KingTheEndOfTheLine

=**The End of the Line: Where Have All the Fish Gone?** = (2009) Director: Rupert Murray

===**Central Argument/Narrative** === The central argument for this film is that the fishing industry is out of control. More fishing capacity than is needed exists; there are enough boats to catch the world's fish population four times over. Preservation and fish reserve campaigns are critical as are individual actions of consumers.

===**Matrix of Sustainability Problems** === Overfishing touches many nodes on the matrix of sustainability problems. The effects are seen across the world map.

When the cod population in Newfoundland was so devastated that the provincial government had no choice but to act by halting fishing, 400,000 jobs were lost overnight. The predominant fishing culture of Newfoundland is falling to pieces.

Developing nations, such as Senegal, are selling fishing rights to large foreign corporations. This hurts local fishermen who can no longer earn a living. The traditional culture is lost, and many try their chances by immigrating north in an attempt to find work.

As more large fish are caught unsustainably, their populations decrease. An ecological effect of this decrease is an increase in their prey's population because of the lower threat from predators. This phenomena ripples down the food chain with major effects. With each species gone, both biodiversity and water quality decreases.

===**Persuasive & Compelling** === The opening title sequence was very compelling. As the text "Most efficient predator" is revealed to be mankind, the film's title (End of the Line) is shown as the screen fads to a man holding a fishing rod and line. This scene really pulled me into the movie and got my attention.

The "quick fishing" scene was also quite compelling. The imagery of a conservation official firing a flare to open the fishing season and the race of boats to catch as much as they could is exciting. Though, the great thing is that there is a purpose behind the madness. Conservation is a part of everyone's mindset as one fisherman said, "We want to catch the fish of fifteen and twenty years from now, not just today."

A small compelling factoid from the film is that 5 kilograms anchovies are required to raise 1 kilogram of salmon. This illustrated a reason why fish farming is probably not the solution to overfishing.

===**Environmental Educational Value** === This film has a strong environmental education value because of the awareness it brings to the issue of overfishing. For instance, it is brought to light that fish collapse curves hit zero populations around the year 2048. The movie touts the idea that when we have a better understanding of overfishing, it will more readily enter people's conscience and help guide their decisions.

Points of Intervention
When dealing with the decreasing blue fin population, the European Union Fisheries Commission set the annual fishing quota at 40,000 tons. The number needed for recovery of blue fins is 30,000 tons, and for sustainable conditions it is 20,000 tons. In actuality, 60,000 tons of blue fin were caught in the year presented as an example in the film. This is a clear indication that rules are neither followed are enforced.

In Alaska, effective intervention has been put in place. The state's fishing policy is determined by science, and limits are well below the need boundary to recover species in danger.

Corporations are also taking a step in the right direction regarding fishing policy, or at least they say they are. McDonald's claims that 90% of its fish products come from sustainable sources, and Wal-Mart aims to have all its fish be sustainable by 2011.

The United States federal government also spends between $20B and $30B on fish subsidies. This money, the film advocates, could be more wisely spent on more fish reserves and sanctuaries.

===**Seek Out New Information** === Rise of the Chesapeake Ray in culinary circles <[]> Responsible fishing labels by the Marine Stewardship Council <[]>