The Other Side of Krill Oil

It’s articles like this that really grind our proverbial gears, here at ASOC. The piece lists the major possibilities of krill, from its benefits, to human health, to a near promise of fortune for any would-be investor in the relatively new industry. Where is the downside of krill oil? Nowhere in the article is there a single mention of the devastating environmental and ecosystem impact of harvesting krill.

The biggest problems with the krill fishery are that a)whales, penguins, seals and other species are hugely or almost totally reliant on krill as a food-source; and b) there is too much uncertainty as to the abundance of krill. We also don't know how climate change and ice-melt will influence krill populations. It’s not difficult to find scientific papers that show how the movement of various penguin populations relates directly with the movement of krill blooms.

To responsibly harvest krill for human consumption, we need to first undertake krill biomass surveys. This will allow us to attain a more confident estimate of how much krill is out there and thus how much we can sustainably extract with minimal ecosystem impact.

As the krill industry grows we cannot examine it myopically. That is, we must not only consider the immediate health and possible financial benefits but also the future ecosystem impacts. Until we gage the impact of wildlife and climate change on krill for the present and into the future, we cannot responsibly add the burden of industrial krill harvesting on this vital species.

The Ups and Downs of Krill

A story released this week notes that there was an unusual krill bonanza in the West Antarctic Peninsula area in 2009, leading to (naturally) a sharp increase in the number of humpback whales usually seen in the area. The region where the whales were feeding usually has a lot more sea ice at the time of year scientists studied the krill and their whale groupies, but since the Peninsula is getting warmer, there wasn't as much sea ice as usual. That means that whales could access the area and feed on krill normally covered by sea ice. Does this mean warming is good for whales? Unfortunately, no:

"The lack of sea ice is good news for the whales in the short term, providing them with all-you-can-eat feasts as the krill migrate vertically toward the bay's surface each night. But it is bad news in the long term for both species, and for everything else in the Southern Ocean that depends on krill," says Ari S. Friedlaender, co-principal investigator on the project and a research scientist at Duke.

Another bonus, according to Rodolfo Werner (who works with Pew on the Antarctic Krill Conservation Project, which ASOC also works on) is that researchers were able to gather information on how much krill the whales were eating. Information of this kind is sorely needed to regulate krill fishing in a way that protects whales, seals, penguins, and other krill predators.

Enjoy the good eating while you can, whales! We humans are busily working on making sure the climate keeps heating up.

A New Explanation for Decreasing Penguin Populations

The Lenfest Ocean Program’s Research series has recently released a study which reexamines changes in Penguin populations. While previous studies showed how changes in ice melt have influenced shifts in penguin populations, this study looks at how penguin populations may also be influenced by the availability of their primary prey – krill. The combination of climate change, increased human fishing and rival krill predators significantly influence krill’s availability. Some studies show that on account of this combination of factors the southern ocean’s krill populations have decreased by nearly 80% since the turn of the 20th century. Krill being the penguins’ primary food source, it is necessary to study the link between the two species, in order to better predict the future of Antarctic penguin populations.

The study uses over thirty years of data, focusing on populations of both Adelie and Chinstrap penguin species. The two penguin species have declined by more than 50% in the South Shetland Islands region, over the course of the study. The study suggests that penguin populations more closely track patterns in krill abundance over time. Penguin populations are likely to continue their decline, so long as climate change and krill populations continue their course of change.

This is most alarming for Chinstrap penguins, which breed almost exclusively around the South Shetland Islands. Because they have such a limited range, the combination of diminishing ice due to climate change, and decreasing krill populations in the South Shetlands is especially concerning to Chinstraps, compared to other penguin species which aggregate in multiple regions.

Though humans are not the only factor that is removing krill from the Southern Ocean ecosystems, how we capture krill is one factor over which people do have some control. This speaks to the importance of creating more Marine Protected Areas (MPA) around the Antarctic. While it was a victory to declare the the Ross Sea an MPA, it is necessary that there be more. With more MPAs especially in areas of great krill aggregation, there would also be greater penguin protection.

Our first NSFW post

That is, if you think you might get in trouble for watching animations of krill mating at work. Otherwise, it's probably just fine. But in any case, the Australian Antarctic Division (AAD) has shot some video showing krill mating at greater depths than scientists thought they would. Unfortunately I can't embed the videos directly.

