What's really horrible is the driving force behind the wide-scale use of FADs was dolphin-safe tuna. In the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean, schools of tuna often associate with schools of dolphin, so purse seiners would locate a school of dolphin and surround them with a purse seine. When the public found out about the number of dolphins being harmed with this practice, there was a public outcry (Greenpeace took part in this outcry). This fishing practice was eventually made illegal, and the fishermen had to find a new way to locate the tuna, so they started using FADs heavily.

For some reason, this dolphin-tuna interaction only took place in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean and nowhere else. When the dolphin-sa­fe label came around, companies jumped on the bandwagon and started labeling their tuna as dolphin safe, even though their tuna was from places that never had a problem with dolphin by-catch in the first place. They take credit for "not doing things in some oceans that have never been done" (in Charles Clover's words). This only serves to confuse consumers worried about sustainability. People see "dolphin-safe" and assume that means it is an eco-friendly choice, when in fact, as this article states, it is
devastating to the environment.

Evolution is evolution? What's your point? We got really good at effing up the oceans, so let's keep it up?