Evidence is mounting that fish populations won’t necessarily recover even if overfishing stops. Fishing may be such a powerful evolutionary force that we are running up a Darwinian debt for future generations.
— Loder (2006), Point of No Return in Conservation in Practice.
Darwinian Debt. That’s the elegant phrase Natasha Loder (2006) uses to describe the observation that human pressure on the environment — fishing in this particular example — has forced evolutionary changes that are not soon reversed.
Fishermen prefer to catch larger fish, depleting the population of older fish, and allowing smaller fish to successfully reproduce. Over a period of years this artificial selection — as opposed to natural selection — gives rise to new generations of fish that are permanently smaller than they used to be. And the fisheries find it hard to recover even after decades (Swain, 2007):
Populations where large fish were selectively harvested (as in most fisheries) displayed substantial declines in fecundity, egg volume, larval size at hatch, larval viability, larval growth rates, food consumption rate and conversion efficiency, vertebral number, and willingness to forage. These genetically based changes in numerous traits generally reduce the capacity for population recovery.
— Walsh et al., 2005, Maladaptive changes in multiple traits caused by fishing: impediments to population recovery in Ecology Letters.