Article: The Planet's Fisheries Are In Even Worse Shape Than We Thought

[Ultralight]

This is not good.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/overfishing-worse-than-we-thought_us_569f0ddae4b00f3e98636892?utm_hp_ref=gre en&ir=Green&section=green

[rosarugosa]

That makes me want to cry.

ETA: No just because my beloved food source is in jeopardy. I find the extinction of species to be one of the most horrifying things imaginable.

[Gregg]

Its kind of Jevon's paradox in play. The more efficiently we were able to harvest the oceans, the higher the demand has gone. Sad that we're closer to the brink than we thought, but certainly not unexpected. One more man made straw on Mother Nature's back...

[catherine]

This is a crime against Nature.

I was watching a food show last night--it was a show about fish--a little bit cooking featuring famous chefs, a little bit gastronomic history. They talked about how oysters were just naturally pilled up by the thousands in Hudson Bay, and how Manhattan fishermen just dipped their lobster pots in the water and instantly were able to pull up a slew of them--they were more then plentiful in the oceans. Derrick Jensen's constant refrain is how the salmon used to be so plentiful, the Pacific Northwest was thick with them in the rivers to the point where you could see the schools of them while you were standing on the riverbed--human consumption and construction of dams have pretty much put an end to that.

Being New England born and bred, I am horrified at the status of cod these days... I've known about that for a while. How do things come to this?? Yes, I know--human overpopulation and demand (with bad fishing management thrown in) but what can we do about it? Will people even care until it's too late?

[Ultralight]

This is a crime against Nature.

I was watching a food show last night--it was a show about fish--a little bit cooking featuring famous chefs, a little bit gastronomic history. They talked about how oysters were just naturally pilled up by the thousands in Hudson Bay, and how Manhattan fishermen just dipped their lobster pots in the water and instantly were able to pull up a slew of them--they were more then plentiful in the oceans. Derrick Jensen's constant refrain is how the salmon used to be so plentiful, the Pacific Northwest was thick with them in the rivers to the point where you could see the schools of them while you were standing on the riverbed--human consumption and construction of dams have pretty much put an end to that.

Being New England born and bred, I am horrified at the status of cod these days... I've known about that for a while. How do things come to this?? Yes, I know--human overpopulation and demand (with bad fishing management thrown in) but what can we do about it? Will people even care until it's too late?

I am Midwestern -- inland -- and not on the Great Lakes. I know what certain agricultural practices (feedlots and such) do to the water here. So I try not to take part in the most damaging parts of it. This is why I don't eat beef or pork -- and why I have also eschewed chicken.

I eat salmon now and again, and some sardines and such. But I usually just eat the fish I catch.

But I don't think that me doing this is going to make any real difference. Now, if everyone stopped eating beef and instead ate lentils -- I think things would improve.

[Chicken lady]

My future son in law throws dinner parties. He's a great cook and he is vegetarian and tries to eat as seasonally and organically as possible - including growing some of his own food in very limited space.

he figures, any week he feeds 6 people dinner, he has almost doubled his impact. (Plus, he really likes to throw dinner parties)

i remember being out with my dad on the ocean "baling blues". We caught so many so quickly my dad started casting to them and trying to reel the lure in before the fish could hit it. That was about 35 years ago.

[Williamsmith]

Fish are a renewable resource. There are people who receive college degrees in fishery management and spend their entire lives dedicated to preserving and expanding fisheries.

As in many issues it is about funding, politics and affecting peoples way of life. Pennsylvania has numerous fish hatcheries. I have one essentially in my back yard. The challenges of protecting and managing fisheries are more political and financial than they are Anyang else but then nowadays what isn't.

Say a a prayer for the cod .....and then eat one.

[catherine]

Say a a prayer for the cod .....and then eat one.

Like saying Allahu Akbar before a beheading?



ETA: here's a link to fairly reasoned account of the complexity of the issues surrounding depletion, management, politics, agriculture, and climate change. I jut think something is not right when we have to "help" nature sustain itself--after being the ones to put it in peril in the first place. I'd like to see the waters replete with fish the way they were before we needed triage to make sure we don't eat them all.

http://www.ecori.org/climate-change-series/2015/12/18/three-sides-to-every-fish-story

[Ultralight]

Fish are a renewable resource. There are people who receive college degrees in fishery management and spend their entire lives dedicated to preserving and expanding fisheries.

As in many issues it is about funding, politics and affecting peoples way of life. Pennsylvania has numerous fish hatcheries. I have one essentially in my back yard. The challenges of protecting and managing fisheries are more political and financial than they are Anyang else but then nowadays what isn't.

Say a a prayer for the cod .....and then eat one.


I actually think the problems are just over-fishing and pollution. Why? That is what dang near all the best scientists have concluded after extensive research.

[Ultralight]

Like saying Allahu Akbar before a beheading?



ETA: here's a link to fairly reasoned account of the complexity of the issues surrounding depletion, management, politics, agriculture, and climate change. I jut think something is not right when we have to "help" nature sustain itself--after being the ones to put it in peril in the first place. I'd like to see the waters replete with fish the way they were before we needed triage to make sure we don't eat them all.

http://www.ecori.org/climate-change-series/2015/12/18/three-sides-to-every-fish-story

Fish used to have their own "hatcheries" out in the wet wilderness. Humans destroyed that, so now they have "hatcheries" to help the fish struggle along...

Sad.