The Australian scientists think this information might have implications for the management of the krill fishery. Dr. So Kawaguchi of the AAD also noted:

“After trawling through hours of video we noticed in one segment, filmed at 507 metres depth, a frenzied twirling of three krill, which turned out to be two males pursing one female,” he said.

“The whole mating ritual only lasted 12 seconds and had five distinct phases which we’ve labeled the ‘chase’, ‘probe’, ‘embrace’, ‘flex’ and ‘push’.”

Who knew krill were so naughty?

US Celebrates 25 years of Antarctic Marine Research

The US' Southwest Fisheries Research Center is celebrating 25 years of researching krill, whales, and everything in between. It takes a lot of hard work to obtain data on Antarctic marine species - months at sea, long hours - but the time invested results in vital information that can help policymakers manage the Southern Ocean. As a side bonus, however, you might get to see an albatross skimming along the ocean surface, or whales spyhopping and breaching. And given the remoteness of the Antarctic, I imagine that scientists get the added thrill of feeling like explorers in uncharted territory. Congratulations to the Southwest Fisheries Research Center and all the government-sponsored research programs that have helped us understand the Southern Ocean better.

Krill: 1 species, 2 enemies

About 90 scientists and support staff set sail on the Aurora Australis, out of Hobart, Australia last week. Their ship will be dragging a small device that traps plankton. Specifically the group is interested in krill, which are at the base of - and one of the most important aspects to - the Antarctic food chain. Dr. Graham Hosie, who is leading the group says that over the years, with similar studies, his group has been finding fewer and fewer krill.

“They are extremely sensitive to their environment. We’ve found that even subtle changes in pattern across the ocean with the oceanography, natural patterns, the plankton can respond very abruptly in composition.

“So we are using the plankton as an indicator of ocean health.

“And because the are the foundation of the system, if they’re changing, we then look to see if there’s any flow-on effect through the rest of the ecosystem.”

This coincides well with a recent statement put out by the Pew Environment Group. Their Antarctic Krill Conservation Project (AKCP) is urging the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) parties at their upcoming meeting to require significantly increased scientific observation of the fishery. This comes at a time when krill fishing is at an all time high, having doubled in the last three years alone and showing no sign of slowing down.

Pew is calling on the CCAMLR parties to adopt precautionary measures to protect krill and the iconic ocean wildlife that depend on it.

To draw attention to the urgency of the problem, the AKCP created a photo petition website (which we’ve mentioned on the ASOC Facebook page) where people can upload their photos and ask CCAMLR to manage the krill fishery in a way that protects this important and delicate food source. The international photo mosaic has almost 10,000 photographs from individuals around the world who care about better protections for penguins. It will be delivered next week to the CCAMLR delegates when they meet to decide on how to manage the krill fishery.

As Dr. Hosie and his researchers have confirmed, krill are already facing great difficulty in dealing with the changing climate. With krill facing two enemies – climate change and over fishing – it is imperative that there be far greater controls over the krill fishing industry. As Hosie pointed out, krill act as a bellwether for what is to come for the rest of the Antarctic ecosystem. If krill continue to decline because of climate change and overfishing, the same effect will ripple through the bird and whale populations that rely on them so heavily.

MSC's string of bad days continues

Life must be rough over at the headquarters of the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) these days. First the ruckus over Fraser River Sockeye, then ASOC's two objections, then a write-in campaign over the shameful decision to assess wasteful tuna and swordfish fisheries off the coast of Florida, and now two articles in this week's Nature. The articles are pretty significant. One is an opinion piece with six high-profile scientist authors, including ASOC's colleagues Sidney Holt and David Ainley, that blasts the MSC's failings, including my personal favorite, its certification of bottom trawl fisheries. In case you were wondering, bottom trawling is the equivalent of clearcutting the ocean floor, if clearcutting forests also involved plowing up the ground and killing all the animals surrounding the trees.

Yet MSC still wants us to believe that "fisheries are not, as the authors assert, certified before they can demonstrate their sustainability." So what DO you call it when MSC brags that its conditions for a fishery it certified brought high bycatch down? Doesn't that mean that they certified a fishery with high bycatch, something patently unsustainable? It seems the crux of their argument is that "we have standards for sustainability, therefore any fishery that meets them is sustainable." Nope. The piece is saying that your very standards are no good. There's another article about the certification of krill that criticizes the certification of the Antarctic krill harvest. MSC doesn't really provide any new counterarguments to that one either, just reiterating that it doesn't want to discriminate against fish meal producers.

