreign forces, and that plaster a nefarious image of the region. Some “pirates” on the other hand are just seeking a better future for their family. Their desperation leads to questionable reactions. If a fisherman can procure the means to continue his livelihood, then his family doesn’t starve. Nonetheless, companies and countries are arming their ships, aggrandising the risk to a better life, and in turn, making life harder on disadvantaged fishermen and their families.

Final Remarks

Although I’m not the most well-versed on this matter, it can’t be denied that the fishing industry is one that operates out of sight. It’s an industry that I believe is least associated with cruelty, because of two things. Firstly, many people don’t realise how vital fish are to the environment and to the seas, and this thinking is usually accompanied with ignorance about the species. Secondly, unlike other industries, the fishing industry is harder to regulate because of its risky nature. Not many people are in the middle of the ocean watching what’s going on, and because of this, the industry is very murky.

Seaspiracy highlights that there is a side to this industry that needs exposing. I personally believe that it did a good job doing so, and I hope that people reconsider their food choices for the better. If the foods that you’re eating cause direct harm to others, to the environment, and ultimately to yourself, then it might be time to think twice about eating them. Critically ask yourself where your food comes from, and seek answers from those responsible. Decide what’s the best option for you, and act accordingly. I hope this short review taught you something, and that it made you question the fishing industry even more. Stay blessed.