AcocellaEndoftheLine

1. Title: The End of the Line; Director: Rupert Murray; Release Year: 2009

2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film? The film addresses the problems associated with our fish harvesting practices. It also describes in detail the problems we will be facing if these over fishing practices continue.

3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out? This film points out a number of sustainability issues. One is the sustainability of globalization. Laws for open waters are very poorly regulated. Large fishing companies that have over fished their waters are buying rights to fish in waters of small, underdeveloped countries. As a result, the local people, whose livelihood and cultures are deeply rooted in fishing, cannot compete with the incredible equipment of these companies. These fishers many times are forced to immigrate to other countries. Then overpopulation and immigration becomes yet another node of the matrix.

Another issue that the film points out is the problem with advertising and what is considered fashionable. Many people do not realize where their food comes from. Many people are blissfully unaware, which is how the fishing companies can get away with their horrible practices. Although there are laws in place, there is still high demand for these fish and companies will deliver.

This also brings up the issue that although there are laws and limitations on fishing practices, they are very rarely followed. Another related problem is that the limits on numbers of fish that can be caught are way too high. If these standards were followed, we would still be catching fish faster than they can replenish themselves. To add to this problem, companies do not even adhere to these limits and when they report the amounts of fish they have caught, many times they under report their catches. One can imagine how devastating this can be on fish and the environment.

4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why? I was interested to watch about the huge disconnect between what limits on fishing scientists recommend and what the EU actually allows. Scientists recommend that 15 thousand tons of Blue Fin Tuna per year are caught. For the population to recover, the limit should be at 10 thousand tons, however the EU quota is set at 30 thousand tons. In actuality, 61 thousand tons of Blue Fin Tuna are fished every year. And that is only what is reported and estimated. It has been predicted that if these practices continue, there will be no fish left by 2048.

I also found the images of the trawlers picking up everything on the bottom of the ocean to be rather compelling. They completely destroy the entire habitat at the bottom of the oceans. They also catch every type of fish in their path, not just the kinds that the fishers want. This means there are a large number of fish that are unnecessarily caught and killed; and many times thrown back into the ocean. I had heard about these practices but I thought the images really solidified how terrible the situation is.

5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why? I was not terribly convinced by the examples the film gave of sustainable fishing practices of certain companies. It gave the statistic that 90% of McDonald’s fish is from sustainable sources. Where did they get this figure from? What source does McDonald’s have if there are so few sustainable fisheries?

I was also skeptical of the research some of the scientists were conducting, specifically the attempts to count the number of fish in the oceans. I am not necessarily convinced that their results will be very accurate because this task seems to be very complicated.

6. What audience does this film best address? Why? I think the film is trying to address the general public. It is meant to spark concern in people and bring about a change. It points out that people are unaware of where their food comes from so it aims to provide some of that information. It also is meant to call people to action and push for better government regulations.

7. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental education value? The film could have been a better educational tool if it had given more information about the sustainable fishing companies that are out there. It spent the majority of the film displaying the problems and when it talks about new sustainable practices, I felt that there was not nearly enough information presented.

8. What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested in the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action that you can imagine being effective? As mentioned above, the film did point out a few ways of fixing the problem, such as knowing where the fish you eat is coming from. Another option that one of the experts interviewed during the film presented was to eat more fish that are lower on the food chain. We overfish the best, largest fish. When that population is depleted, there is an excess of the smaller fish that those large fish preyed on. If we create a larger demand for fish that are not as well desired, it gives the larger fish populations a chance to recover.

Also, one of the problems the film noted was that it is sometimes fashionable to eat rare and exotic fish. The film showed one fancy restaurant that was serving a fish that was an endangered species, advertising that it was a delicacy. This restaurant was very reluctant to even comment on the practice, let alone change their policies. We need to educate people to realize how detrimental this is to the environment and to the sustainability of fishing.

9. What additional information has the film compelled you to seek out? (Two supporting references) At the end of the film, it gave a website to go to for more information. This website is very informative about the film and lists a lot of the scientific facts that are presented in the film. It also has an interview with the director that explains a lot of the reasoning behind the film, how the issue is personal to him, and his views on what the future holds. []

I also wanted to look up sources of sustainable fishing practices. I found an interesting article about the Walmart situation that was mentioned in the film. Walmart is the largest seller of fish in the United States. It is now promoting the MSC (Marine Stewardship Council) label and wants to be purchasing all of its fish from sustainable fisheries in the next three to five years. A sustainable fishery is one that does not take more fish out of the ocean than are born per year. []

In my search for information about sustainable fishing practices, I found a few groups such as the Ecology Action Centre (EAC) that are dedicated to sustainable practices. The EAC is based in Canada and is one of the leading environmental activist organizations working toward a more sustainable world. []