Tuesday, 29 March 2011

HS2 Debate Questions

We had a few of the questions that were submitted in advance answered by the panel at our debate yesterday, but didn't have time for all of them, so I promised to post some of them online today. Here they are and if anyone would like to answer them, then please do so in the comments section:

1) "HS2 is being developed after the main LTP plans have been agreed regionally. What will be the impact of HS2 be on local planning and on funding which could have been used instead to support local transport networks; particularly in the more deprived North of Solihull Borough where its inadequacies are a much greater economic and social barrier to the local economy than the need for a very expensive rail HS2 line?"

2) "223 mph (360km/h) trains use more than twice the power of 124 mph (200km/h) trains, add this to the emissions from construction and the increase in air traffic at Birmingham Airport as a result of HS2 and this will actually result in a substantial increase the UKs carbon emissions over the next 60 years. Should we be spending 34 billion on a transport project that does nothing to help the UK reduce CO2 emissions?"

3) "Why is the Government continuing to promote HS2 when there is a greener alternative, Rail Package 2, that will provide all the forecast capacity needs more quickly and at significantly lower cost?"

4) "The HS2 prospectus tells us that some 40 million passenger journeys into London per year will be slowed down or scrapped as a result of HS2. Will nobody spare a thought for the long suffering rail commuter (I am one of them) and consider upgrading our existing rail network at a fraction of the cost of HS2, so that ALL working class people can have access to a faster train service, rather than enabling a few executives to get from Birmingham to London 10 minutes quicker than they can already?"

5) "Why do we not go for a new line which runs at a slower speed and can therefore avoid damaging environmentally sensitive areas as it won't have to run in a straight line?"

6) "Instead of going to Euston station and disrupting the West Coast Mainline, why doesn't the line go into Stratford and onto HS1 there? Surely that's the way to really get people off planes."

The balance here isn't quite the same as it was in the audience, as there were more people there who were pro-HS2, but they didn't submit written questions. There have been a lot of positive comments about the debate, but many people feel that more evidence is needed to back up the claims by both sides. If you would like to contribute to this, please do.

Joe Peacock

Saturday, 26 March 2011

FoE Localism Bill Meeting at the House of Commons

While we do like to do teleconferencing when possible, there are some times you have to travel to meetings and so two of us went down to the House of Commons on Thursday for a meeting on the Localism Bill. Neither of us were experts on the bill to start with, but were able to use the journey down to London to read up on it using these useful briefings.

We arrived in plenty of time so were able to sit by the Thames enjoying the sunshine and listening to the endless roar of traffic all round us and planes overhead thinking how lucky we are in Birmingham not to have this (for the moment at least).

Going into the Commons was rather like going into an airport (I haven't for a few years, but remember what it was like), although we didn't have to take our shoes off thankfully. Once you're through all the scanners they let you wander about quite freely, though, and we made our way through imposing corridors until we made it to the room where the meeting was to take place.

MP Nic Dakin was hosting the event for us and has also helped introduce some of the amendments we want to see to the bill. We were promised that other MPs would be there, but apart from Gerald Kaufman, who popped in for a while, none of the Birmingham MPs made it along. We had been hoping to speak to Jack Dromey, MP for Erdington, as he has been doing some work on the bill, but neither he nor his PA turned up as they had promised to do.

This was disappointing, but overall the meeting was very interesting and it was great to meet and hear from representatives of other groups who represent local communities and defend their rights in planning decisions all over the country. The Rights and Justice team at FoE really are committed to working on equalities and the things that matter to those whose voices are not usually heard all over the country, yet their work may not be recognised as much as the higher profile campaigners working on climate, food and energy issues.

Detailed notes of the meeting were taken and will be sent round to all attendees soon and can be passed on to MPs and other interested parties, so I'll just make a few comments on what interested me in the course of the discussion.

You would have thought that if a bill is going to give more power to local people to make decisions, that should be good. Unfortunately, with this government things are never that simple as there are many things in it which could be very damaging to local democracy, communities' quality of life and the environment, especially when considered along with the measures announced by the chancellor in the budget, which seem to be a green light for development at any cost.

