Reliability of research on fishing declines questioned by U of Wresearchers

GHN News Editor - How
reliable is the present research on the status of fishing and the
balance in ecosystems in the ocean relative to fish?  New science
studies tell us that half of it may be faulty.


In
1998 a landmark study was done looking at how various fish along the
food chain were dropping off in supply because of certain fish that
don't respond well to various climate conditions.  How different
predators responded was said to be affected by these ecological changes.

Scientists
tell us that conclusions made about how we are "fishing down the food
chain" is considerably different, given new information and evaluations
of organisms.  S;o the 1998 research on the health of world fisheries is
faulty given the information presently found. 

The
chief author of this new research Trevor Branch points out that
following the declines in the 1970's of the average trophic levels of
fish being caught, there has been distinct changes, with catches
actually increasing since the mid 1980's that include even the
high-tropic predadtors such as blue thing, bigeye tun, and skipjack
tuna.

"Globally
we're catching more of just about everything," Branch said. "Therefore
relying on changes in the average trophic level of fish being caught
won't tell us when fishing is sustainable or if it is leading to
collapse." That's because when harvests of everything increase about
equally, the average trophic level of what is caught remains steady. The
same is true if everything is overfished to collapse. Both scenarios
were modeled as part of the Nature analysis."


Predicting
the fishing capacity of the oceans, and the rise and fall of systems,
is a difficult process with changes made according to new information
discovered, so that what was learned in 1998, and even today, may change

with increased research.