Mauka to Makai
A science blog for the massesArchive for May, 2009
Overfishing Simplified…Then Complexified
Overeating…overeager…overactive bladder—words that start with “over” rarely describe positive things. Overfishing is no exception.
The concept of overfishing is simple. It’s fishing, overdone. When we remove fish from a population at a faster rate than the population can reproduce, we’re overfishing. Some fish are easier to overfish than others. Late bloomers like orange roughy—which become sexually mature somewhere between 20 and 32 years of age and can live to be 130—make overfishing a cinch. Orange roughy became a dinner plate celebrity in the 1980s. Demand for the deep-sea fish skyrocketed so fishing pressure grew and grew and grew. But the fish couldn’t keep up with their growing popularity and the population tanked.
Other fish, like Atlantic herring, are reproductive rockstars. These fish mature quickly, produce lots of offspring and die relatively young. As a result of what some would call a rather wanton lifestyle, Atlantic herring are less likely to be overfished. Sadly, even rockstars can be overfished with enough effort. Atlantic cod make lots of babies (quickly), but more than four centuries of hard-core fishing finally left their populations in shambles.
Obviously, overfishing is bad news for the overfished fish, but it also does a doozie on the entire ecosystem, turning a “situation normal” into one big SNAFU.
Take the Cape Gannets’ situation, for instance. Cape Gannets are big-ass seabirds that nest on islands off the coasts of Namibia and South Africa. (They’re related to boobies, FYI*.) Normally, the gannets and the pelicans that share their turf feast on the anchovies and sardines found in the surrounding super-productive coastal waters. Alas, the gannets and pelicans weren’t the only ones who knew about the abundance of anchovies and sardines in these waters. People fished and fished and fished until the stocks were overfished, bringing us to the current “AFU” conditions. Now, some Cape Gannets are flying up to 450 kilometers a day to get food and pelicans are eating Cape Gannet chicks. Truly AFU.
While returning from a 450 kilometer foraging trek only to discover that your neighbor ate your chick would truly suck, Cape Gannets aren’t the only species suffering from the side effects of overfishing. In fact, the overfishing of sharks has caused an ocean-wide SNAFU.
Sharks eat skates and rays, but with fewer sharks around, the populations of skates and rays are booming. While that’s good news for the skates and rays, it’s bad news for their food—and the rest of the ocean. Cownose rays eat bivalves like scallops and clams. Bivalves are the ocean’s filters so—thanks to the depletion of sharks that’s led to an overpopulation of rays who have eaten all the bivalves—the ocean’s water quality is suffering. And juvenile fish now have fewer places to hide since the cownose rays destroy seagrass beds in their search for bivalves.
Around Caribbean coral reefs, the absence of sharks has made room for a new king: the grouper. Groupers eat herbivorous fish who eat algae. Without a cleaning crew to keep it in check, algae thrive and outcompete coral. Without coral, there’s no coral reef and without a coral reef, there’s nowhere for little coral reef fish to hide. Again, truly AFU.
Still, there’s hope that we can return to situation normal by making the switch from overfished seafood to sustainable seafood. To find out which fish is which, check out these guides:
Blue Ocean Institute Seafood Guide
Environmental Defense Fund’s Seafood Selector
*The “Y” in FYI refers to those of you who can’t help smiling whenever you read the word “booby.”
Bitch
Dear Mauka to Makai readers,
We know you’ve become accustomed to our predictably prompt posts. (HA!) Well, anyway, it’s been a little over a week since our last post and we’re feeling guilty. We haven’t abandoned you. We’ve just been busy. Of course, that’s no excuse for denying you the fun science writing you’ve come to expect so, to help you bide your time until our next post (which will be up by the end of the week, we promise), we direct you to this brilliant letter written by Dr. Pascale Lane as part of Isis the Scientist’s “Letters to Our Daughters” project. Enjoy!
Cotton-top Tamarins
Some species end up with an endangered label as a result of competition with another species or their own fondness for kinky sex. For other species, endangered-ness is absolutely, positively human-induced.
Meet the cotton-top tamarin—a squirrel-sized Albert Einstein-ish primate found in the forests of Colombia. (No offense intended to Einstein—the cotton-top tamarin is adorable.)*
In the 1960s and ‘70s, 20,000 to 30,000 cotton-top tamarins were removed from the wild and shipped to the United States for biomedical research. (The fuzzy little guys have a tendency to develop colon cancer, making them ideal subjects for medical research.) The removal of all of those tamarins obviously took a pretty big chunk out of the cotton-top population, but then humans started tearing down the forests, taking the habitat right out from under the tamarins and leaving them with nowhere to live. A 1978 study estimated that 75% of the cotton-top tamarins’ original forest habitat had already been cleared for agricultural uses.
Thanks to this human handiwork (the habitat destruction and removals for research, plus an ongoing illegal pet trade), the number of cotton-top tamarins in the wild has dropped 80% over the last 18 years. The IUCN—which lists the species as critically endangered—estimates that there are now just 6,000 cotton-top tamarins left in the wild. And of those, only 2,000 are mature individuals. (That means only 2,000 cotton-top tamarins currently have the potential to produce baby cotton-top tamarins.)
So you see, we clearly f***ed things up for the cotton-top tamarin. Now, the question is: can we undo what we did? Well, no. There’s no “undo” button in life. But, by protecting the remaining 6,000 cotton-top tamarins, perhaps we can give the fuzzy little Einsteins a fighting chance.
The method: Community-based conservation, an approach in which local communities become part of the solution. Community-based conservation efforts have been successful all over the world, especially in instances where the community IS the problem.
For the cotton-top tamarin, conservation efforts must focus on the primate’s habitat (exporting cotton-tops has been illegal since 1974). But how do you get a community that’s destroying an animal’s habitat to protect it? Simple. Give the residents another source of income so they don’t have to destroy that habitat to survive. This is exactly what happened in Los Limites, Colombia.
Inspired by the cotton-top tamarins and surrounded by a whole lotta trash, the women of Los Limites began making Eco-Mochilas. (Since there’s no formal trash collection in the village, plastic bags were scattered throughout Los Limites and the surrounding cotton-top tamarin-inhabited forest.) Now, villagers collect plastic bags from the forest and throughout the village and deliver them to the Asoartesanas (the women who make the bags). The Asoartesanas cut the plastic bags into strips and crochet the strips together to create a tote bag or purse (an Eco-Mochila). Making Eco-Mochilas doesn’t just clean up the cotton-tops’ habitat. Sales of the bags support cotton-top conservation efforts and provide villagers with a source of income that doesn’t destroy the forest.
*Cotton-tops play a critical role in their forest habitat. They are super poopers (a.k.a. seed dispersers) who can “ingest and void” (translation: swallow and poop) larger seeds than much larger primates like baboons and chimpanzees. After passing through the cotton-top’s digestive system, seeds show higher germination success than those that haven’t been pre-processed by the tamarins.


