Bottom trawling is a special case. When you add together the damage it does to habitats, marine life, coastal communities and the planet, it’s clear that it’s in a league of its own. Bottom trawling undermines local food security and brings conflict to vulnerable coastal communities. No other method of fishing causes so much damage. No other method of fishing is as incompatible with the path to a low carbon world. For the planet, for the ocean and for the hundreds of millions of people who depend upon it to eat and to live, we need to urgently tackle bottom trawling.

Well, bottom trawling is the worst offender: it’s the most widespread human-caused disturbance to seabed habitats globally. In fact, because it pre-dates newer industries like renewable energy, in many ways, bottom trawling has fewer environmental safeguards than other parts of the blue economy. Erecting an offshore wind farm requires a lengthy and expensive planning process with comprehensive stakeholder consultations and voluminous environmental impact assessments. Such farms are not without their environmental issues, but the damage to the seabed they cause is essentially a one-time thing. We don’t repeatedly smash wind turbines into the seafloor, yet we do repeatedly bottom trawl. 

Actually, compared with other industries like offshore energy, bottom trawling isn’t particularly regulated. Around the world, there’s an increasing push to ensure that organisations demonstrate not only “no net loss” but also “net positive impact” – offsetting or restoring post-impact. But bottom trawl companies have zero obligations to restore the habitat they impact. 

And while there’s been welcome progress in recent years in identifying so-called vulnerable marine ecosystems to avoid, the sad fact is that identifying VMEs is prohibitively expensive for many States. Further, with many so-called protected areas allowing bottom trawling and with the high seas still a free-for-all, it’s hard to argue that bottom trawling is already highly regulated.

Finally, our world is warming, and along tropical coastlines, food security for local fishers is a growing concern. As our blue planet changes, so too must regulations governing its use.

It’s certainly true that management measures can reduce some of the most harmful impacts through seasonal or area-based closures, move-on rules, mesh size regulations, quotas, bycatch reduction efforts, and observer systems, among others. 

And it’s certainly true that capacity for enforcement, governance and management differs from place to place. But that isn’t an argument against regulation. We can’t just give up on creating better policies altogether. That way lies a world that has given up the struggle against climate change and given up hope of vibrant, sustainable oceans teaming with life.

We are working with and supporting governments to improve regulation and enforcement. A number of tropical developing nations have already put in place near-shore exclusion zones for artisanal fishers, but these are often ignored by industrial operators. The sad fact is that many States don’t have the resources or the political appetite to fight back, so as long as the subsidies continue, so too will the transgressions.

It’s true that the Marine Stewardship Council has certified as sustainable a number of bottom trawl fisheries. In fact, there are more fisheries in the programme that use bottom trawls than any other gear type. However, no coastal bottom trawl fisheries in developing nations have been certified, and the MSC doesn’t consider the socio-economic and climate impacts of a fishery as part of the certification process. Sustainability, for them, is limited to environmental aspects only. But because of their cumulative impact on climate, environment and people, bottom trawl fisheries are a special case.

This is a pro-fishing campaign. It’s pro-livelihoods and pro-sustainability. We believe these things don’t have to exist in opposition with one another. We recognise that many bottom-trawl fleets are not deliberate architects of environmental damage, but the product of favourable national subsidies and loose regulation. Such subsidies constitute one of the greatest market failures the ocean has ever seen, and continue to prop up fisheries that would otherwise be financially unsustainable.

While we recognise that some of these fleets have been beneficial for coastal communities over the short term (by delivering employment on board vessels and in processing facilities, and bait to small-scale fishers), over the longer term, fishing this way simply isn’t sustainable. That’s why we want to see states redirect those harmful subsidies and take a range of bold steps to support a just transition, safeguard the rights of displaced workers, and tackle the unintended consequences of trawling restrictions.

We’re growing a broad coalition of small-scale fishers, seafood companies, conservationists, local tourism businesses, scientists, managers and fisheries policy experts that’s devoted to inclusive, holistic and lasting change. We’re pro small-scale fishing, we’re pro environment and we’re dedicated to bringing the needs of coastal communities to the fore.

Actually, bottom trawling isn’t a viable option in most places. It only persists because it’s subsidised. Without those subsidies, it wouldn’t be economically worthwhile. There are alternatives and management measures (e.g. less damaging gears) but it’s true that these will not be applicable in all contexts. Fisheries managers everywhere have common goals. They need to ensure that ecosystems and fish stocks remain healthy to deliver benefits long into the future. But they operate in vastly different environments with varied priorities, resources, and values, and it is these which will govern the best blend of measures. 

That said, we are a pro-fishing coalition and we recognise that there would be significant short-term livelihood implications to an immediate global ban on bottom trawling. That’s why we’re calling for something less radical: a ban in coastal waters and in MPAs, and a frozen trawling footprint.