At the moment, we have some very good guidance on planning decisions in Regional Spatial Strategies, Local Development Frameworks and other pieces of legislation, but the danger is that all this could be thrown out and replaced with much looser guidelines. Originally they were proposing that a neighbourhood plan could be drawn up by a group of as little as 3 people, but this has now been increased to 20. There is still a lack of any guarantee of a right to be heard or any scrutiny over the work of neighbourhood forums/parish councils who will come up with the plans in terms of sustainability, equality or human rights legislation.

There is a lot of dissatisfaction with the current approach to consultation, so we do need to look at what is a better way and draw one up using our experience. This would include ways of protecting the rights of everyone to an oral hearing, looking at the way these things are publicised, ensuring that people can feel that they will make a difference and then see that difference. Sustainable development must be protected and there must be a clear definition of what this is that will be clear to everyone.

You can read more about the localism bill here and if you are concerned about what it will do after reading this, please contact your MP to express your worries, either in writing or by going along to one of their surgeries, which you can look up here. If you want to get involved in the work we do on planning, please get in touch.

Joe Peacock

Scare Stories

I thought I should write a short extra post on the issue of rail from the transport summit. The first half of the summit was all about promoting HS2 with all the speakers giving a big push to it to try to ensure everyone would go away and actively support it.

As has already been reported in the press, Adrian Shooter of Chiltern trains told a story of how there was a collection at the end of a meeting in a village hall where they collected £100 000 in 10 minutes to fight the campaign opposing HS2. I don't know whether this is true or not. I do know that many of the opponents are very well educated and in a lot of cases well connected so this is a different kettle of fish to fighting residents groups over environmental matters.

The campaigners are being very careful to ensure that they focus on more than just the local issues, despite Phillip Hammond's continuing attempts to label them as NIMBYs. They are looking very carefully at the economic arguments, the process of the consultation, the alternatives to the HS2 proposal for improving our transport systems in this country and the environmental arguments.

Nobody really argues that we need to do something to improve our rail services in this country and that if we are to create a modal shift from road to rail, then we will need to spend money on new infrastructure. The argument is whether this is the right way of doing it, whether speed is the key or whether people just want a more comfortable and affordable option. The contradictions in the case for HS2 are huge, as it is sold as green, yet will create more long journeys and take people off more environmental forms of transport, gives a business case that relies on people not working on trains when all the evidence is to the contrary – business people do like to work while travelling. It is neither low cost nor low carbon and the consultation is not giving us a chance to examine other options for improving our transport systems.

Birmingham City Council is so determined to have another big vanity project that they're putting £50 000 in to promoting it at a time when cuts are being made to frontline services all over the city and jobs are being lost in bigger numbers than even HS2's wildest predictions for 15 years time. The fixation with supplying the airport with extra passengers via fast trains to pollute the skies even more can't be worth that, surely.

There is also a contradiction in the words of the council and the actions of London Midland at the moment. There is a stated desire to get more people using local rail services (and councillor Huxtable is very supportive of re-opening stations along several lines in Birmingham that we've been campaigning for) yet they are closing ticket offices at many of the local stations meaning there will be no facilities open there, making them a much less pleasant, safe and accessible place for passengers. My colleague asked councillor Huxtable about this and he did at least confirm that they were speaking to them about this and had been asked to attend a meeting next week.

Let's hope that stations in Birmingham will be maintained for people's comfort and safety on local services, that other local stations are re-opened and that the government doesn't commit huge amounts of money to the wrong type of infrastructure for the benefit of the few who will use it when investment is badly needed all over the country. Let's have a grown up debate over what type of transport system we need to cut the country's environmental impact, wean us off oil and ensure that everyone has access to affordable and reliable public transport when they need it.

2 Men Inhabiting Different Worlds

On Tuesday I attended 2 events organised by the city council. Firstly there was the Birmingham transport summit where we had many flashy presentations on Birmingham's future connectivity and the importance of international links to bring inward investment. Then, in the evening I went along to receive an award for the green community work we'd done through our Faith and Climate Change project and also heard a talk by Rob Hopkins of the transition towns initiative on how we need to re-localise our supply chains and move away from a dependence on oil.

At the transport summit we had a new cabinet member for transport leading it, in councillor Huxtable, and there was a marked change from the previous incumbent. Cycling was mentioned far more times than last year and there was more of an emphasis on walking, too, but still the main overarching obsessions are with large-scale vanity projects, such as HS2, the airport runway and the new “gateway” station at New Street. It is a bizarre world that the leader of the council, Mike Whitby, lives in when he talks about the need for consistency and there not being contradictions in their policy, yet can talk about cutting CO2 emissions and sustainability and doubling the number of passengers at the airport by bringing in more people from the South East in one breath.