[kib]

Part of the trouble is that we discover a "good spot" without thinking about what it means, and fish it to death. Orange Roughy was pretty much wiped out because it turned out they migrate to a certain place to spawn in great numbers, and we were fishing in the comparatively narrow pass-thru to their spawining ground, so basically all the OR in the Pacific Ocean was passing through one area and we just went in and said wow, look at all these fish, we can take as many as we want. Turns out they don't breed for their first 30 years and can live to 150, and their numbers were wildly overestimated by sampling in that one place, so in effect, they're a non-renewable resource. Who knew. I find Deadliest Catch fascinating (in a train wreck sort of way) because it seems to me it's similar and we have learned jack shit about moderation being the key to conservation. Granted there's a season for crab fishing, but the goal appears to be hoovering up every crab in the ocean while it's on.

It's human nature to get excited about what is perceived as a cornucopia of something, but it seems some cultures are better at moderating their natural greed than others. (soap box moment, I don't think capitalism and a consumerist society helps one bit in encouraging moderation.)

ETA: I've just been reading Peter Benchley's "Shark Trouble", his non-fiction research into what has happened to shark populations (and his basic regret over having written Jaws and fueling shark-phobia.) It's fascinating, he gets into explanations of a lot of shark behavior as well as his anecdotal diving experience. If his numbers are right, for every human death by a shark, there are several million sharks killed by humans.

[Gregg]

It's human nature to get excited about what is perceived as a cornucopia of something, but it seems some cultures are better at moderating their natural greed than others. (soap box moment, I don't think capitalism and a consumerist society helps one bit in encouraging moderation.)

Probably an obvious statement, but I think a lot of that has to do with our distance from the food chain. Indigenous peoples were able to look out and see that the bison heard was smaller than last year or that there didn't seem to be as many salmon in the river. Sometimes they could figure out why, other times maybe not, but they could still see the writing on the wall and make whatever adjustments were available to them.

Fast forward to today when the environment is only observed by a tiny percentage of the population and the rest of us sit in conditioned boxes, insulated from any sense of urgency regarding natural trends. That same environment has been poisoned, over-harvested, genetically altered, etc. Abused beyond any capacity to recover in a sustainable time frame. And yet the people who know little to nothing about the struggles continue to see the pretty little cellophane wrapped packs of (insert name of nearly extinct species) in the grocery store. Why wouldn't they automatically jump to the conclusion that everything must be ok since they can still buy whatever they want? Its a total systemic failure from top to bottom, corporate boardroom to end consumer. The only solution I can see that would have any chance of success is a painful combination of legislation and treaties, a new commitment to early and ongoing education and a massive influx of R&D money to develop palatable alternatives, many of which would likely be plant based. Without all of that, and more, there just isn't any doubt in my mind that our human nature will cause us to stay the course until there's nothing left.

[Ultralight]

Fast forward to today when the environment is only observed by a tiny percentage of the population and the rest of us sit in conditioned boxes, insulated from any sense of urgency regarding natural trends. That same environment has been poisoned, over-harvested, genetically altered, etc. Abused beyond any capacity to recover in a sustainable time frame. And yet the people who know little to nothing about the struggles continue to see the pretty little cellophane wrapped packs of (insert name of nearly extinct species) in the grocery store. Why wouldn't they automatically jump to the conclusion that everything must be ok since they can still buy whatever they want? Its a total systemic failure from top to bottom, corporate boardroom to end consumer. The only solution I can see that would have any chance of success is a painful combination of legislation and treaties, a new commitment to early and ongoing education and a massive influx of R&D money to develop palatable alternatives, many of which would likely be plant based. Without all of that, and more, there just isn't any doubt in my mind that our human nature will cause us to stay the course until there's nothing left.

Round these here parts we call that "scientific advancement" and "civilization!"

[JaneV2.0]

Finally something I can feel smug about--I've never liked seafood, and eat it rarely. Eating fish has always seemed more environmentally destructive to me than eating responsibly-managed livestock. Healthwise, I should force myself to eat more of it--to get those omega 3s--but it's a real stretch for me.

[Ultralight]

Finally something I can feel smug about--I've never liked seafood, and eat it rarely. Eating fish has always seemed more environmentally destructive to me than eating responsibly-managed livestock. Healthwise, I should force myself to eat more of it--to get those omega 3s--but it's a real stretch for me.

If you can't feel smug about something particular you can always feel smug about not feeling smug, right Jane? ;)

[Rogar]

I couldn't locate the article for a reference, but a lot of the ocean fisheries have been depleted past the point, where through some complexities, probably won't recover even with efforts regulate catch numbers. I only have ocean fish for special occasions and use the Monterey Bay Aquarium Seafood Watch as a guide for what fish to buy. They have an app and pocket sized cards as well as their web site (http://www.seafoodwatch.org/) Unfortunately it doesn't leave a lot of selection and if you shop a place that actually knows the chain of catch and possession it can end up being expensive. I know that much of what I see in the standard grocery chains doesn't meet their approval rating. To complicate things, the current health guidelines recommend fish once a week or so and I don't think most people are educated or concerned enough to shop wisely.

An excellent book is Paul Greenberg's, "Four Fish". It's been popular and is an entertaining read. It changed some of my consumption habits.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7347759-four-fish

[Ultralight]

I wonder if they make hairshirts for people who are smug about not being smug... ;)

[JaneV2.0]

Thanks for that reference, Roger. The Monterey Bay Aquarium does a lot of good work.