Dr Worm's research has shown that 90% of the oceans large predators have declined since the rise of industrial fishing having major impacts on marine ecosystems. He continued that "the scientific community is in very little doubt that this is a crisis." In order to stop this crisis, he said that a number of things have to be done - that the impacts of some types of 'fishing gear could be mitigated' (changed for the better) but that others, like those used for bottom trawls, simply could not.

Key to restoring the diversity and productivity of the oceans would be setting aside certain areas of the ocean as 'no take' marine reserves: areas where no human activities are allowed but where fish and other marine life can grow and live without human interference and then 'spillover' into the surrounding ocean areas. He concluded that the 'oceans have been depleted and changed on a global scale" and that to restore them, we have to minimize the destructive impacts and try to maintain diversity and adaptive capacity by creating a network of marine reserves.

Dr Callum Roberts, a marine scientist from the University of York in the UK then spoke of the benefits of marine reserves for the oceans. Commenting on the state of the oceans around Europe's shores and management failures, he said, "if this were a publicly listed company, the shareholders would have fired the directors long ago." He argued that 'no industry has a right to cause a species to go extinct and that fisheries managers can no longer ignore the habitats and ecosystems that species live in. Dr Roberts focussed on the benefits of no-take marine reserves, citing a study that showed that marine reserves in Kenya had improved the food security of the people living close to them. To prevent overfishing, he suggested that the scientific literature has shown that between 20 and 40% of the sea should be set aside as a network of marine reserves. He concluded, "without conservation, fisheries are doomed" and that "marine reserves are not a last resort, but a foundation for the sustainable management for the future."

Sebastian Matthews from the International Collective in Support of Fishworkers then presented on the importance of small-scale fishing to coastal communities. I am sure his presentation will soon be up on the UN website (look under "law of the sea") as it offered some clear insights into the issues impacting on small-scale fishers across the world, in so doing compromising their livelihoods and cultures.

It was then time for me to speak. Maarten, our unbelievably brilliant videographer in Amsterdam had put together a short DVD that showed the impacts of industrial fishing on our oceans and the people that depend on them for their livelihoods. Unfortunately, just like yesterday when the phone-link to Carmen failed, UN technology could not get the DVD to work (even though we had tested it during the lunch break). It was very frustrating but we are going to get another opportunity to show it tomorrow just before lunch. So, without the delegates seeing the plight of our oceans in full colour, it was up to me to speak to their hearts, and hopefully influence their minds.

I reminded them that we were there to protect the oceans, and spoke about the Rainbow Warrior being out on the high seas and the extent of destruction. I quoted Albert Einstein who once said, "our technology has surpassed our humanity" - Einstein was, of course speaking of nuclear weapons, so I said, "the high seas bottom trawl fleets that ply the high seas, constrained only by how much they can catch in these largely unregulated waters, come very close to being a weapon of mass destruction for deep-sea life." I asked the delegates to make good on the promises already made and honour the agreements already signed ... and do something positive and proactive before its too late.

A lot of questions were asked of the scientists on the panel. It was really amazing to see that these government policy makers, who always argue that they need science before they can take action, had two independent and highly respected scientists before them, and proceeded to question whether their findings were valid. Here were two people, with no economic or political interest in the world's oceans, using facts and figures gathered by the governments in the room to show them the dire straits that our oceans are in, and their data and conclusions were questioned. Our team was left wondering whether the arguments for "science based decision making" that we always hear are yet another excuse for inaction.

The statement that raised the most eyebrows was, however, made by a representative of the Canadian Fishing Industry speaking on a panel yesterday when he said "the ocean can adjust and industry can adjust". Speaking to the decline of the cod stocks off Newfoundland in Canada, he went on to say, "our industry would not necessarily want the cod to come back" because they make more money off snowcrabs and shrimp now. So what happens when they have fished out the snowcrabs and shrimp? ... Sigh.

More tomorrow when the panels end and some of the backroom politics come out into the open for the negotiations around the recommendations that the meeting will make on some of the issues to be included in the General Assembly Resolutions on oceans and fisheries later this year.

Karen.