I asked a question in the second part of the event (after Councillor Whitby had left, unfortunately) about the rise in oil prices due to the problems with supply and the unsustainable nature of planning to use motor cars and planes in the (relatively near) future. Cllr Huxtable passed this question on to an officer who had been to Abu Dhabi recently and I was surprised by his frankness when he said that supplies are likely to run out in 2040 or 2045 and that although there are other ways of powering motor vehicles, planes are much more difficult. How any sensible leadership can put all their eggs in a basket that is going to be empty in less than 30 years seems incredible – what legacy are they leaving behind them?

The quote that they put up about leaving the city a more beautiful place than they had found it felt rather like a sick joke in this context.

In the evening Rob Hopkins spoke eloquently about the transition movement and the projects springing up all over the country where people are trying to re-connect with their local areas and that, as much as being an environmental movement, this is a social movement too, as people who've done it talk more about the friends they've made than the carbon they've saved. Once again we saw figures about how quickly oil is going to run out and some reminders of the ridiculousness of how our economy works at the moment with the same goods travelling back and forth from country to country needlessly, wasting precious resources and disconnecting consumers from the producers.

There certainly are some impressive things being done with local currency schemes, energy generation ventures and food growing initiatives, although he admits that it's only a small part of what needs to be done. He also spoke of his admiration of the work being done by Localise West Midlands in promoting real policy solutions on the economic changes that are needed. On how to fight the power of supermarkets, I found his answer a little unconvincing, as at the moment there seems to be no stopping them and getting people to change habits when their local shops have already gone is very hard indeed.

In the question and answer session I once again got my question in, this time about the need for campaigning when it comes to trying to stop politicians doing the stupid things that they are prone to, such as those mentioned above. He admitted that this was very much needed too, but he had become burned out after doing this for a few years himself, so different types of activities are all needed.

So, are we doing the hard stuff here at BFoE and leaving the nice fun stuff to the transition groups? We used to do a lot of practical things, too (and still do in places), but when covering a city the size of Birmingham, cannot keep such a focus on small areas as a transition group for Kings Heath or Sutton can. It is a real challenge to get people involved in campaigning and policy work as it's not as glamorous, nor are the results as immediate, but it really is a crucial area of work, so we appreciate all the volunteers who get involved with our group to help it happen.

We also got an award on the night for our work in being a green community organisation. Here's a picture of me getting it from Rob Hopkins:

When the leader of your council lives in such a state of denial as ours and his deputy (who was there to introduce the event with Rob Hopkins, but didn't stay to hear what he said) claims to be a champion of climate change and sustainability, but goes along with all those policies too, you need a strong campaigns group with a positive alternative vision of the future. The difference we can make depends on the support we get, so please come along and get involved if you can, or if you are unable to contribute your time and expertise, become a financial supporter instead.

Joe Peacock

Monday, 21 March 2011

Tesco Taking Over

A new Tesco store has been approved for construction in Moseley, in the face of overwhelming opposition from local residents. Despite more than 2000 signatures gathered on petitions against the new store, and an initial rejection from the local council planning committee, the new development will be built on the derelict Meteor Ford site, and will consist of a Tesco store, sheltered housing and a medical centre.

An article in the local press gave a very one-sided look at the impact of Tesco stores, ignoring all the evidence of trade being taken away from local shops, the benefits of spending money with local businesses where that money is then recycled into the local community and not mentioning the business practices they use which trample over small producers and farmers

Residents are primarily opposed to the new store because of fears that it will divert trade away from local independent businesses. The developers claim that the store is needed to win back a market share in the surrounding areas of Hall Green, Kings Heath and Small Heath. This is unlikely however, as the store will not be large enough to detract from large supermarkets in the area, but still large enough to draw business away from Moseley High Street. Again, developers claim that the types of businesses in Moseley are generally high end shops and so will not be in direct competition with Tesco. However, the examples they cite as high end shops are all food retailers, and it is hard to believe that a supermarket primarily selling food will not be in direct competition with independent food outlets such as sandwich shops and bakeries.

