Large scale boycotts of the industry will drop demand, and so production, and finally the impact on the fisheries.
You can already see this at work with the decline of the milk industry in the US as consumers have lowered their consumption by about 49% since 1970.[1]
All done by the power of consumer choice.
Millions of people are already voluntarily choosing to engage in these boycotts against these destructive industries, without waiting to have a gun put to their heads. It's worth considering taking part in order to have some positive impact on the world, while also continuing to push for systemic change, in my opinion. It doesn't have to be either/or.
[1] https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2022/june/fluid-milk-co...
Changing the industry is not in one person's power, but it is a small number of people (owners of the several large producers and the regulatory guys) who do change it; this (overnight) cancelling of the season is a counterexample to your point.
Either way, if that is actual consumption then that's an increase in total dairy use and I appreciate the correction.
I would argue my point still stands in terms in drinking milk consumption, it at least has dropped by nearly 50%, and that means that we would be producing a lot more dairy overall today if consumer habits hadn't shifted away from milk (and the growth in cheese and yogurt consumption had increased in the same fashion as it has, which admittedly may not have been the case).
Another example would be the massive growth of plant based milks and vegan/vegetarian products and restaurants into multi billion dollar industries over the last few decades, displacing a commensurate amount of demand from animal based industries.
My point is also not that governments, corporations, and the powerful don't have any influence over the state of the world. It was that large scale boycotts and pressing for systemic change can be done simultaneously, and do not have to be mutually exclusive.
A better example to illustrate your point might be the grape boycotts of the 1960s, when Cesar Chavez/Dolores de la Huerta/UFW & company successfully appealed to the American working man to boycott (specifically California) grapes until the growers agreed to basic labor rights.
In any case, my point is that industry/the powers that be aren't actually to blame, as evidenced by their readiness to cancel the season. As this is most likely caused by climate change, we should be boycotting the fossil fuel industry, if only we could
I agree the technology exists, but there's no way the governments in those areas are going to enforce any sort of laws that hurt short term profits.
Doesn't seem solved to me. Look at the trouble south america has been having with chinese trawlers doing illegal fishing and sending it back to china.
We don't have supervillains trying to destroy the world, all we need is rational people thinking like this to do it for us.
So are you, and everybody else that has synthetic textiles in their house.