READ: Seaspiracy: A Call for Action, or a Call for Veganism? (Tea Jaber)
American University of Beirut: Politics of the Sea
By: Tea Jaber
Directed by British film maker Ali Tabrizi, Seaspiracy is a Netflix documentary which raises awareness towards the atrocities committed by the fishing industry towards marine life and laborers at sea. After the release of the documentary, many influential individuals praised its role in highlighting the effects of seafood consumption, and how the depletion of oceanic waters will make way for irreversible damages towards the earth’s atmosphere. Seeking to expose major organizations and the roles which they play in covering up the illegal acts of the fishing industry, Tabrizi puts himself in danger, travelling from continent to continent to document all that is hidden from the naked eye, in hopes of urging individuals to “go vegan.” The problem however lies in the lack of solutions provided towards the issues being raised, leaving individuals with one option to counteract the issues being raised, that being veganism, when in reality, such an option does little to counteract the reality of the situation. I feel it to be crucial to also take into consideration that the documentary only targets a certain percentage of the world’s population, being that many lack access to the internet. So, is Seaspiracy truly trying to call for change, or is it nothing more than a propaganda film made by vegan activists? As coined by Ray Hilborn, a professor at the school of fisheries and aquatic sciences at the University of Washington.
One of the issues which is discussed throughout Seaspiracy is that of human labor. We, as individuals, consume seafood blindly, without taking into consideration the means by which it is obtained. Not only are humans, specifically capitalist organizations, destroying marine life, but are damaging the physical and mental health of those who work tirelessly at sea in order to make a living (Sippell, 2021). An interview with Steve Trenet of the Environmental Justice Foundation shown in the Netflix documentary highlights the reality that slave labor in the commercial fishing industry exists; the problem at hand is that there is a lack of knowledge towards the harsh environmental conditions and treatment which laborers endure, due to the fact that the fishing industry unfortunately “operates under the radar.” This means that nobody could get off the ship in the case that they feel as if their lives are being threatened. Trenet continues to explain that Thailand specifically, is greatly involved in such unethical practices, having an approximate of 51,000 fishing boats out at sea, in efforts of obtaining a large supply of marine species, including dolphins, sharks, salmon, etc. at cheaper costs.
Countries such as China, Vietnam, Indonesia, U.S., and others which have access to large bodies of water also appear to be greatly involved in the practices committed within the fishing industry (Sawe, 2017). In fact, in 2016, Obama even implemented a ban on the consumption of slave-produced good, shining a light on the severity and abundance of such practices (Sippell, 2021). Seaspiracy’s director conducted interviews with two individuals who had previously been victims of torture at sea; they both chose to remain anonymous, probably due to an existing fear that their lives may be at risk if they were to expose the reality of situations. A recurring pattern shown throughout the documentary reflects the lack of desire which those who are involved in or generate profit from the fishing industry to be filmed and/or questioned, as public exposure may place limitations on their money-making strategies. One may wonder why individuals choose to endure such hardships at sea; however, one must be aware that most of the times, the conditions which one may endure may be unforeseen (Sippell, 2021). It is only when these men find themselves away from land that they become aware of what they had unfortunately signed up for. Some have their wages cut, and others endure abuse, some even becoming victims of murder (ILO, 2013).
One repetitive behavior which I find the director of Seaspiracy guilty of is his inability to provide solutions to the issues which he seeks to raise awareness towards. Yes, he was able to interview men at sea; however, he knew the risks which they may endure if they had been caught, yet continued in his course of action. He also fails at researching the reasons why labor abuse occurs so easily. Raising awareness is one thing, but creating solutions is another. Thus, through this paper, I seek to provide solutions which can be implemented in order to decrease labor abuse at sea:
Tracking and monitoring
Governments should implement various spot checks whereby licensed individuals are given access upon ships in order to monitor the conditions of the workers over certain periods of time (Urbina, 2015), as those who work at sea usually endure months, or in some cases, years of gruesome labor and torture. As mentioned above, their inability to contact outside sources places them in difficult situations; thus, being able to voice their struggles to trustworthy individuals who have the power to provide them with aid will be beneficial. Also, when the head fishermen become aware that routine checkups will be conducted on board of the ship, they will be forced to refrain from committing unlawful practices which place sea laborers at risk, both mentally and physically.
