A simple first step would be a global ban on bottom trawling. No exceptions at all.
It's like if you harvested deer by dragging chain saw wire and tumbling grapples through a forest between two giant bulldozers, killing every other living thing in between. Most bottom trawling wouldn't happen without subsidies and tax breaks on fuel.
They wouldn’t care if they wanted to do it. Read that article about the Soviets slaughtering huge numbers of whales for no reason and misreporting the numbers to the international community. Whistle blowers eventually told the world so that the science would make sense, that’s how many whales were just missing.
It seems privateers would be a great solution here. Sovereign nations can grant licenses to people to seize and sell illegal fishing vessels in their territorial water, even is the state doesn't have the resources to seize the ships themselves.
I do not think this is very promising because the Chinese would have a legal and moral right to respond with armed force against the privateers and their host country. I do not think any countries, even the United States, are prepared to do that over fishing rights.
Would China actually have a legal right to respond with armed force against, say, Chile if Chile seized Chinese vessels illegally fishing in Chile's territorial waters? That doesn't seem likely to me. Countries have a right to enforce their laws in their territory. It seems to me that a military response would constitute an act of war by China.
Of course, China might well respond forcefully in other ways.
That would certainly apply to Chilean law-enforcement in Chilean territorial waters and I think exclusive economic zone.
I am not confident that Chile can subcontract that out to private parties. In particular, if a private ship comes up to your fishing boat and tries to board you, I think you have a good claim to use force to repel them. And to ask your navy for assistance in doing so.
A navy entering another nation's territorial waters to repel that nation's authorized representatives seems like an act of war to me. It definitely wouldn't qualify as Innocent Passage.
However, pretty much every western nation is a signatory to the 1856 Declaration of Paris, in which they formally abolished privateering, so they'd probably have to use a different mechanism. Perhaps they could deputize private individuals as law enforcement.
We are going to go to war with China sooner or later. Get a working large scale Ballistic Missile Defense system, then provoke a war. As part of the surrender terms, require them to stop fishing. We can also destroy their fishing fleet.
The ongoing PRC-Philippines conflict in the South China Sea can provide a picture of how these situations play out. I agree that deputizing privateers and granting them the catch as payment would be a good place to start.
Today's article, "China is killing the fish," was courageous, high-caliber journalism. Not too long ago, piracy on the seas was common. This is similar. Governments of the world do have a responsibility outside their sovereign borders. After all, this Earth is our common home, and it should be a collective concern to sustain its health for future generations.
Quibble in the first part: the ozone layer CFCs/HFCs seems like a really bad example there. The Montreal Protocol was massively successful and required substantial international cooperation. It’s not like investments in HFCs which eventually made them cheaper happened idiosyncratically.
Very interesting and valuable article. Lots of work is evident. Surprising to me was so much fishing off the Latin Am coasts. Is this fishing being done mostly by LA citizens or by citizens of China or other countries?
This is important and well-known to those of us who follow such issues.
It's even worse than you think. China wants to harvest krill from the Antarctic. Krill are the foundation of the marine food chain. Allowing this will kill off many or most marine animals.
That little bunny picture is an apt illustration for this blog, precisely because you worry so much. Any chance of leavening the bad news with a story about a developing country whose economy is doing well?
Appears that Japan has improved its performance on biodiversity. Is it taking less fish mass per person? It does seem to be protecting its forests more.
A simple first step would be a global ban on bottom trawling. No exceptions at all.
It's like if you harvested deer by dragging chain saw wire and tumbling grapples through a forest between two giant bulldozers, killing every other living thing in between. Most bottom trawling wouldn't happen without subsidies and tax breaks on fuel.
They wouldn’t care if they wanted to do it. Read that article about the Soviets slaughtering huge numbers of whales for no reason and misreporting the numbers to the international community. Whistle blowers eventually told the world so that the science would make sense, that’s how many whales were just missing.
The Most Senseless Environmental Crime of the 20th Century - Pacific Standard https://psmag.com/social-justice/the-senseless-environment-crime-of-the-20th-century-russia-whaling-67774/#:~:text=The%20Soviet%20whale%20slaughter%20followed,real%20demand%20for%20whale%20products.
It seems privateers would be a great solution here. Sovereign nations can grant licenses to people to seize and sell illegal fishing vessels in their territorial water, even is the state doesn't have the resources to seize the ships themselves.
Privateering is IIUC now banned under customary international law.
I do not think this is very promising because the Chinese would have a legal and moral right to respond with armed force against the privateers and their host country. I do not think any countries, even the United States, are prepared to do that over fishing rights.
Would China actually have a legal right to respond with armed force against, say, Chile if Chile seized Chinese vessels illegally fishing in Chile's territorial waters? That doesn't seem likely to me. Countries have a right to enforce their laws in their territory. It seems to me that a military response would constitute an act of war by China.
Of course, China might well respond forcefully in other ways.
That would certainly apply to Chilean law-enforcement in Chilean territorial waters and I think exclusive economic zone.
I am not confident that Chile can subcontract that out to private parties. In particular, if a private ship comes up to your fishing boat and tries to board you, I think you have a good claim to use force to repel them. And to ask your navy for assistance in doing so.
A navy entering another nation's territorial waters to repel that nation's authorized representatives seems like an act of war to me. It definitely wouldn't qualify as Innocent Passage.
However, pretty much every western nation is a signatory to the 1856 Declaration of Paris, in which they formally abolished privateering, so they'd probably have to use a different mechanism. Perhaps they could deputize private individuals as law enforcement.
We are going to go to war with China sooner or later. Get a working large scale Ballistic Missile Defense system, then provoke a war. As part of the surrender terms, require them to stop fishing. We can also destroy their fishing fleet.
They would have neither. If you disarm a robber that breaks into your house, you don't have the "legal and moral right" to do anything to retaliate.
If you let them get away with this crap, it will escalate. Appeasement doesn't work.
The ongoing PRC-Philippines conflict in the South China Sea can provide a picture of how these situations play out. I agree that deputizing privateers and granting them the catch as payment would be a good place to start.
Noah, I work with WHOI .... this is a massive problem...thanks for highlighting.
Today's article, "China is killing the fish," was courageous, high-caliber journalism. Not too long ago, piracy on the seas was common. This is similar. Governments of the world do have a responsibility outside their sovereign borders. After all, this Earth is our common home, and it should be a collective concern to sustain its health for future generations.
Thanks for raising awareness to this issue.
Quibble in the first part: the ozone layer CFCs/HFCs seems like a really bad example there. The Montreal Protocol was massively successful and required substantial international cooperation. It’s not like investments in HFCs which eventually made them cheaper happened idiosyncratically.
Very interesting and valuable article. Lots of work is evident. Surprising to me was so much fishing off the Latin Am coasts. Is this fishing being done mostly by LA citizens or by citizens of China or other countries?
This is important and well-known to those of us who follow such issues.
It's even worse than you think. China wants to harvest krill from the Antarctic. Krill are the foundation of the marine food chain. Allowing this will kill off many or most marine animals.
That little bunny picture is an apt illustration for this blog, precisely because you worry so much. Any chance of leavening the bad news with a story about a developing country whose economy is doing well?
I wonder how the current US administration's "Donroe Doctine" might apply here.
Appears that Japan has improved its performance on biodiversity. Is it taking less fish mass per person? It does seem to be protecting its forests more.