Furthermore, the location of the new store is on the outskirts of Moseley as opposed to in the centre, which poses the problem of convenience. As it is based away from the main shopping area in Moseley, shoppers are less likely to utilise the Tesco for goods which were not available in the High Street. It is more likely that they will simply fulfil all of their shopping needs at Tesco, which will definitely take business away from local retailers.

The other major concern is that of increased traffic congestion around the site. The proposed plans have allowed for 103 parking spaces, which for a store of this size is relatively low. Add to that visitors to the health centre and residents, and the amount of parking really seems inadequate. The new store will most likely attract interest from outside of Moseley, such as commuters passing by and residents from other constituencies. All of these factors will lead to increased traffic passing through Moseley, as well as inevitable congestion due to the lack of parking.

Delivery vehicles will be accessing the site via a residential road, which will cause additional traffic problems, but more significantly will increase the levels noise disturbance experienced by residents, particularly during out of hours deliveries. Certain plans have been put into place to make the roads more suitable for increased traffic and encourage public transport and walking to the site. However, due to the size of location of the store, it seems unlikely that many shoppers will use alternatives to simply driving there.

Just five years ago there were only three major Tescos in Birmingham. Now, including Tesco Express shops, there are 33 stores across the city. Changes in legislation in recent years has made it easier for companies to expand, due to it now being much more difficult for councils to turn down planning applications unless they directly affect other planned building developments. It a disgrace that despite Moseley residents clearly not wanting a large supermarket in their area, and doing everything they could to stop it, the plans will go ahead. The developers have "apologised" for bullying the council into getting their way, but this is no consolation to the people who will be affected. Big supermarkets are rarely stopped and are forcing more and more independent retailers to close, leaving empty retail units all over town.

The hope is that this doesn’t discourage protest against future developments of a similar nature. Councillors voted equally for and against the plans, and it was only due to this tied situation that a further vote had to be cast and the decision went ahead. So don’t be disheartened, some people are listening, the core strategy consultation has included a number of anti-supermarkets comments, so let's hope these are now included to protect our local businesses.

Joe Osborne

Tuesday, 15 March 2011

Tax cuts for the most under-taxed??!!

I was amazed to find Jerry Blackett calling for airport taxes to be cut in the Birmingham Post on March 14. How unfortunate it is that at a time when people are losing their jobs and facing tax rises on everyday items he should be defending the already under-taxed aviation industry.

The figures he quotes for losses to the economy are dwarfed by the subsidies the aviation industry already receives and the money that is taken out of the economy by people flying abroad.

VAT has just gone up to 20%, as people must be very aware, yet how much VAT does the aviation industry pay? None on anything! They don't pay VAT or any other tax on fuel, they pay no VAT on buying aircraft, servicing of those aircraft or meals served on aircraft. With this lack of taxation, public money being proposed to be put into paying for Birmingham Airport's runway extension and no suggestion that the industry is liable for the environmental damage it causes, in fact they get a very good deal indeed.

Compared to car travel, aviation benefits from an annual tax subsidy of around £9 billion and how many people actually benefit from this? The country suffered from an annual tourism deficit of over £15bn in 2009, down significantly due to the recession. Perhaps a further adjustment is needed for people to spend more money in this country and bring more money into the treasury.

At a time when people are losing their jobs because of cuts to public services, we should not be giving any further money to activities that benefit so few people. The majority of people don't fly and would rather that those who do pay their fair share of tax.

See Fair Tax on Flying for more info

Joe Peacock

Let's Beautify Birmingham!

Seed Bombing - 21ST March, 7-9pm at Birmingham Friend's of the Earth Offices - Allison St

This months Happily Ever Crafter event is going to be a good one it seems - lots of positive responses!

We've decided to hold a Seed Bomb making event - just balls of seeds, soil and clay -
organic materials which will help you beautify your local area - just chuck 'em where you choose!

It's a free session, with all materials provided, you just need to bring some clothes you don't mind muddying!
We'll also be making and filling some simple plant pots so you can take some seeds... soon to be flowers and or vegtables, home with you too.

All welcome, we'll be open from 7-9pm, and will look forward to seeing you.

The idea behind seed bombing is to encourage plant (and therefore insect) life in areas that may generally be hard to reach - the so called bombs can be about the size of golf balls and will be for you to take away and dispose of wherever you like - making the local area slightly more pleasant for you and others.