Keep it up, MSC - the more you fail to really engage on these serious issues, the more people are going to make your life miserable. The environmental community would just LOVE it if there were a well-funded organization with rigorous standards that could promote best practices in fisheries. But MSC only qualifies under the well-funded part. It's good that the scientific community is being made aware of its shortcomings.

A Linkage between Right Whale and Krill Declines...

As many are aware, right whales got their name because when whaling was more prevalent they were considered the ‘right’ whales to hunt. Today they encounter a new threat.

The good news: in the southern hemisphere, at least, right whales have shown a serious rebound with population figures as of 1997 estimating as many as 10,000 of these whales.

The bad news: where in 2003 we were only finding a few whales that would mysteriously die, in more recent years we’ve seen figures up in the eighties and nineties, with the majority of these casualties being calves, which may be dying from malnutrition as their blubber was alarmingly thin.

As southern right whales feed in Antarctica the greatest portion of their diet comes from krill. Here it points out that as krill may grow scarcer with global warming so to may southern right whales.

With this in mind we cannot help but revisit the certification of Antarctic krill as a sustainable fishery. The growing number of whale deaths is only one example of the far-reaching effects of a decline in Antarctic krill that would surely dramatically exacerbate with an opening of the fishery.

As we mentioned in prior posts there were blatant holes in the methodology in MSC certification that make their claims questionable – most notably their decision not to classify bottom trawling as a destructive fishing practice. With such an example of obvious turning of blind eye and what is an at best inexact science surrounding the process of determining safe levels of krill to extract, certification for the krill fishery in the Southern Ocean is dangerous.

Right whales are only one example of the spreading effects of krill declines from climate change and human extraction. It will be interesting to see if there are similar trends among the penguin populations and other animals that rely on this base of the Antarctic food chain.

Krill NY Times article

The New York Times has picked up the story about the decision to certify Antarctic krill as sustainable over the objections of ASOC. The story contributes to the growing sense that the Marine Stewardship Council is not as sustainable as it would like to appear. The basic objection many of us have to even considering certifying fisheries for species low on the food chain is that it is risky and has a higher potential to wreak havoc on an ecosystem in case of environmental fluctuations or mistakes in scientific predictions. For many species like krill, the harvest doesn't even feed humans, but feeds farmed fish or is turned into fish oil for nutritional supplements, raising the question of whether it is ethical to put an ecosystem at risk to provide the well-off with salmon or nutraceuticals. Of course, MSC will say these issues are beyond its reach - for its process to be fair, it must certify fisheries that meet its standards without regard to more subjective or philosophical issues such as these. All its independent assessors can do is look at the science (which as you might expect is never 100%) and make a determination.

Too bad the article didn't mention that there are other omissions in MSC methodology that make its claims of sustainability questionable. Such as its decision not to classify bottom trawling as a destructive fishing practice that disqualifies a fishery from certification eligibility. I suppose MSC would argue that bottom trawling, which is like forest clearcutting except much more destructive, isn't completely catastrophic in the sense that you can do it without ruining the ecosystem (although you can also ruin the ecosystem!). And that it's better for bottom trawlers to work towards MSC certification, which would mean that they are at least following some higher standards, than using whatever fishing procedures they want. But then what motivation is there for operators to use the best of best practices or develop alternatives to bottom trawling? MSC needs to realize that if it sticks to "good enough" and "trying hard" as standards they might help shape up a few bad actors but global fishing isn't going to become "sustainable." It's not going to encourage the rethinking of our approach to fisheries and fishing that will be necessary to ensure productive harvests for years to come. If certification is really all about preserving fish stocks and not about helping fishing operators make more money then MSC needs to listen to conservationists instead of dismissing us as a bunch of overly critical fish-huggers.