Banning and/or limiting the act of transshipment
Transshipment refers to a system which prevents ships from returning to shore, as containers are transferred back to land through the usage of alternate vessels such as ships, fishing boats, etc. (Urbina, 2015). Placing limitations on such a system may ensure that ships return to shore every now and then (Urbina, 2015). This will most hopefully counteract the effects of forced labor. The ability for ships owners to keep their vessels at sea for elongated periods of time provides them with the opportunity to avoid exposure to law enforcement and civil society, maintaining their ability to employ acts which allow them to reduce fishing costs (Ediger, Ewell, Hocevar, Jacquet, Miller, and Suzuki, 2017).
Financial Safety Nets
Most workers are made promises which lure them into choosing to work at sea, in hopes of making a living for themselves and their families. It is only when they are no longer at shore that they come to realize that these so-called promises are in most cases broken. Many have their wages cut short, and others claim to not even receive any salary whatsoever (ILO, 2013). The ILO should demand ship owners to provide proof of their ability to cover the wages of the usually large number of workers. Also, due to the fact that working at sea can be rather dangerous, with unexpected weather conditions giving rise to complications, ILO should also ensure costs of those who lose their lives or who develop disabilities as a result of exposure to unprecedented circumstances (Urbina, 2015).
British film maker Ali Tabrizi also speaks of the ethical standards which are ignored by those who keep the fishing industry running. In this case, he discusses the idea that fish can feel, but does not elaborate it on it. I believe that humans have a tendency to invalidate the importance of other species which co-exist with them. They hold the idea that as humans, they are to be considered as the superior beings. In De-colonizing the Waters: Interspecies Encounters between Sharks and Humans, Hammerton and Ford shine a light on how humans colonize what belongs to them and what doesn’t. For example, in Australia, humans claim certain water territories as their own in order to enjoy leisure activities, when in reality, oceanic waters should be considered as habitats for the marine species which wander within them (Ford and Hammerton, 2018). To validate their actions, humans tend to form the belief that marine species do not feel, despite their being proof contradicting such a notion.
It’s quite simple, fish feel as humans do. When fish are hooked, they directly begin to wriggle and squirm (THL, 2020), showing that they are aware that their bodies are being damaged. Also, when humans are in locations whereby oxygen is not abundant, they begin to suffocate, just as fish do when they are in environments that lack water (THL, 2020). In one experiment, researchers injected an acidic substance into the lips of fish; feeling pain, the fish began to rub their lips on the surfaces of tanks, or even on sand, in order to counteract the sensation which they were experiencing (THL, 2020). In addition, just as humans possess peripheral nervous systems, responsible for generating responses to stimuli, fish have been shown to possess them too (THL, 2020). We may also take into consideration land species. When dogs see their owners in pain, they react. Lions hug and protect their cubs. This proves that these animals possess feelings which are more or less being invalidated by humans who are only interested in their own personal gain.
In one interview, Tabrizi questions a Faroese Whaler, Jens Mortan Rasmussen, about the reasons behind why he slaughters whales. Rasmussen compares his actions to that of farmers, who raise and kill thousands of chickens and cows, yet have their actions justified by the human need to consume large amounts of dairy and/or poultry products. “I’d rather kill one whale than kill 2000 chickens,” he says. This is where I believe Tabrizi’s arguments throughout the documentary fall short. Tabrizi works hard to raise awareness towards the atrocities which occur towards marine species, but fails to shine a light on land species which endure the same treatment, if not worse. After his conversation with Rasmussen ends, Tabrizi mentions how he has realized that he has not taken into consideration the ecological impact which the preservation of land species may have on the world; however, he refrains from delving into the topic, and continues to target his focus towards marine life, once again, invalidating the larger issues which also need to be dealt with.
