Should scuba divers eat fish?

Over-fishing is as big a problem to humanity this century as global warming, according to the man behind documentary, the End of the Line.
Yet research shows most of us don't realise that our seas are under such a pressing threat.
Journalist Charles Clover's film exposes the impacts of fishing on marine life, the plight of species such as bluefin tuna, and the profound implications of a future world with no fish.
But a key message from the film is that actions individuals can take will help bring change.

Which raises the question, should scuba divers eat fish?

For us the underwater world is our playground. Healthy reefs are what draw us to far-flung locations around the world. I'm sure we've all had a moan when dive sites haven't lived up to expectations and been shorn of life.
Yet I'm sure we've all enjoyed a sneaky piece of local fish afterwards.

It's diffiuclt for us Brits, we have been brought up on a diet of fish and chips. Sea bass cooked simply with a twist of lemon and some black pepper over sweet potato mash and some veg has to be one of my favourite tuck-ins.

But seabass are also among the Marine Conservation Society's list of 69, yes 69, fish to avoid. While it states some seabass fisheries are okay, how can I be certain whether the fillet on the plate has come from a sustainable source or not? Is it best to just so no full-stop.

Some scientists have warned the oceans are in so much peril world's fisheries could face collapse by 2048. This will have a devastating impact on our environment.

As previous blogs have touched on, we need a healthy marine ecosystem to absorb carbon dioxide from the air but, such is the damage to the underwater world, ocean acidity is increasing and threatening the very ecosystems and coral reefs that we enjoy.
According to the latest research, fish play their part in regulating acidity, secreting a compound called calcium carbonate, which if it dissolves in the upper levels of the oceans could help replenish the alkalinity of the seas.
Therefore fewer fish contributes to greater ocean acidity = destroyed coral reefs.
If that happens every dive, no matter where in the world, will be like a desert.

Quoting a friend: "For centuries we have taken our marine riches for granted. But in recent decades we have taken too much, with too little care. Fragile habitats have been destroyed, fish stocks have collapsed and valuable resources have become dangerously depleted. The marine environment is on its knees. Now it is time to give something back."

Charles Clover called on consumers to demand sustainably-caught fish from retailers and restaurants. Which is a start. It's taken almost 20 years for politicians (short-termists by nature) to understand the impact of global warming but the oceans can't afford for them to catch up here.

The EU has proposed some new measures of shark finning in European waters. If they can drop national interest and have a look at the ridiculous rules around fishing we might have something to go on.

We can also support the development of Marine Conservation Zones, contained in a bill working its way slowly through Parliament.

But back to my earlier question. Should we divers lead by example and so no to the fish on the menu to do our little bit to reduce demand? Just as it is in the long term interests of fishermen not to empty the oceans, it is also in ours. Travelling half way around the world for a dive site that resembles a lifeless quarry doesn't hold much appeal

After all, Mother Nature has a way of bouncing back if we relieve the pressure and give her time.