HawksleyFilmAnnotation3


 * Erika Hawksley**
 * Annotation #3**
 * Word Count: 1,274**


 * Title:** The End of the Line
 * Director:** Rupert Murray
 * Release year:** 2009


 * What is the central argument or narrative of the film?**

The central argument of this film is that overfishing is causing devastating effects on the population of fish in the ocean and that immediate action needs to be taken to combat these effects. Our world takes for granted the catching and consuming of seafood. We have begun to take more out of the sea than can naturally be replenished and thus many varieties of fish are being depleted. Our capacity to catch fish far exceeds the supply in the ocean. The technology and amounts of boats used for fishing make it nearly impossible for fish populations to sustain themselves. By depleting certain species of sea creatures, we disrupt the entire ecosystem of the ocean and cause havoc to the environment.


 * How is the argument or narrative made and sustained? How much scientific information is provided, for example? Does the film have emotional appeal?**

This argument is sustained through discussion of scientific research and available data, as well as information seen firsthand by fishermen. It is obviously hard to determine how many fish are left in the sea, but data is recorded about how many fish are being caught. However, recently researchers have discovered that some countries, such as China, were reporting false numbers that indicated an increase in number of fish caught each year. Truly, the number of fish being caught has been decreasing each year because the supply of fish is decreasing. Substantial scientific evidence is provided throughout the film to help sustain the central argument of overfishing, specifically about blue fin tuna. This film has some emotional appeal relating to the depletion of species and the deterioration of our environment. The End of the Line does effectively use dramatic music and imagery to capture and hold the viewer’s attention.


 * What sustainability problems does the film draw out? Political? Legal? Economic? Technological? Media and Informational? Organizational? Educational? Behavioral? Cultural? Ecological?**

This film draws out cultural, behavioral, and economic problems. The End of the Line points out our behavioral and cultural problem of desire for ever increasing consumption, which is in itself an unsustainable concept when applied to any supply of food or materials. Economic problems can be seen in this film because making money is at the root of overfishing. Since, so many people make a living in the fishing industry and it is profitable for large corporations to sell exotic varieties of fish to upscale restaurants, it will be difficult to restrict fishing rates.


 * What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?**

I was most compelled by the data presented about the overfishing of blue fin tuna. Scientists have been predicting the extinction of the blue fin tuna and now it is becoming a reality. Blue fin tuna are being fished at four times the recommended rate and six times the rate needed to allow recovery of the species, despite already high regulations limiting two times the recommended rate. I found it astonishing that this species is being fished at a rate so much higher than what allows the population to be sustained. The depletion of the blue fin tuna should be our warning sign that action needs to be taken now to turn around the overfishing problem we have.

The End of the Line could have addressed other species of fish in more depth besides the blue fin tuna in order to add more depth to the argument. I was not convinced by the solution of buying sustainable fish because there wasn’t information about how to tell if the fish was caught sustainably or not. There could have been more detail about what regulations should be put in place and how sustainable fish will be labeled.
 * What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?**


 * What audiences does the film best address? Why?**

This film addresses a broad audience because fishing is a topic that many people can relate to and the argument of the film is presented in simple terms that everyone can understand. Anyone who consumes seafood is a stakeholder, but everyone on the planet should be concerned with this problem. The depletion of fish in the sea will erode the quality of our environment and affect the entire ecosystem in the sea. Even though I personally don’t eat fish, I felt targeted by this film to be concerned about overfishing and encourage responsible catching and consuming of fish.


 * What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?**

More information could have been added to this film about how much action needs to be taken to restore the population of blue fin tuna. There was data about how much they are overfished, but no estimate was given about how many more tuna there needs to be to in order for the population to be considered restored.


 * What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.**

This film provides many points of intervention to help the problem of overfishing. They suggest buying only sustainable seafood, pressuring politicians and government for stricter regulations, and reducing overall consumption of fish.

The film also suggests that restaurants should take endangered species of fish off their menus or at least inform customers that certain types of fish on the menu are endangered and then allow them to make their own decision whether or not to order it. There is a push for stricter regulations on the amounts of certain species of fish that can be caught each year to help depleting populations recover and to prevent depletion of other species. Enforcing fishing regulations on areas allowed to be fished as well as how long and what times of year certain species can be fished also helps to prevent overfishing. The film encourages the audience to put pressure on restaurants, companies, and stores to only sell fish caught in a sustainable manner. It also points out that we should restrict fishing to a smaller percent of the ocean that the current 99% that is allowed to be fished. Fish farming is an alternative to fishing from the sea, but it has many downfalls and is not a sustainable solution to overfishing. Fish farming requires more fish from the sea as food for farmed fish than the amount of fish produced in the farms.


 * What additional information has the film compelled you to seek out? (Provide at least two supporting references.)**

The End of the Line compelled me to seek out information regarding blue fin tuna fishing. I found an article about fishing charters still taking place in Prince Edward Island, Canada where tourists pay to go out fishing with experienced fishermen and haul in tuna weighing up to 1000 lbs. It is unfortunate that recreational fishing such as this is still allowed despite the depleting blue fin tuna population. However, the article mentioned that in the 1980’s they stopped fishing for blue fin due to low populations and have started again due to increasing numbers in the last 15 years. It’s a good thing that the population bounced back in this area, but hopefully fishing is being done sustainably as to not deplete the population again.

[]

I was also interested to see what other species of marine life are being overfished. I found that Caviar, Atlantic Cod, Eel, Halibut, Orange Roughy, Oreos, Atlantic Salmon, Shark, Shrimp, and Yellowtail are all species that are threatened by overfishing.

[]