Wednesday, 9 March 2011

SusMo success! Church roof turns into power station.

We've been following the situation with solar panels on the roof of St Mary's church in Moseley with interest for some time, as this should be a great opportunity to show other churches what can be done with a real demonstrator project that benefits the local community and the cause of renewable energy as a whole.

SusMo has put in a huge amount of work to make this project a success. They won £30,000 from the Green Streets award for this part of the bid (the other money going to the Mosque and some residential properties). The project also had a further £20,000 lined up to meet the full cost, but that opportunity has now expired. SusMo are now actively seeking a replacement source of funding, and would be delighted to hear from people who can help them find it.

However, the important barrier of permission to install the solar panels has now been overcome. This result comes after a long and arduous campaign. The Planning Inspectorate overturned the decision of the Planning Committee, thereby granting planning permission, in September 2010. The Diocese of Birmingham had to follow a separate (and lengthy) process of evaluation before reaching their decision, but was eventually swayed by the sense and viability of the project.

John Dowell, the agent for St. Mary’s Moseley Parochial Church Council, expressed joy and relief at the Chancellor’s decision. “His decision backs the views of the churchgoers, Moseley residents, and members of the wider public who have written in support, rather than the objectors who wished to preserve the church building exactly as it was in 1910.” He added that it brought the Diocese of Birmingham in line with projects in other parts of the country‚ including London, Bath and Bristol‚ ensuring that the city is not left behind in its response to climate change and rising fuel prices.

SusMo Chair Claire Spencer echoed John’s sentiments. “This installation will ensure that St. Mary’s is less reliant on energy from fossil fuels, and makes a great deal of financial sense. Visually, it sends a wonderful, positive message ‚ the people of Moseley care deeply about its present, its future, and one another. But the process that we have been through with St. Mary’s has also set a precedent, making it easier for other churches to tap into renewable energy‚ and we look forward to their plans!”

SusMo would like to thank everyone who has supported them and St. Mary’s throughout this project‚ the good advice, letters of support and words of encouragement made all the difference.

Birmingham Friends of the Earth offers our congratulations and hopes that this will be the first of many similar schemes in the city.

Tuesday, 8 March 2011

Digbeth Residents Association 07.02.11

Last night I went to my first Digbeth Residents Association (DRA) meeting. I started at Birmingham FoE as Outreach Officer last month and am working on creating links with residents groups, as well as organising events (such as our HS2 debate) and finding opportunities for us to go out and talk to people.

I was asked if I would like to attend after sending a few e-mails to Val and Pam about the possibility of establishing a grow site in Digbeth. We have been involved in others, so it would be good to do one here where we're based.

Upon arriving at the Alcester suite of the Paragon hotel I was welcomed in by friendly faces. These included residents of Digbeth, a police officer from the area and people interested in the Digbeth area.

After all the introductions were out the way the DRA spoke passionately about Digbeth's future. They feel strongly that the Digbeth area needs more greenery. They have been given 20 Birch trees by the Eastside Projects, with the idea that they will be planted in Highgate park, although the DRA are hoping to set a few a side to be distributed around the area. Another idea was to use the abandoned Victorian rail viaduct as allotment space. We also touched on the subject of grow-sites in Digbeth; which is something I've been looking into myself. Everyone there seemed enthusiastic about the idea and I think it will be a great success... that is when the pain-stakingly long process of finding land we can use is done!

Other issues raised concern the section 106 improvements to Bradford Street, St Patrick's day parade, film nights in the spotted dog, police presence at the meetings and the Digbeth summit.

Overall it was a great insight into all the planning and hard work that goes into making Digbeth the exciting and creative place that it is today!

Rosie Cervelli

Monday, 7 March 2011

Aston University Go Green Week

Last week was Aston University’s Go Green Week. Birmingham FoE were invited along to engage with students on our environmental campaigns. Each day had a different theme. The Energy & Climate Change group were there to coincide with “Turn Off Tuesday”.

One of the things that amazes me about Birmingham is that two of its universities have no student led environmental groups. Aston University used to have one but it is now defunct. So a big aim of the day was to sign up as many interested students as possible to a mailing list, with a view to getting a new group up and running with links to Birmingham FoE.

