Can star power save the seas? A review of The Bottom Line

I said in my last post that I would be reviewing a few of the films I watched at last month’s Wildscreen Festival and one that definitely deserves some attention is The Bottom Line. It deals with the issue of bottom trawling, a fishing practice that’s responsible for the widespread destruction of deep-sea marine ecosystems. The film was also a top-three finalist in the Campaign category at the Panda Awards and was narrated by Sigourney Weaver, who felt so strongly about the issue that she worked on the project for free (if you would like to join the fight to save our oceans, click here).

The film really stood out for me amidst the bleak picture of our planet and its ecosystems (both present and future) that was painted by so many top conservationists, scientists, environmentalists and filmmakers at Wildscreen. The hopeful message conveyed by the film’s creator Maarten van Rouveroy (producer/cameraman for Greenpeace International) came as something of a relief: we can’t give up.

Even though the film was aimed at UN delegates (to encourage them to reach an agreement to regulate bottom trawling), I hope that it’s far more widely viewed so that people gain a greater awareness of this destructive practice and its consequences. Go on, it’s only about 8 minutes!

Since Wildscreen, I’ve been able to put a few questions directly to Maarten. Let his words inspire you, too!

Q: Is it too late to save the planet? Is there any hope?

A: Let me first of all point out that these are my personal opinions and I’m not speaking in any official capacity.

Over the past few decades, environmental awareness and the will to act differently have been growing (partly because we are increasingly faced with the consequences of our actions). But we will need change to come much more quickly and in much greater strides if we are to have any hope of saving the planet.

Even though it is still not too late, it is undeniable that we have created (and are still creating) some irreversible damage. Our actions are resulting in the extinction of species and the loss of unique, irreplaceable habitats. However, the most important environmental battle of our time is without any doubt that for our global climate. There is every chance that if we do not change course dramatically within the next five years, we will do irreversible damage to our atmosphere and end up in a situation of “runaway climate change”. Should this happen, we may end up in a scenario where we cannot mitigate the process of climate change any longer. If we cannot save the planet’s atmosphere, there is no hope of successfully protecting the ecosystems on planet Earth.

Q: Why should we care if the majority of people don’t?

A: Firstly, it is not too late to make a big difference, although we will have to make significant changes and they will need to come fast. Secondly, “giving up” is simply not an option. The struggle for our planet and its climate is one we cannot afford to lose as we are currently heading towards a scenario that will render the planet uninhabitable for us as well as the species and ecosystems on which we depend. Thirdly, even at times when our actions seem pointless, I would personally rather try to make a difference than stand on the sidelines while environmental destruction continues.

Q: How can we encourage people to care?

A: People need to become part of the solution rather than part of the problem. Even big, fundamental changes can start at the level of the individual. Everyone can take action and make a positive contribution.

Q: What is there to give us hope?

Children in India show their support for Greenpeace's Energy (R)evolution

A: Fortunately, being “green” has become mainstream and is even considered “cool”. There’s now greater environmental awareness and more willingness to act than ever before. We need this momentum to create fundamental and permanent change. The financial crisis may also create a mind shift and present an opportunity to switch to a green economy. More and more people are beginning to realise that sustainable solutions are also the most sensible from a long-term economic perspective.

There is also hope in a number of large-scale initiatives such as the moratorium on deforestation discussed between Indonesia and Norway, the increasing success of large-scale marine reserves (such as in the Pacific) and the solutions proposed under Greenpeace’s Energy (R)evolution.

Q: What can we do to make a real difference?

A: People can make a number of practical lifestyle changes that will make a significant difference if they catch on. Personal action must be accompanied by a willingness to infect other people with the enthusiasm to copy and improve on such action. However, the greatest and fastest changes can be made by corporations and governments. People need to use the incredible power they have as conscientious consumers and critical voters. Simply blaming governments for their failure to act is not enough; they need to be forced into action by the people who put them in charge.

Q: Do you think hard-hitting, in-your-face films about the environment work?

Al Gore's 2006 documentary earned $49m at the box office worldwide

A: I do believe people need to continue to be confronted with environmental destruction and the consequences of our actions. However, they also need to be presented with the solutions that exist to make a difference. I fundamentally disagree with commissioning editors who refuse to fund and broadcast environmental and conservation films on the basis that such programmes are not popular with viewers. The success of films such as An Inconvenient Truth, The Cove, The Age of Stupid and proves there is substantial interest among audiences. In addition, broadcasters should take responsibility for bringing these issues to the attention of their viewers.

Q: Do you know what The Bottom Line has achieved?

A: The Bottom Line was made for a specific audience of United Nations (UN) delegates voting on a resolution on bottom trawling in the high seas. Through the star power of Sigourney Weaver as the narrator of the film, we were able to get this short production shown during a plenary session at the UN.

Fishing trawler (Photograph courtesy of Captain Robert Pawlowski, Creative Commons)

Most of the UN decision makers in this audience were essentially lawyers who were dealing with one issue on one day and a completely different topic on the next (and always looking at these issues from a legal perspective). Most of them had no idea what was really happening on the high seas and were shocked by some of the images in the film. As a direct result of the film being shown at the plenary session, the wording of the final resolution was significantly improved from a conservation perspective. Having a better legal framework through the UN is, of course, only a first step. In order to achieve a real positive impact for the protection of deep-sea ecosystems, the new resolution needs to be properly enforced and policed.