Is it time to stop having fish with our chips?
We’ve stopped using plastic straws and throwaway cups to protect the oceans, but is that enough? best investigates…
Thanks to the ‘David Attenborough effect’, thousands of people have understood the detrimental impact singleuse plastic has on oceans and the millions of species living within them. With unforgettable images of a turtle caught in a plastic sack and an albatross chick killed by ingesting a plastic toothpick, since the 2017 premiere of Blue Planet II, we all committed to reusable cups and saying no to plastic straws.
But is that enough?
Are throwaway coffee lids a mere drop in the ocean, while a far bigger problem lurks beneath? According to controversial Netflix documentary
Seaspiracy, the global fishing industry is wreaking havoc on marine life. The documentary claims ‘ghost’ fishing nets – nets left or lost at sea – contribute more to the Great Pacific Garbage Patch than any other plastic, accounting for 46 per cent of the floating plastic island.
As environmentalist George Monbiot explains in Seaspiracy, these nets are dangerous because they are designed to kill.
And kill they do, long after they’ve served their purpose, as sea animals become entangled, unable to breathe or break free.
We imagine a single fisherman bobbing out to sea in a little boat, but some believe fishing has grown in scale to something Jonathan Safran Foer describes in his book, Eating Animals, as a war we’ve raged on the oceans to pillage its depths.
‘Once the picture of industrial fishing is filled in – the 1.4 billion hooks deployed annually on long lines, the 1,200 nets, each one 30 miles in length, used by only one fleet to catch only one species, the ability of a single vessel to haul in 50 tons of sea animals in a few minutes – it becomes easier to think of contemporary fishers as factory farmers,’ Foer states.
Seaspiracy has certainly been controversial, with some marine biologists hitting back and accusing British filmmaker Ali Tabrizi of inaccuracies.
During the 90-minute film, experts are called to explore the ‘factory farmers of the sea’. They conclude that while trawling for their intended haul, other species are unintentionally swept up in the nets. This bycatch poses a huge danger to the delicate ecosystem of the oceans. For every fillet of fish on our plates, turtles, dolphins and whales could’ve lost their lives.
The documentary suggests 40 per cent of global fishing is bycatch, thrown back into the ocean but rarely surviving the trauma and oxygen starvation.
The conclusion is that by exploiting the oceans, we are declaring a war where if we win, we lose. As one environmentalist interviewed in the film claims, if we continue to fish on such a large scale, we will lose the oceans.
We know we can’t live without trees, which absorb carbon, release oxygen and help mitigate the climate crisis. But healthy ocean waters, animals and habitats isolate carbon dioxide from the atmosphere at rates up to four times higher than forests. We cannot survive without oceans.
Not all industrial fishing happens deep at sea, though. Fish farms – which now account for half of our seafood – are also criticised in the film, with claims that they have led to pollution, disease and sea lice infestations.
Farmed salmon have colourants added to their feed to produce the pink hue associated with a healthy fillet, which was enough of a shock to put off Lucy Sambrook, 30, a PR consultant from London.
‘Salmon was my favourite meal,’ Lucy says. ‘I’d eat a fillet three times a week, but it made me feel sick seeing what was happening on fish farms. For my first food shop after watching Seaspiracy, I went vegetarian for the first time.’
Lucy says: ‘I’ve been led to believe to be pescetarian is the right thing to do. But the way they trawl seabeds, they’re deforesting the ocean worse than land forests.’
Because, according to Seaspiracy, looking for reassurance from a sustainability label on the packaging may be a misleading guarantee.
If we cannot be 100 per cent sure that the fish we eat truly is sustainable, is it best to boycott? While that might be an easy ethical move, what about nutritional value? Fish has long been heralded as the healthy choice. Dr Gemma Newman, author of The Plant Power Doctor, says: ‘A lot of people think they need fish for omega-3 fatty acids.
‘Fortunately, you can get these directly from algae oil supplements, as algae is where fish get them from too. This has the advantage of being a readymade source of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids and free of environmental pollutants.’
There are lots of non-fish sources of short-chain omega-3 fatty acids too, such as walnuts, flax, chia and hemp seeds.
‘They’re great for brain and heart health too,’ Dr Newman says.
Advances in the production of plant-based alternatives means there are now products available which mimic tuna, salmon and fish fingers. Banana blossom, the fleshy flower of a banana fruit cluster, uncannily resembles the flaky taste and texture of white fish.
Backlash to Seaspiracy comes from some of the environmental groups criticised within it, while the general public are wondering what to believe.
The Humane League UK campaigns to end the abuse of all animals raised for food, and managing director Vicky Bond hopes Seaspiracy highlights the urgent need for fish to be afforded the same legal protections as farmed animals.
‘ We want to see the government recognise that the fishing industry needs the same regulations and legislation as land animal agriculture,’ Vicky says.
‘Fish farms are marketed as an alternative to depleting wild stock but they cause pollution and disease, with salmon swimming in circles. It’s not natural or sustainable.’
The environmental problems the human race have caused, and face, can feel too catastrophic, but is one of the answers to dump fish with our chips?
‘They are deforesting the ocean worse than land forests’