Hi, calli,

First--let me say that your writing makes more sense to me than the instructions do. For one thing, it should be write about the pictures.

I will attempt to re-word some of yours as I would write it, since you ask, though most of it is very very good.

"In the first one of the two pictures we can see in the year 1905 a ship was fishing and many fish were there. In the second picture, however, many ships were fishing but only one fish turned out, as in the year 1999."
In the first of the two pictures we see that it is the year 1905; one boat* is fishing and there are many fish in the sea beneath it. In the second picture, however, many boats are fishing but there is only one fish in the water; it is the year 1999.

"The pictures tell us that with so many years' overfishing, the resources of fish at sea have been coming to the brink of exhaustion. The fishing vessels [have] multiplied over the past years, vying for the resources of fish at sea, which isn't unlimited. If the situation continues without control, the fish at sea will die out one day and we’ll have no fish to net any more even with all kinds of vessels in hand."
The pictures tell us that with so many years' overfishing, the resources of fish at sea have been coming to the brink of exhaustion. The fishing vessels have multiplied over the years, vying for the resources of fish at sea, which aren't unlimited. If the situation continues without control, the fish at sea will die out one day and we’ll have no fish to net any more even with all kinds of vessels in hand.

"That’s not any of us want[s] to see. But how can we let this never happen? The answers lie in nowhere but our own hands. First we should understand the idea of continuing development and pursue a way of fishing abiding by the natural law. Second our governments as well as international organizations should get in line to impose a ban on overfishing, such as limiting the number of vessels.
"
That is something that none of us want to see. But how can we prevent this? The answers lie entirely in our own hands: first, we should understand the idea of continuing development and pursue a way of fishing that abides by the natural law; second, our government as well as international organizations should get together and impose a ban on overfishing, perhaps by limiting the number of vessels.

"In doing so, we can have the fishing industry develop in a rational scale that the nature allows and we’ll again see affluent** fish at sea while fishing industry thrives. I hope that’s the picture which follows the given ones. What a beautiful set of pictures it will be!"
In doing so, we can have the fishing industry develop at a rational scale that nature allows, and we’ll again see a richness of fish in the sea while fishing industry thrives. I hope that’s the picture which follows the given ones. What a beautiful set of pictures it will be!

*I live very far from the ocean, and therefore may not be very familiar with appropriate terms, but to my knowledge, vessels that are used for fishing are usually called fishing boats, whereas ships are huge vessels that transport passengers and/or cargo.

**Affluent is used for people only: those who are rich in money.

I applaud your writing, my dear; I think you are very advanced in English. I hope the person who grades (assesses, judges, marks) your response isn't the person who wrote the instructions. They really are pretty poor (in clarity), but if the writer thinks they're good then he or she might think your work is incorrect! Speaking of exclamation points --you used it beautifully.