One in three fish caught never makes it to the plate

Re: One in three fish caught never makes it to the plate – UN report

#61

Post by jaggederest » Tue, Jul 10, 2018, 8:51 AM UTC

singularity2001 wrote: post #55

jaggederest wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My current point of concern is that I can go out and sit all evening without a mosquito bite. That was unheard of even 30 years ago when I was a kid. You'd be lucky if you didn't have one for every minute you spent outside. I think the insects are dying, and it's frightening. Second item would be watching the bison migrate on the plains. Literally horizon to horizon, a hundred thousand individuals or more in a group.…

IMO The lack of mosquitos is the single positive aspect of a crippled nature. Allegedly a Pharao had a slave covered in honey to get some peace from those beasts. New Zealand is paradise except that on some beaches you just can't stop unless you want to get drained.

Yes, I just think they're the most durable bastards out there, and if they're being affected by whatever it is, surely all the more shy and retiring species are basically gone as well.

If we were being deliberate, sure, a targeted assassination of the Anopheles mosquito might not be a bad thing. But I don't get that sense at all... More like collateral damage.

Re: One in three fish caught never makes it to the plate – UN report

#62

Post by waivek » Tue, Jul 10, 2018, 9:01 AM UTC

ponzored wrote: post #58

GreeniFi wrote: post #39

Fish catch in East Africa is down 75% in 30 years. That’s huge - given increased population, hunting effort and “fishing down the food chain”, as species previously not eaten are now fished. There will undoubtedly be substitution - but we barely understand the 2nd order effects, let alone 3rd , 4rth and 5th.

Somalia population 1987: 6.1 million. 2017 population: 11.4 million. Just one country, but that might have something to do with it. 2100: 58 million. I can only imagine the environmental destruction that will go along with that. https://www.populationpyramid.net/somalia/2017/ Meanwhile, what do countries like Somalia produce to enrich our civilization? The country has zero scientific output: https://www.natureindex.c…

I agree. If I was a native American a few centuries ago I would also think something similar. What do Europeans contribute to us other than killing of our loved ones and almost extinguishing our race. A ballooning European population is not good.

Re: One in three fish caught never makes it to the plate – UN report

#63

Post by ckastner » Tue, Jul 10, 2018, 9:02 AM UTC

skrebbel wrote: post #54

ckastner wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never understood why such changes -- dramatic as they may be -- were seen as a cause of concern, except in cases where the changes affected our food supply. Humans may be responsible for the decimation or outright extinction of entire species, but isn't that how Nature works? Nature has encountered countless extinctions before us (where's the Megalodon now?) and at least 5 mass extinctions, so why should this dynam…

I know very little about ecology, but my understanding is that lots of insects, including but not only bees, are key to plant reproduction. Maybe my math is wrong, but fewer insects probably implies fewer plants, with a delay. Given that I'd like to survive and all, I'd like there to be plants so I can eat them. And breathe air and whatnot.

I already conceded the survability aspect ("except in cases where the changes affected our food supply").

Re: One in three fish caught never makes it to the plate – UN report

#64

Post by ponzored » Tue, Jul 10, 2018, 9:08 AM UTC

waivek wrote: post #62

ponzored wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somalia population 1987: 6.1 million. 2017 population: 11.4 million. Just one country, but that might have something to do with it. 2100: 58 million. I can only imagine the environmental destruction that will go along with that. https://www.populationpyramid.net/somalia/2017/ Meanwhile, what do countries like Somalia produce to enrich our civilization? The country has zero scientific output: https://www.natureindex.c…

I agree. If I was a native American a few centuries ago I would also think something similar. What do Europeans contribute to us other than killing of our loved ones and almost extinguishing our race. A ballooning European population is not good.

Europeans have been responsible for the majority of scientific advances we all enjoy today.

Native Americans died from diseases and conflicts with a superior group of people. Competition for resources is a core driver of evolution and is nothing new for any species on Earth.

Re: One in three fish caught never makes it to the plate – UN report

#65

Post by ckastner » Tue, Jul 10, 2018, 9:16 AM UTC

antocv wrote: post #50

ckastner wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never understood why such changes -- dramatic as they may be -- were seen as a cause of concern, except in cases where the changes affected our food supply. Humans may be responsible for the decimation or outright extinction of entire species, but isn't that how Nature works? Nature has encountered countless extinctions before us (where's the Megalodon now?) and at least 5 mass extinctions, so why should this dynam…

> but isn't that how Nature works? Nature has encountered countless extinctions before us (where's the Megalodon now?) and at least 5 mass extinctions, so why should this dynamic cease now? This mass extinction caused by humans is an order of magnitude faster and affects far more varity of species and plants.