One of the most important takeaways from the award-winning documentary is the fact that the killing of marine species directly affects the global environment. We must not only discuss the amount of fish being killed, but the damage created by the methods used by the fishing industry. Bottom trawl fishing refers to placing large nets at the bottom of the ocean then dragging them, simultaneously capturing targeted species (Hooper, 2020). Employing this method can be immensely destructive to corals, which marine species tend to rely greatly on, treating them as habitats (Hooper, 2020). They also provide migrating species, such as whales, with nutrients. Throughout the course of the documentary, Tabrizi shifts his focus towards certain countries such as Thailand, and pays little to no attention to other countries such as New Zealand, which is one the countries known for making use of methods such as bottom trawl fishing. In fact, in 2019 alone, an approximate of 3000 tonnes of deep sea corrals were destroyed by the country alone.
How does this effect climate change? The preservation of marine species increases carbon sequestration, a process that lacks carbon emissions away (Hooper, 2020). Life which exists in the ocean is capable of preserving carbon which is constantly emitted by life on land (Hooper, 2020). In fact, the ocean has been shown to be the largest reservoir of carbon on earth (Hooper, 2020). With climate change increasingly on the rise due to the over consumption of plastic, burning of woods, etc. damaging one of the only sources preventing the complete collapse of the earth’s atmosphere cannot be in any way beneficial to both life on land and life in water. There are solutions that can be implemented. Firstly, the integration of marine protected areas is vital. This refers to placing limitations on areas which seem to be vulnerable to collapsing, in return allowing these oceanic areas to slowly but surely recover from the continuous damage which they have suffered over the years (Hooper, 2020). Also, organizations such as Greenpeace should call for the banning of fishing techniques, such as bottom trawl fishing, through the creation of campaigns, attracting the attention of international organizations, such as the United Nations, who have the power to form and implement treaties catered towards the protection of oceans.
Tabrizi also places all focus on the fishing industry, painting it as the one and only reason behind the destruction of oceans. In reality, numerous practices play a role in damaging marine life; thus, simply switching to veganism doesn’t solve all problems at hand:
Plastic pollution
We are massive consumers of plastic. From straws to plates and cutlery, we make use of plastic because it is easily disposed and relatively cheap. However, the plastic used is being disposed in oceanic waters, polluting species and poisoning their habitats. There is a constant call for individual action, urging people to refrain from using plastic based products and switching to metal and/or glass. The way I see it, international leadership should also be integrated, as relying on individual willingness will only create minimal and/or temporary change.
Manufacturing plants
Factories in unregulated parts of the world play a great role in increasing water pollution, as they exercise the illegal dumping of chemicals, metal, radioactive materials, gases, etc. which in return contaminate oceanic waters which marine species thrive off of.
Oil Spills
Vehicles which operate within waters such as ships, motor boats, jet-skis, etc. are responsible for the discharge of large amounts of fuel into the ocean. In addition, such vehicles give way to noise pollution, which can also be directly damaging to certain species, such as dolphins and whales, which make use of echolocation to migrate, detect danger, and locate mates.
Speaking from a media perspective, the film has been accused of misrepresentation. Those who belong to minorities have payed attention to the racist and xenophobic undertones which are repeatedly highlighted (Pacha, 2021). Tabrizi portrays Asians as bad guys, victimizes the blacks and browns, and paints the whites as the do-gooders, seeking solutions towards the issues raised (Pacha, 2021). On another note, the repetitive call for veganism as the ultimate substitution underlies the benefits which the consumption of fish provides to humans. Stopping commercial fishing and relying on plants is one thing, but how is that going to be achieved? Tabrizi does not mention the cost of creating plant based products for the majority of the world’s population, He also completely neglects the idea that many rely on the consumption of fish, in addition to the act of fishing, as a means to preserve their livelihoods. This paints a picture that the documentary only targets middle and upper class society. In addition, what happens to those who work as farmers or out at sea? Who will compensate for them? Once again, the documentary holds a lot of conversation, just not a lot of action.
