Stripping the Seas

How humans have ‘harvested’ the oceans to emptiness.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


One thing that humans are very proficient at is killing. Since man started hunting in boats, we have been killing everything we could catch from the world’s oceans. We’ve killed for food, ornament, fertilizer, and fuel. We kill by accident (the term commercial fisheries use is “bycatch”), out of carelessness, and frequently for the sheer hell of it.

For most of our history, given the vastness of the oceans and the seemingly unlimited life therein, we couldn’t impact most species of fish, whales, turtles, seals, and seabirds. Now, though, as Richard Ellis bluntly argues in this important and aptly named book, we have the resources and the technological wherewithal to so reduce so many species of ocean life that the ecological consequences are incalculable.

By continuing to “harvest” sea life as if it were boundless, we have nearly finished off the fisheries of cod, sardines, and anchovies, and are fast working our way through the remaining tuna, swordfish, large sharks, Chilean sea bass, and Atlantic salmon. How is this possible? It’s as simple as demand outpacing supply. “A million vessels now fish the world’s oceans,” Ellis writes, “twice as many as there were 25 years ago.”

This is not an easy book. Ellis is fond of facts and numbers, and with them he’s fashioned a nigh-overwhelming elegy for the victims of our gill nets and drift nets, factory fishing ships, explosive harpoons, longlines, trawlers, and fish-spotting aircraft — not to mention our collective shortsightedness.

Among the obstacles to halting this enormous, long-running tragedy: Powerful economic interests skew the policies of such regulatory bodies as the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service, while much of the overfishing takes place in international waters where no one country or organization can manage what’s left of the “resources.”

Is there any hope? Maybe not much, but consider that the depleted species themselves are resilient and, given half a chance, can and do rebound, albeit slowly. Ellis notes that marine reserves — “no-fish” zones — have proved effective and should be established on a larger scale. Still, time is short, and the oceans’ precious biodiversity is already damaged. As Pogo put it and Ellis would agree, the enemy is us.

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate