• Mavvik@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    This is kind of misleading since they closed the fishery (I think in the 90s), so the amount of cod catch would naturally plummet. The fishery did, however, need to be closed due to overfishing.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Not exactly; it collapsed, then they closed it once it was too late, and now it’s still fucked, 30 years later.

      In the early-1990s, the industry collapsed entirely.

      In 1992, John Crosbie, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, set the quota for cod at 187,969 tonnes, even though only 129,033 tonnes had been caught the previous year.

      In 1992 the government announced a moratorium on cod fishing.[12] The moratorium was at first meant to last two years, hoping that the northern cod population would recover and the fishery. However, catches were still low,[16] and thus the cod fishery remained closed.

      By 1993 six cod populations had collapsed, forcing a belated moratorium on fishing.[14] Spawning biomass had decreased by at least 75% in all stocks, by 90% in three of the six stocks, and by 99% in the case of “northern” cod, previously the largest cod fishery in the world.[14] The previous increases in catches were wrongly thought to be due to “the stock growing” but were caused by new technologies such as trawlers.[13]

      • Mavvik@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        That’s a fair point. It still is a misleading plot since it isn’t an estimate cod population, and isn’t representative of population after 1992. As you said the numbers are still bleak. I found this plot , Source , which does tell a similar story around the early 90s but indicates greater recovery in more recent years.