In abbreviation, the 90 minute documentary does a good job in making generalizations and providing oversimplified solutions (Arlidge and Booth, 2021), if any. Yes, fisheries play a great role in polluting oceanic waters, but as mentioned above, the fishing industry is home to almost 40 million people’s jobs (Arlidge and Booth, 2021). Simply making the suggestion of shutting down the fishing industry may probably solve one issue, but it gives rise to many others, specifically unemployment. This comes to show that although the documentary raises awareness of important topics, it is far from being coined as realistic. Where Tabrizi goes wrong is in his constant need to falsify the acts of major organizations rather than educating his audience (Allen, 2021). Also, the solution which he provides, that of eliminating all seafood from one’s diet, is nothing more than a representation of his personal beliefs and way of living. Belonging to upper class society, Tabrizi finds himself capable to implement a solution which he, and those who live similarly to him, are able to entertain, leaving those who find themselves marginalized unattended (Allen, 2020); thus, the call-to-action which the audience takes away by the end of the documentary clearly comes from a point of privilege (Mawire, 2021). Moreover, Seaspiracy by all means lacks balance (Mawire, 2021); watching it is chaotic to say the least. As soon as one begins to understand the issue being targeted, Tabrizi directly jumps to another. In 90 minutes, Tabrizi was more or less trying to discuss every possible issue which he can think of, making use of propaganda to lure individuals into having more reasons to eventually go vegan (Mawire, 2021). One thing which I can say is that Seaspiracy does a good job in raising awareness towards humanistic abuse, but then again, the two individuals which he interviewed do not represent the whole of the fishing industry. I urge those who watched Seaspiracy to refrain from obtaining their knowledge from one single source, but to implement their own research before deciding their course of action.
References:
“DO FISH FEEL PAIN? GROWING RESEARCH SAYS YES.” Thehumaneleague.org, THL, 15 Dec. 2020.
Allen, Liz. “Seaspiracy: A Call to Action or a Vehicle of Misinformation?” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 10 Dec. 2021.
Booth, Hollie, and William Arlidge. “Seaspiracy: How to Make Fishing More Sustainable by Tackling Bycatch – New Research.” The Conversation, 28 Sept. 2021.
Caught at Sea: Forced Labor and Trafficking in Fisheries, ILO, 2013.
Ewell, Christopher, et al. Potential Ecological and Social Benefits of a Moratorium on Transshipment on the High Seas. 2017.
Hammerton, Zan and Ford, Akkadia. Decolonising the Waters: Interspecies Encounters between Sharks and Humans, Animal Studies Journal, 7(1), 2018, 270-303
Hooper, Ellie. “What Is Bottom Trawling and Why Is It Bad for the Environment?” Greenpeace Aotearoa, 11 Apr. 2020.
Mawire, Tricia. “10 Biggest Criticisms about Seaspiracy.” ScreenRant, 23 May 2021.
Pacha, Aswathi. “'Seaspiracy' Review: FACT and Fiction Meet Fish in Controversial Netflix Documentary.” The Hindu, The Hindu, 4 Apr. 2021.
Sawe, Benjamin Elisha. “Leading Countries in Fishing and Aquaculture Harvests.” WorldAtlas, WorldAtlas, 25 Apr. 2017.
Sippell, Margeaux. “Seaspiracy Shines Spotlight on Slave Labor in the Fishing Industry.” LaptrinhX, LaptrinhX, 29 Mar. 2021.
Urbina, Ian. “Ending the Abuse of Laws, Workers and the Environment at Sea.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 27 July 2015.