Tuna and billfish fishing moved offshore mainly in the past 200 years

Archaeological evidence shows people caught these open-ocean predators for thousands of years, but intensive distant-water fishing came much later.

Editorial illustration — not from the study.

The study traces how people interacted with tuna and billfish across thousands of years. Early evidence of tuna fishing dates to about 44,000 years ago, while the earliest evidence for billfish dates to about 10,000 years ago. By 3,000 to 1,000 years ago, fisheries for some tuna species had appeared in regions around the world.

Most early fisheries operated where these fish could be reached near the coast, such as around underwater canyons, or where seasonal movements and unusually warm ocean conditions brought them closer to shore. The researchers link some early fisheries to ceremony and ritual, as well as to advances in maritime technology. They find that intensive commercial exploitation of these predators in truly offshore habitats is mostly a development of the last 200 years.

When offshore fishing began

The earliest archaeological evidence of fishing for tuna dates to about 44,000 years ago; the earliest evidence for billfish dates to about 10,000 years ago. Early fisheries for some tuna species were established around the world by about 3,000 to 1,000 years ago.

Most early tuna and billfish fisheries were located where the animals could be accessed relatively close to shore, including near submarine canyons, or where they may have moved inshore seasonally or during warm ocean events. Some early fisheries were associated with ceremony or ritual and with improvements in maritime technology. Sustained and intensive commercial fishing of these open-ocean predators in offshore habitats occurred mainly during the past 200 years, with a few exceptions.

Why the timing matters

The findings distinguish between the long history of catching tuna and billfish and the much more recent spread of intensive fishing far from shore. They show that people became major ecological drivers in nearshore and offshore ecosystems at different times and through different pathways.

That distinction helps place modern ocean fishing in a longer history of human effects on marine ecosystems. It also shows that the presence of ancient fishing does not necessarily mean that people were already exploiting distant offshore habitats intensively.

Evidence and limits

The study draws on archaeological evidence for tuna and billfish fishing from locations around the world and compares when and where these fisheries appeared. The dates in the abstract are approximate, and archaeological evidence cannot provide a complete record of every past fishery or region. The abstract also does not specify how much evidence was available for each location or how the researchers defined intensive commercial exploitation.

Coastal residents weigh flood damage, costs and family ties when considering a move

People considering whether to leave flood-prone coastal communities weigh disastrous flooding and rising costs alongside crime, healthcare and proximity to family and friends. In a survey of 182 respondents, most said they would not relocate, while others said they would move immediately or in the future.

13 hours ago·5 views

Society & Economics

Managers accepted reflective coaching from humans but wanted answers from AI

A study of eight managers found that they preferred human coaches for reflective questioning, even though they welcomed that approach from a person. When the same coaching protocol came from an AI system, they wanted it to provide answers instead.

20 hours ago·16 views

Abstract editorial illustration accompanying the article: AI voter personas shifted an election estimate toward Democrats—but accuracy is unclear

Society & Economics

AI voter personas shifted an election estimate toward Democrats—but accuracy is unclear

Researchers used large language models to create artificial survey respondents for a weekly look at the 2026 US House elections. Adding personal memories and news exposure shifted the estimates toward Democrats, but the resulting 18.7-point Democratic margin was well above the 8.7-point polling average, leaving the method’s predictive accuracy unresolved.

1 day ago·37 views