However, ASOC is pleased to see that Whole Foods has made the decision to pull krill oil from its shelves. Whole Foods is also working with the Blue Ocean Institute and the Monterey Bay Aquarium to label its seafood instead of just relying on MSC labels. Likewise, Wegmans stores have decided not to sell seafood from the Ross Sea, which is the most intact marine ecosystem on the planet. People might say that these decisions are not based on pure science - pure science says there are lots of krill, and only a small bit is being taken. But this approach is inadequate. Take the so-called "krill paradox" that when numbers of baleen whales (krill predators) decline, so do numbers of krill. Turns out that whale excrement has nutrients that encourage phytoplankton growth, which feeds krill, which could explain the connection. So if we humans don't even really understand basic predator-prey relationships like these, are we being smart to make decisions without allowing for the possibility that we could be really, really wrong? Good for these retailers for not caving into the narrower interpretations of sustainability.

Will people care about climate change and overfishing if they harm cute animals?

It's a no-brainer that animals like Antarctic penguins that are dependent on krill, that are in turn dependent on sea ice, won't do all that well in a warmer climate. Some, including the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) would downplay the idea that there krill might become a problem. MSC recently certified the Antarctic krill fishery as sustainable. Throughout the process, the consultants assessing the sustainability of the fishery insisted that the catch was low, because there are thought to be millions of tons of krill, and a very small percentage of that estimated amount was being fished. But ASOC colleague David Ainley explains that there's a big difference between the overall number of krill or other fish and the number that you, Jane and John Q. Penguin, are going to get to eat. Penguins, Dr. Ainley says, need a lot of food. And looking for that food burns even more energy, so it's bad if they waste time going to locations where prey is no longer plentiful due to fishing.

People (most of them, anyway) don't have emotional attachments to krill and the other fish penguins eat. There seem to be few people who don't find penguins at least a little charming. Is it possible that if environmental problems can be shown to hurt innocent penguins who just want to waddle around cutely, people will start demanding better from their leaders?

MSC says Antarctic krill is sustainable

This week, ASOC learned that our objection to the Marine Stewardship Council's certification of Antarctic krill was not upheld by the independent adjudicator. In a blog post on the decision, Casson Trenor points out the inadequacies of the certification process. MSC's guidelines don't consider the ethics or morality of a fishery. For krill, the benefit to society is small. Krill may be used to feed farmed fish, or turned into expensive nutritional supplements. Neither of these is necessarily a good use of resources. By narrowly focusing on fisheries while ignoring their broader context, MSC loses a lot of credibility. Moreover, there really isn't a lot of information that suggests that increased krill harvesting won't harm local populations of predators. When fishers target the very bottom of the food chain, where krill is, they're taking a huge gamble. If their predictions about acceptable catch levels are wrong, the entire ecosystem could be devastated. Is this really what consumers think of when they think of "sustainable"? It's time for MSC to re-evaluate its standards.

Adorable penguins replaced by jellyfish?

The Census on Antarctic Marine Life (CAML), part of the Census on Marine Life (COML), is reporting that Antarctic krill populations are being "decimated" due to climate change. And unfortunately it looks like jellyfish are poised to take over as penguins and other krill predators decline. Jellyfish can better exploit the copepods that are taking over for krill. Huw Griffiths, a participant in CAML, says that he's already seeing jellyfish in the Southern Ocean. Check out a gallery of the amazing animals CAML discovered in the Antarctic.

Not to disrespect jellyfish, which are pretty interesting in their own right, but it would be a shame to lose this unique ecosystem. The CAML has identified many new species that we know barely anything about. So it's not just penguins that might suffer when the Antarctic environment changes. We could be losing out on species that look like aliens from another planet, species that produce compounds that could treat human beings, species whose determined waddling is never anything less than delightful. And in return we'd just get jellyfish.

Surprise, fish oil capsules don't give you immortality

Looks like those much-touted omega-3 fatty acids aren't perfect. While they do provide many health benefits, in the long run, they can also do some damage. According to University of California - Santa Barbara researcher David Valentine, "The brain is absolutely packed full of omega-3s. However, there's also oxygen in the brain, and that's going to cause a reaction. They're going to oxidize. And that gradual oxidation is, in essence, a losing battle against brain damage. After a lifetime, the damage takes its toll." Valentine notes further that "... it's an inevitable catch-22. Human intelligence is derived in part from DHA, but DHA itself is inherently unstable." While Valentine doesn't discourage consumption of fish oil capsules, it's interesting to know that omega-3s are only short-term friends, especially since many humans now live long enough for their oxidation to have an impact.