Even if that were true (and I'd challenge the variety of species and plants, see [1]): what, objectively, is the problem with that?

Furthermore, even if the pace and breadth of current extinction were that dramatic, isn't the argument against that a purely emotional one? I sincerely doubt that most humans can even name a hundred species; would they really miss a few million if a few million others remained?

Just to be clear again: I'm not arguing against conservationism, I'm interested in the arguments being made for it. I believe we are conserving for own selfish purposes, and I'm perfectly OK with that. I just think it's wrong to call that "natural".

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian%E2%80%93Triassic_extin...

Re: One in three fish caught never makes it to the plate – UN report

#66

Post by ramblerman » Tue, Jul 10, 2018, 9:16 AM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #44

leroman wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are simply wrong. I am vegetarian now for 10 years, I have been hearing the same de-motivational talk since I started. (but less so now) Ten years ago there were not so many vegetarians or vegans, now Israel (I read) is one of the leading countries in the ratio of vegetarians in the population. Don't be discouraged, if you stop eating fish, friends will hear and some will get inspired and do the same. Eventually…

"Just stop eating fish" is not a solution, in the same sense that one brick does not make a building. You need very many bricks, and you need a very significant amount of people to stop eating fish for the problem to be solved. Popularizing fish abstinence - now, that's an outline of a solution.

Perhaps, but bringing your own house in order before marching on to tackle the world is not bad advice.

There is a lot of 'feigned indignation' in this world, and big plans whereby everyone has to change, and then we will see progress.

I couldn't give up fish, not right now. So I applaud anybody who would actually take that step, over writing a few bullet points as to how we should tackle the problem.

Re: One in three fish caught never makes it to the plate – UN report

#67

Post by waivek » Tue, Jul 10, 2018, 9:17 AM UTC

ponzored wrote: post #64

waivek wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. If I was a native American a few centuries ago I would also think something similar. What do Europeans contribute to us other than killing of our loved ones and almost extinguishing our race. A ballooning European population is not good.

Europeans have been responsible for the majority of scientific advances we all enjoy today. Native Americans died from diseases and conflicts with a superior group of people. Competition for resources is a core driver of evolution and is nothing new for any species on Earth.

Europeans got the lucky bounce of Genghiz Khan. It's very probable that the Islam golden age would have beaten Europeans to the punch if not for him.

And what do you mean by "superiors group of people"?

Re: One in three fish caught never makes it to the plate – UN report

#68

Post by quicklime » Tue, Jul 10, 2018, 9:21 AM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #24

rollulus wrote: post #23

If news like this upsets you, there's an easy solution: just stop eating fish.

Which solves exactly nothing, until a significant chunk of the world's population does the same too. And then we'll have depressing articles about poor fishermen who found themselves unemployed and unemployable. The problem is unfortunately very complex and in need of some large-scale, targeted effort.

> And then we'll have depressing articles about poor fishermen who found themselves unemployed and unemployable.

But think of all the uplifting articles we'll have about new jobs on farms!

Re: One in three fish caught never makes it to the plate – UN report

#69

Post by jonhendry18 » Tue, Jul 10, 2018, 9:39 AM UTC

jaggederest wrote: post #53

TeMPOraL wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Droughts, less open water available, more activity in said waters? That could account for some mosquito reduction. But in other comment you mention other insects, so this indeed seems like a broader problem.

I don't know what it is, but it's absolutely disturbing. Insects are, by comparison with us mammals, incredibly resilient. Anything that is reducing insect populations on a massive scale is bad news for the entire world.

Try leaving out some old tires to collect water.

Re: One in three fish caught never makes it to the plate – UN report

#70

Post by awodol » Tue, Jul 10, 2018, 9:41 AM UTC

ponzored wrote: post #58

GreeniFi wrote: post #39

Fish catch in East Africa is down 75% in 30 years. That’s huge - given increased population, hunting effort and “fishing down the food chain”, as species previously not eaten are now fished. There will undoubtedly be substitution - but we barely understand the 2nd order effects, let alone 3rd , 4rth and 5th.

Somalia population 1987: 6.1 million. 2017 population: 11.4 million. Just one country, but that might have something to do with it. 2100: 58 million. I can only imagine the environmental destruction that will go along with that. https://www.populationpyramid.net/somalia/2017/ Meanwhile, what do countries like Somalia produce to enrich our civilization? The country has zero scientific output: https://www.natureindex.c…

I can assure you that Somalians are not the main contributer to the devestation of the areas like the Gulf of Aden. Most fishing there happens illegally from your "superior countries" taking advantage of the weak country's lack of protection of it's legal fishing waters. When people are fishers and foreign government's come into their land and drain the fish, people get angry.