Loss of Coral May Cause Food Supply Crisis
More than half of the tropical coral reefs in the world where governments collect data on fishing levels are being degraded beyond repair, according to a global survey of reef fisheries.
The findings suggest that it would take an additional area of tropical coral four times the size of the Great Barrier Reef - the biggest reef system in the world - to sustain current fishing levels. 
If the commercial exploitation of tropical corals continues at present rates, many reefs will be irreversibly degraded and millions of people will have to look for other sources of food, scientists said. “Millions of people are dependent on coral reef fisheries. We are facing a global crisis among communities which have limited alternative livelihoods or major food sources,” said Katie Newton of the University of East Anglia in Norwich.
“We’re facing a food-security crisis - 30 million people on the planet depend entirely on coral reefs for their income and for their food,” Ms Newton said.
The study found that 55 per cent of the 49 island nations who register their fish catch are fishing unsustainably by taking more fish, mollusks and crustaceans than the reefs are able to replace.
The scientists estimated that the amount of fish being caught on tropical coral reefs is currently 64 per higher than can be reasonably sustained. This means that it would require an additional area of tropical coral amounting to 75,000 sq km - 3.7 times the size of the Great Barrier Reef - to make current fishing levels sustainable, the scientists said.
By 2050, population growth would triple the fishing pressures, yet coral reefs will continue to suffer from other threats, notably pollution and global warming.
The study, published in the online journal Current Biology, suggests that the threat to tropical corals will lead to many inhabited island atolls being abandoned during the 21st century.
Nick Dulvy, of the Center for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture in Lowestoft, said exploitation of coral fisheries would cause social and economic hardship. “Alternative livelihoods will be essential for many of those currently dependent on coral reef fisheries,” he said.
It is estimated that 284,300 sq km of tropical coral exist globally and that about 20 per cent have been irreversibly lost in recent decades. Another 26 per cent is at risk. Small-scale fishing can be sustainable but population growth and the spread of unsustainable methods of fishing - such as the use of dynamite - is damaging many reefs beyond repair.
“Once [large fish] are removed, you get various cascade effects such as a proliferation in sea urchins, which are indiscriminate grazers,” Ms Newton said.
© 2007 Independent News and Media Limited
“…By 2050, population growth would triple the fishing pressures, yet coral reefs will continue to suffer from other threats, notably pollution and global warming…”
This single sentence informs our ecological crisis. It does not matter if you are talking about copper, the fisheries, oil, ability to absorb green house gases, ground water for agriculture, water, etc.. the story in general is the same. We have more and more people being supported by a declining renewable and non renewable resource base.
Why are so few people willing to state these simple facts: that we must halt population growth, decrease our extraction of resources, and share?
That the answer to that question is because it involves a paradigm shift will not halt the ecological facts of life. Until we can face those facts, there can only be increasing violence as we struggle for remaining resources continue the theft from future generations continues.
jon
Connecting the dots: from human behaviors to ecosystem decline
http://StudentsForTheEarth.org
Jon,
You are quite right. As some have been mentioning under another article here, much of the resistance is because big business is currently based on ecologically destructive practices. Also, the corporate powers that be, among others, have succeeded in duping some on the left into thinking that population growth should be a taboo topic. They’ve painted it, for instance, as “us in the First World versus them in the Third World.” In fact, nothing could be further from the truth as many of the most effective approaches to reducing population growth involve empowering women and girls in developing countries through increased educational opportunities and health care. They don’t want us to think about that because more people means more demand for products and more dirt cheap labor to fuel their illusion of endless economic growth — that is, until the economy collapses in the wake of a dying ecosystem.
I tried to catalog some of these approaches in an article on my blog, to show that the draconian measures we’ve been led to associate with reducing population growth are completely unnecessary. I hope people are beginning to see through the political and corporate propaganda to the simple reality of our growing numbers on a finite planet.
Statistics lie and liars use statistics. Numbers only mean so much. Take the U.S. with a relatively small population, it uses 25% of the world’s fossil fuels. A poor person living in India is not going to tax the environment as much as a wealthy US citizen who may have several homes and several vehicles. Birth control definitely improves the lives of women and how well they can manage their families, but try telling that to the right-to-life maniacs… who seem to be only too willing to accept torture, war, capital punishment as part of their schizophrenic worldview.
Siuxrose,
“Take the U.S. with a relatively small population, it uses 25% of the world’s fossil fuels. A poor person living in India is not going to tax the environment as much as a wealthy US citizen who may have several homes and several vehicles.”
This is very true and highlights that we need to keep straight the different factors in the equation. In fact, there is an actual mathematical equation for total consumption. It is, essentially, population size times per capita consumption level.
That is what creates great concern for some about population growth in the US. Each person added here means much more resource consumption than would be the case in a developing country. On the other hand, with developing countries such as India and China rising in their per capita consumption rates and understandably striving for higher levels of consumption, growth of their already large populations has more and more impact. Looking just a bit down the road we really have to attend both to population and consumption.
Siouxrose — Sorry for misspelling your name above.
we have the largest reef between Baja and Panama here in EL SALVADOR and the ARENAZI Bush’s narco biz buddies are being allowed to destroy it with a pier and development project, go figure huh?
6000 fishermen do not take this lightly
www.fairtradefish.org for HEMP links and info
Bush will bomb the hell out of the earth before he will allow a collective conscienceness. heaven help us all. Until the american people are willing to say hell no and stand and fight we are dooming the next generation.
We must make the pursuit of profit morally and legally wrong. Profit does not equate to happiness. It never has.