This research complements the American Heart Association's recommendation that people without coronary heart disease are just fine if they get their omega-3s from food rather than from supplements. Since krill-derived omega-3 supplements are becoming more and more popular, it's good to know that perhaps more of this nutrient isn't necessarily going to have a positive impact. Eat sustainable fatty fish or other omega-3 rich foods and you'll probably get all you need for your brain and your heart. And real food tastes better than a capsule anyway.

South Orkneys Become the Newest Marine Protected Area

News broke yesterday that the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) declared its first Marine Protected Area below the Southe Orkney Islands in the Southern Ocean. With the CCAMLR meeting still fresh on the minds of ASOC campaigners this is an encouraging victory for them and the Antarctic community. It is also a huge step forward in working to conserve the delicate marine ecosystems around Antarctica. This and (hopefully) future MPAs will encourage further scientific investigation of differences between fished and protected areas of the Southern Ocean.

What makes this area especially important is that its unique natural features make it a key habitat for krill, which are both one of the main draws for fishing vessels to the Antarctic and an essential food source for so many of the Antarctic's marine species.

Save the Krill, Save the Penguins

For the past two weeks, ASOC campaigners have been working hard at the annual meeting of the Commission on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living resources (CCAMLR). CCAMLR is the body that manages fisheries in the Southern Ocean, and its management of the krill populations is particularly critical. Krill stocks are declining just as improved technology and a growing market for nutritional supplements are making the species more interesting to fishers. This year, ASOC delegates were urging that the krill catch be divided geographically even though it has not reached the size that CCAMLR previously decided would warrant such a division. The reason the catch needs to be divided further is that local depletions of krill can directly impact krill predators that forage nearby. Making sure that fishing vessels don't all target the same area makes it less likely that penguins, whales and seals will be affected by the catch.

A lot of companies that produce krill oil often note that the size of the krill catch is small compared to the estimated krill population. However, as mentioned local depletions can have a big impact, and as krill populations continue to decline hard choices may have to be made. As in, do penguins deserve life even if it means someone can't purchase a cheap nutritional supplement of dubious effectiveness (the American Heart Association doesn't recommend fish oil supplements for people without heart disease)? I know which one I'd rather have.

It's a bird! It's a plane! It's...a krill SUPERSWARM!

As a "low-trophic level" species, krill get a lot of attention. They're at the base of the food web, so scientists have to know what drives them to be able to understand the rest of the ecosystem. Krill tend to group together in huge swarms, but the swarms very in size, with some so large they are considered superswarms (sounds almost ominous, doesn't it?). Superswarms are bigger and more dense than normal swarms, and are at least 1 km long and 30 m deep. Notice I said at least - some are 10 kilometers long! Superswarms are thought to account for the majority of the entire biomass of krill in the Southern Ocean, meaning that 60-70% of all krill could be represented by 10 or so swarms. A new study by the British Antarctic Survey, reported by the BBC, claims to have discovered some (but not all) of the secrets of the superswarms. Some highlights:

-Superswarms are made up of juvenile krill. Adults form smaller, less dense swarms.

-Superswarms are more likely to form when there is less food.

-Superswarms are more likely to form at night.

The researchers posit that because juveniles need to eat less, the protective benefits of swarming with billions of other krill outweigh the negatives of having more competition for food. More urgently, however, the research points to the need to manage krill fishing cautiously. If most krill are concentrated in just a few swarms, fishing from the largest swarms could have a greater impact on krill populations and krill predators than previously thought - even if catches aren't a large proportion of the estimated overall population. ASOC has been encouraging CCAMLR to subdivide the krill catch among several geographic areas to ensure that harvests are evenly distributed. Hopefully this study will provide more momentum for that effort!

Krill, reproduction, and daylight

The Australian Antarctic Division released the results of research demonstrating that light exposure plays a critical role in determining when krill spawn. During the Antarctic winter (June to September), krill are in darkness, and they are unable to reproduce. A few months after winter ends and light returns, they spawn again. It was previously thought that internal cues govern this process, since some experiments showed that krill kept in total darkness or light had the same reproductive cycle as those that lived under a more natural cycle. But this new research indicates that it is a change in light conditions that governs their reproduction. According to the press release:

The third group of krill experienced one month of the natural Antarctic light cycle, followed by two months of darkness, and nine months of light (the 'light 1' treatment). These krill reached sexual maturity three months earlier than the other groups – observed by changes in their exoskeleton (shell), which they shed as they grow.

