Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 154 posts

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

#71

Post by antocv »

ckastner wrote: post #65
antocv wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

The problem with that is, its an unknown, the effects could be far more devastating than previous mass extinctions, even the worst one about 252 million years ago.

If you extrapolate the speed of current devastation, extinction and let it play out over the time-span of the last mass-extinction, there really wont be anything living on earth besides micro-organisms.

Non-selfish arguments for why we should not kill off other species? Why should we not kill all life bigger than a pea on earth? Ill let you take that one.

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

#72

Post by scrollaway »

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.

I think we just need to accept that a portion of the population will not follow these rules, and that this portion alone is enough not to reach the critical mass required to reach that solution "inflexion point".

Even if I'm wrong saying that... how long will it take to reach critical mass? How much destruction will be caused attempting to reach it?

Individual-centered solutions can't work efficiently enough for these things to change without personal incentives. We need incentives, replacements, regulations.

Look at the difference between those two worlds:

World 1: "Don't use those free plastic bags! Buy a reusable bag instead for more money! It's the responsible thing to do!"

World 2: "Plastic bags cost $0.06 each."

Which one has less plastic floating in the sea?

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

#73

Post by samdoidge »

ckastner wrote: post #65
antocv wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

It's a hugely worrying trend. If it continues, a potential outcome is no other species exist.

There are medicinal and practical uses for plants, and some are have only recently been discovered. Losing them is losing this these potential discoveries and uses.

Humans inherently enjoy nature. We like to see trees, greenery , wildlife. The loss of these things hurts our enjoyment of the world.

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

#74

Post by mmjaa »

kurtisc wrote: post #47
ekr wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience of this is that 10-15 years ago, when I was a child, my dad would often take us on road trips by car, sometimes arriving home late into the night. (the trips were around Central Europe) The headlights, windshield and parts of the body were always significantly covered by dead insects. For the past 5 years or so however, they have almost always been perfectly clean. This has amazed me.

I wonder if any of that can be attributed to improved aerodynamics pushing bugs around the body of the car?

No, its farmers and their monoculture:

https://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/19/europe/insect-decline-ger...

Also, quite relevant to the topic at hand ..

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

#75

Post by gambiting »

ekr wrote: post #31
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.…

My experience of this is that 10-15 years ago, when I was a child, my dad would often take us on road trips by car, sometimes arriving home late into the night. (the trips were around Central Europe) The headlights, windshield and parts of the body were always significantly covered by dead insects. For the past 5 years or so however, they have almost always been perfectly clean. This has amazed me.

As someone who has just done a 13 hour drive from Amsterdam to Krakow, I can assure you that my car was absolutely covered in dead insects, the front licence plate was barely readable, the layer of dead bugs was so thick.

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

#76

Post by belorn »

purephase wrote: post #2

> The FAO reports that 35% of global catches are wasted. About a quarter of these losses are bycatch or discards, mostly from trawlers, where unwanted fish are thrown back dead because they are too small or an unwanted species. But most of the losses are due to a lack of knowledge or equipment, such as refrigeration or ice-makers, needed to keep fish fresh. This is so depressing...

It get worse when one consider that wanted species is only a tiny fraction of the fish population, while invasive or overpopulated species continue to cause problems because they are so unwanted that the most economical thing a fisherman can do is to dump them back into the water.

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

#77

Post by belorn »

rollulus wrote: post #23

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

If you want to make the situation better, start eating eating fish from invasive species or fish from overpopulated lakes caused by eutrophication. Here in Sweden it seems more the rule than the exception that fresh water lakes are overpopulated, and yet the prescriptive method is to eat less fish and more farmed vegetarian options which means more fertilizers and more runoff creating even more eutrophication in lakes.

There is no easy solution to sustained ecological balance. Only by actively counteract the imbalance by positive action can a balance be maintained.

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

#78

Post by Steve44 »

ckastner wrote: post #45
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.…

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 sometimes get a little irritated at some of the "save the planet" type arguments. The planet will be just fine, it's gone through a lot of changes over the years and will continue to go through changes. One example I often show is the sea levels 16,000 BC as explained here https://www.nationalgeographic.org/maps/doggerland/ by National Geographic.

What is going to have problems is the health of the ever growing Human population. Us Humans may well be heading towards a crisis, the planet won't even notice.

BTW, I think we should be working hard to support a sustainable future for Humanity and the rest of the environment.

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

#79

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

Steve44 wrote: post #78
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 sometimes get a little irritated at some of the "save the planet" type arguments. The planet will be just fine, it's gone through a lot of changes over the years and will continue to go through changes. One example I often show is the sea levels 16,000 BC as explained here https://www.nationalgeographic.org/maps/doggerland/ by National Geographic. What is going to have problems is the health of the ever growing Hum…

The most charitable reading of ”save the planet” is: save those parts of the biosphere that might be critical to our long term survival.

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

#80

Post by plantain »

kurtisc wrote: post #47
ekr wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience of this is that 10-15 years ago, when I was a child, my dad would often take us on road trips by car, sometimes arriving home late into the night. (the trips were around Central Europe) The headlights, windshield and parts of the body were always significantly covered by dead insects. For the past 5 years or so however, they have almost always been perfectly clean. This has amazed me.

I wonder if any of that can be attributed to improved aerodynamics pushing bugs around the body of the car?

Improved aerodynamics makes it worse not better.

Less of a bow wave to divert them away from the vehicle earlier.

Post reply on HN