ive thought about this before but dont live near the oceans. I was thinking of permie methods for enabling fish to breed better, and other means.
In addition to setting up artificial corrals for habitat you could get algae to bloom as well and raise tons of one of the fish that breed well, and are at the bottom of the food chain. Plant eaters. Something humans like... In that way perhaps we could focus fishing on those, and let the rest grow back in in full numbers, perhaps a bit higher since we could set up habitat as well.
the same holds true with lakes and rivers. Im guessing not all or even most permies might agree, Im not sure... but to me I think if we dont do such things it will be much worse then if we did.
Many kelps/seaweeds are very nutrient & mineral rich. As populations outgrow the capacity of land based farming, mankind will need to look seaward for survival.
From a permaculture perspective, farming the oceans is all about creating edge... yes to artificial reefs... the zone along the shore and shallows are the most productive regions. Any solid structure provides the foundation for an entire food chain.
I use to fish a lot in the great south bay off long island. They made some artificial reefs out of used tires chained together and sunk in the bay (scary toxins?). The productivity of these structures was stunning in relation to the rest of the mostly flat-bottomed, sandy bay. We would catch crazy amounts of blackfish there.
Seaweed and algae are some of the most nutritious foods on earth, and also among the most efficient in terms of turning sunlight into food. Sea veggies also do not have the problems that animal seafoods do in terms of bioaccumulation of toxins higher up the food chain.
You see most of the problems with toxicity in top predators like tuna & dolphins... of course, shellfish that filter shallow waters near cities are going to be toxic.
Stacking functions, we would look at offshore wind & wave farms providing structure for a polyaquaculture including both sea animals and sea vegetables. Don't know if any seabirds are worth eating.
H Ludi Tyler wrote:
Seems like with 40 percent of the phytoplankton gone and many fish species endangered, not to mention being the toxic waste dump for the planet, the poor sea is doing about all it can right now.
I see that as all the more reason to take action. I guess by 2050 many fish species will be fished to near extinction. many are there now.
The only official "answer" Ive seen is stop eating fish, and thats well and good, it would work. but many poorer countries especially would have to change their entire lives...
Setting up the habitats does wonders. Of course we need to get the junk out of the water to..... I certainly agree, and stop putting it there to begin with.
Don't know if any seabirds are worth eating.
The residents of St. Kilda (off the west coast of the Shetland Isles, Scotland) subsisted on a diet that consisted mainly of seabirds and sheep (fulmars, ganets, puffins) for at least 2000 years, possibly longer.
Apparently seabirds are an acquired taste and very oily according to a book I read on St . Kilda.