A few weeks ago, acclaimed film director James Cameron descended to the deepest known point in the ocean, making him only the third person in history to do so. In an interview after the record-breaking dive, Cameron reminded us that our oceans are truly the last frontier.
We know more about galaxies millions of light-years away than we do about the depths of our own seas.
It is, if anything, a fitting explanation for the destruction we wreak through overfishing in the deep blue, in spite of its importance. The scale of this impeding disaster is overlooked, as other issues are given greater attention by the public at large. Moreover, the inaccessibility and inhospitability of our massive oceans make it easy to forget or to be unaware of how much damage has been done to marine biodiversity, especially to fisheries.
According to the United Nations, fishing is "central to the livelihood and food security of 200 million people" and is a source of protein for 20 percent of the world's population. Yet the global fish supply is collapsing at an alarming rate.
We are on the verge of losing a critical source of food, and we seem to be doing next to nothing about it.
In a paper published in the journal Science, a group led by BrianWorm estimates that a total collapse of all the world's fisheries will happen before 2050.
Already, some populations of larger fish like cod, haddock and tuna have been reduced by up to 95 percent in the last six decades alone. Overfishing is incredibly damaging to the marine ecosystem, as it disrupts the food chain, but it is also just as damaging to the livelihoods of fishers themselves.
As Greenpeace points out, the collapse of cod fisheries off Newfoundland in 1992 led to "the loss of some 40,000 jobs in the industry," and cod stocks in the North Sea and the Baltic Sea are heading down the same path.
At the same time, the collapse in fisheries contrasts with a growing demand for fish and products derived from them.
A joint OECD-FAO outlook expects the trade price of fish per metric ton to increase by a third over the next decade.
Most fishing vessels are enormous sea-faring factories with on-board processing, packing and refrigeration facilities, dragging behind them similarly massive trawling nets.
Instead of trying to fish sustainably, the industry has turned its attention to the Pacific, a vast untapped resource of fish. In other cases, fishermen resort to illegal methods, such as using nets with smaller holes to capture juveniles, which authorities try their best to prevent.
To add insult to injury, the World Bank estimates that this mismanagement costs up to $50 billion per year in lost economic output.
The financial implications of a total collapse of the global fisheries are far greater than we care or want to imagine.
It would be ruinous to the marine ecology and would also contribute to an economic crisis, precipitated by a rush on alternative food sources. We cannot go down that path.
The simplest option, other than not eating fish at all, is to choose fish grown or caught responsibly. Amongst other countries, the United States leads the way in industrial fisheries, so it pays to buy from around here.
Buying local fish is always the best choice. If you must buy fish from afar, look for a label of the Marine Stewardship Council, which sets and checks standards for sustainable fishing. Small steps like these will help stabilize and repopulate fish stocks around the world.
Don't feel that you, on your own, can't do very much. After all, no snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible.
Jean-Paul Honegger is a member of the Class of 2015.