The Myth About Plastic Recycling? It works out

Tabrizi opens the film with scenes from his childhood. His love for the sea came from watching Orcas and Dolphins occur in marine theme parks. As an adult, he understood that Damage linked to captive mammals. The action moves quickly Mass murder of dolphins in Taiji, Japan along with overfishing for tuna. Everything is interconnected, and the chain of destruction continues until “the documentary loses its shock factor” because “the gloomy statistics no longer surprise,” reported The independent one. The message is clear: “We are destroying marine life at high speed.”

Seaspiracy claims that overfishing for tuna helps keep demand and prices high. Netflix

In the film, Sylvia Earle, famous marine biologist and ocean researcher, warns that commercial fishing itself will become extinct as humans can extract enormous amounts of marine life from the sea, since eventually there will be no fish left, connecting all the dots between commercial fishing, destruction of the Oceans and slavery with a “wobbly line” and the “indictment of the myth of sustainability”. With each new scene, Tabrizi reveals the deceit, corruption and greed that are currently destroying the oceans. Through numbers and expert cameos, he claims: Discarded plastic fishing equipment makes up most of the debris from the sea and kills whales and other animals. The oceans will be cleared of fish in 27 years. Safe seafood labels are jeopardized by “pay-to-play”. Profit structures and poor enforcement; Overfishing is more harmful to the environment than deforestation; Farmed fish are plagued by disease, cause environmental pollution and are resource-intensive. Thai fishing fleets use slave labor to stay profitable. “Sustainable seafood” is a myth. and the only solution is to stop eating fish.

Shark bycatch is thrown overboard in West Africa. Sea Shepherd

Tabrizi’s takeaway is a crushing condemnation of the multi-billion dollar fishing industry and the governments, groups and companies involved in the destruction of the ocean. Sea piracy calls for a collective shift away from eating seafood too vegan and herbal alternatives.

“The amount of fish being taken out of the ocean is absolutely staggering – five million fish per minute” Sea Shepherd Conservation Society founder Captain Paul Watson said EcoWatch. “We mine life from the sea. There is no sustainable fishery anywhere in the world.”

Known for its direct action techniques and sometimes criticized, the marine conservation organization plays a prominent role in Tabrizi’s film. Tabrizi films of Sea Shepherd ships confronting an illegal Chinese fishing vessel and encountering starving artisanal fishermen in West Africa who have done so lost their jobs and food source to industrial fishing.

When asked if the state of the oceans is as bad as in Sea piracyWatson told EcoWatch, “I think it’s actually worse than portrayed in this movie. For the most part, these problems are out of sight and out of your mind. And when the ocean dies, we die.”

The Sea Shepherd fleet of ships patrols the world’s waters. Thomas Le / Sea Shepherd

To date, millions have seen the documentary, and reactions from viewers and marine organizations determine the scope.

“I think it was a brilliant movie,” said Watson. “It is the first opportunity to get the message across about what is happening in our oceans. Many people are presented with information that they have never looked at before.”

A twitter Users agreed, saying, “Modern fishing with nets big enough to sweep cathedrals is destroying the ocean ecosystems we rely on to regulate the planet. We are literally killing ourselves …” A another Users urged: “Be careful if you are interested in ocean / fish. I will stop eating fish from today. A must.”

Critics of the film were also vocal, denouncing the underlying facts, the film’s possible vegan agenda, and its reductionist and sensational approach. Global Aquaculture Alliance reported. The New York Times likened the tone to “a cheap imitation of powerful investigative journalism” full of “conspiratorial thinking”. Some accused the film of maintaining a “white rescue complex”. The independent one reported.

The leading seafood certification group, Marine Stewardship Council (MSC), a goal throughout the documentation, declined numerous interview requests from Tabrizis. After the documentary was released, MSC agreed, “There is a crisis in our oceans and an urgent need to end overfishing.” The organization also refuted: “… it is wrong to say that there is no such thing [as] sustainable fishing and that the only solution is to stop eating fish. Some of the issues pointed out by the film – bycatch, overfishing, and degradation of marine ecosystems – are exactly the issues that the MSC certification process is designed to address. “

Sea Shepherd founder Paul Watson views commercial fishing as the greatest threat to the future of the oceans. Sea Shepherd

Mark J. Palmer, associated with the Earth Island Institute, the company that manages the Dolphin Safe label for tuna, is featured in a central scene in the film. In front of the camera, Tabrizi asks Palmer if he can guarantee that all tuna cans labeled as dolphin-safe will not harm the dolphins. The latter replies: “No. Nobody can” and justifies his answer with the words: “Once you are out in the ocean, how do you know what?” [fishermen are] to do? We have observers on board – observers can be bribed and do not travel regularly. “Palmer has since tried to mute his testimony, suggesting that Seaspiracy took what he was saying out of context, reported IntraFish, a seafood news website. Checked the film’s claims and Palmer’s defense, and concluded that “[b]Based on the comments made by the Earth Island Institute and other experts, it cannot be said that all canned tuna labeled “Dolphin Friendly” are guaranteed not to have harmed dolphins while fishing. “Regardless of whether they are fans of the film, most conservationists and scientists agree that the oceans play a role in the fight against the climate crisis, both for the food security of millions of people worldwide and for the protection of cultural lifestyles, according to The Guardian , Callum Roberts, a marine conservationist The conclusion presented in Seaspiracy offered the film’s critics the following conclusion: “My colleagues may regret the statistics, but the rationale is that we are causing great harm to the ocean, and it is true. At some point you run out. Whether it’s 2048 or 2079, the question is, ‘Is the trajectory in the wrong direction or in the right direction?’ ”

Comments are closed.