'This study has shown that the transition from light to dark to light is important in controlling the timing of spawning under laboratory conditions,' Dr Kawaguchi says.

This kind of research is very important as it adds to our understanding of the krill life cycle. Although krill are the subject of many research projects, we still don't know a lot about them, and the gaps in knowledge may complicate efforts to ensure a balance between commercial fishing and the needs of the Antarctic ecosystem.

Fur Seals and Krill

Fur seals travel a really long way for food, researchers have found. Pregnant fur seals were found to travel 1300 kilometers from the Southern Indian Ocean to the Southern Ocean, even during the Antarctic winter. Researchers suggest that the seals make the journey because they cannot tolerate the cold temperatures in the Southern Ocean for long periods of, but the abundance of krill makes the journey worthwhile.

The article notes that the research indicated that fur seals were highly dependent on krill, since they undertake such arduous journeys just to reach krill swarms. What could that mean for the fur seals who live near the Aker Biomarine krill fishery in the South Atlantic? The Marine Stewardship Council is preparing to certify this fishery as sustainable, but their public report indicates that fur seals can easily switch to other prey when krill aren't available. Do they know for sure? If researchers are just realizing that some fur seals will travel a long way for krill, can we really say that we understand the extent of seal dependence on krill?

Krill and Ocean Circulation

The Christian Science Monitor reports that scientists believe that krill and jellyfish, among others, could have a large impact on ocean circulation, helping to circulate the more nutrient-packed water from the deep to the ocean surface. Read all about it here. Yet another reason for humans to tread lightly when interfering with ocean ecosystems.

Do you need to take omega-3 supplements?

I often come across press releases from nutrition companies touting the benefits of krill-derived omega-3 fish oil supplements. While this one references a reputable study done by the Harvard school of public health that determined that increased consumption of omega-3s could prevent tens of thousands of deaths every year, it also tries to steer you towards purchasing fish oil supplements. I suppose the Alternative Health Journal is slightly less self-interested than the krill oil supplement manufacturer, but I wanted to inject some reality into the discussion. Namely, that the American Heart Association recommends that healthy people get their omega-3s from food. Supplements are recommended for people who already have heart issues, such as coronary artery disease or high triglycerides. So every time you see something touting the benefits of fish oil supplements, remember, if you're currently healthy, you don't need these supplements to benefit from omega-3s. The AHA recommends consuming fatty fish at least twice a week.

Of course, seafood consumption has its own problems. I suggest downloading the fish guide from either the Blue Ocean Institute or the Monterey Bay Aquarium. Don't, however, take your guidance from the National Fisheries Institute, which is trying to correct all the inaccuracies in the media about sustainable seafood. Their claim that it's not a bad thing for a fishery to be fully exploited would be hilarious if it weren't for the fact that the seafood industry has so much negative influence over fisheries management. They explain that "An under exploited or moderately exploited stock can be a wasteful use of resource, while overexploited or depleted stocks can cause concerns about the future." Yes, because as world population increases, there's nothing that should alarm anyone about the fact that most fish stocks, if not overfished, can't be fished any more without pushing them towards collapse. Nothing at all, given the increasing demand for fish, or the fact that many people around the world depend on fish to provide protein in their diets! The UN's Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) defines fully exploited as "The fishery is operating at or close to an optimal yield level, with no expected room for further expansion." Note that this doesn't mean that fishery management won't increase catch limits, even if scientists determine that this would be risky. Different fisheries have different management, and often industry has a big say in how limits are determined.

Currently, ASOC is working to ensure proper stewardship of Antarctic fish and crustacean stocks. The idea that an underexploited resource is a wasted resource is incredibly dangerous for the Antarctic. Sometimes, it's not even really known what the optimal level of exploitation is, given the uncertainty about how much of a certain species might be needed to be available for other species in the ecosystem, or how climate change might change the situation. Some fish, such as Antarctic toothfish (also known as Chilean Sea Bass), might not be able to sustain more than very low levels of exploitation. Concern from environmentalists isn't part of an evil plot to distort the facts - check out this study published in the prestigious scientific journal Nature for information about the true state of fish stocks. It's not alarmism, it's just reality.