The Environmental Cost of Fishing - a Comparison to the Alternatives

The environmental impacts of fishing have received considerable attention in the media and many NGOs have conducted campaigns to have retailers not sell species that they feel have too high an environmental cost.  The most common environmental costs of fishing are reduced abundance of target species,  impacts on non target species as by-catch and modification of sea floor by trawling and dredging.  Capture fisheries currently provide 20% of worlds animal protein production, and in many poor countries that proportion is much higher.  If we compare the environmental costs of capture fisheries, to the alternative forms of producing animal protein, we find that capture fisheries, on average per unit of food produced, have lower greenhouse gas production, lower use of freshwater, lower use of fertilizer, lower use of pesticides, lower use of antibiotics.  Unlike agriculture, sustainably managed fisheries maintain the basic structure and function of natural ecosystems while providing a major source of the human food supply.  Consumer certification is currently an important topic in the marketplace and many NGOs argue that the bar is set too low by groups such as the Marine Stewardship Council.  If we compare the relative environmental costs of alternative forms of food production, the standard set for seafood certification is far higher than for agriculture.