> I guess the complexity is that.. there doesn't seem to be a good answer, currently.
Encouraging people to eat less fish might be the easiest (and thereby best) solution.
I'm not saying humans should eat /no/ fish – indeed there are many human communities which rely on fishing, and for which fishing plays a key role in their culture. Similarly, some people may need to eat fish for health reasons.
However, it seems to me that /reducing/ consumption by cutting consumption of fish for pleasure/taste would likely benefit both the environment and people; for example, indigeneous groups which traditionally rely on fishing would face less competition from industrial-scale fishing. From an environmental standpoint, most things, even whaling it seems, are inherently sustainable in smaller scales.
Again, I don't mean to say that everyone needs to comsume zero fish. But if those of us who can, which likely includes many HN readers, cut down our consumption it may benefit everyone at quite a small cost to ourselves; as a middle class Northern European, I can testify that me not having consumed fish in the last 5 years has had 0 immediate impact on my health or happiness levels.
Note: Of course this is all assuming that there are more eco-friendly alternative protein/fat/omegas sources available. Again, I do not mean to say that this is applicable for everyone.