Armed with our leaflets and clipboards in the foyer of the Main building we approached students. Of the students who weren’t too busy on their way to lectures to stop, almost all of them recognised that energy & climate change were important issues and many of them wanted to find out more. This is encouraging, (we didn’t come across any climate change deniers!), but the difficult bit will be engaging them enough to get them to actively get involved!

The second aim of the day was to gauge students views on their student digs. Student rented accommodation is amongst the worst housing stock in the UK and Birmingham is no exception. One of the things we are campaigning for is a legally binding minimum standard of energy efficiency for private rented properties by 2016.

While students were largely very keen to tell us about their draughty bedrooms and freezing bathrooms, when it came to agreeing to be filmed for a “Rate My Digs” feature, they became a little more reticent! Some for fear of retribution, but many because they hadn’t done their hair or because they “had a heavy night”! However, with perseverance and charm, we were able to get a handful of brave soldiers to appear in front of the lens without make-up!

You will be able to see what they said in a video which will shortly be released, so look out for that. On the whole though, it is fair to say that Aston University is investing in new, energy efficient accommodation so hopefully our students can watch Deal or No Deal in warmth and comfort, safe in the knowledge that they are not wasting energy!

Robert Pass

Thursday, 3 March 2011

Overfishing and the unsustainable use of our oceans

On Monday 28th February, Nigel Baker, Lead Food Campaigner, led a fascinating discussion on overfishing. He started off by asking each member of the group to look down a list of common fish species and state whether they thought each one was currently overfished. He then compared our answers to recent data from the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC). Some of the results were a surprise to us, for example Atlantic Cod stocks are apparently not so badly depleted, while some of the results confirmed what we knew, for instance that current fishing methods for tiger prawns are completely unsustainable.

Nigel then went on to draw our attention to a number of alarming facts around current fish stocks:

  • 90% of the stocks of large predatory fish are already gone

  • globally, fishing fleets are at least two to three times as large as needed to take present day catches of fish and other marine species

  • the majority of the UK population depend on only four species of fish – tuna, salmon, cod and haddock

  • the dangers associated with overfishing are shown in the example of the 1992 collapse of northern cod fisheries in Newfoundland resulting in at least 40,000 people losing their job and stocks of cod that have never returned

It was also mentioned that the profile of the current debate about overfishing has been raised by the chef Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall who has recently begun a campaign called the Big Fish Fight. In the series on Channel 4, he finds out that due to the current EU quota system, up to 20,000 tonnes of fish are thrown back dead into the North Sea every week, that is up to half of the catch for each boat is discarded.

It seems that there is reason to hope that the current system may change as the EU Fisheries Commissioner has just set out ideas for ending the practice of discarding fish, as set out in an article on the BBC website on the 1st March.

One solution to the problem of discard may be to adopt an ecologically friendly policy such as that used in Faroe Islands, an archipelago which has a population of 48,000 people and an economy which is heavily dependent on fishing. According to this more sustainable system, a quota is imposed in days rather than tonnes, and thereby avoids throwing excess fish back into the sea.

The Big Fish Fight programs also explore the problems associated with fishing on a commercial scale which uses techniques which catch all species in an area indiscriminately leading to the problem of by-catch. One example shown in the series is for tuna which is packaged by Tesco as being sourced in environmentally friendly ways, but which is shown to come from fishing boats which regularly catch sharks, tortoises and turtles in their large nets.

The discussion then went on to consider what we can do about this situation. One suggestion is that we should learn to eat a wider variety of fish, for example eating Mackerel, in order to save other species under threat. It was noted that the UK fish and chips industry is a significant driver in the UK's demand for this limited range of fish. Aldo told the group that at least one fish and chip shop in the area has started offering more sustainable fish on the menu since seeing the issue raised on TV, and suggested that we could all make a visit sometime. If you know of any other fish and chip shops locally that do this, please let us know!

One further issue that was raised in the discussion was the rising acidification of our oceans due to climate change, and how this is causing coral reefs to rapidly become bleached and jellyfish populations to increase. Unfortunately there was not time to discuss this topic in full, however eating jellyfish with chips was not felt to be the answer!

FoE has a linked campaigning group called Marinet who are campaigning for reform of the EU Common Fisheries Policy. Please visit their website and support their campaign: http://www.marinet.org.uk/ and next time you eat fish, think about what your choice is doing to the oceans.