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

Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

news.ubc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 394 posts

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#191

Post by strbean »

KerrickStaley wrote: post #75

If you're interested in adjusting your seafood eating habits towards eating more sustainable seafood, the Monterey Bay Aquarium maintains a guide on which seafood (based on species and location/method of catch) is most sustainable, somewhat sustainable, and not sustainable. My favorite version of the guide is the printable version that you can fold up and put in your wallet: https://www.seafoodwatch.org/seafood-recom…

I got to see Alton Brown talk about sustainable seafood there! His message was pretty much "Eat calamari, eat it a lot."

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#192

Post by mping »

zackmorris wrote: post #100

I'm shocked that the article didn't mention this, but the mass die-offs we're seeing are because the world's coral reefs will be dead by 2050: https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/environment-90-per... https://www.businessinsider.com/great-barrier-reef-could-dis... https://www.forbes.com/sites/trevornace/2020/02/24/70-90-per... The effect of this is that 500 million pacific islanders will be forced to flee to So…

Why a tech billionaire? We as humans just need to eat less animal food, and reduce our emissions as low as possible.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#193

Post by ascar »

saddlerustle wrote: post #116
zackmorris wrote: post #100

I'm shocked that the article didn't mention this, but the mass die-offs we're seeing are because the world's coral reefs will be dead by 2050: https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/environment-90-per... https://www.businessinsider.com/great-barrier-reef-could-dis... https://www.forbes.com/sites/trevornace/2020/02/24/70-90-per... The effect of this is that 500 million pacific islanders will be forced to flee to So…

> 500 million pacific islanders will be forced to flee to Southeast Asia How the heck did you come up with this number? The entire population of Oceania excluding Australia, New Zealand and Papua New Guinea is 3 million.

Maybe some references help to clear this up. GP apparently did get his geography mixed up.

The term Pacific Islander [1] seems to not include the Philippines and Indonesia, as these islands are generally considered to be part of South East Asia [2]. One logical connection is that the Philippines and Indonesia are tectonically on the Asian crust [3], while the islands to the east are on the oceanic crust.

Thus the original statement of 500 million people fleeing to southeast asia makes geographically no sense, but I guess the intent of the people of Indonesia, Philippines etc. being cut off of seafood remains clear.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Islander

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southeast_Asia

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Ocean#/media/File:Paci...

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#194

Post by dilettantism »

arrosenberg wrote: post #174
blix wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on some rough napkin calculations, the caloric efficiency by land of broccoli is about the same as industrial meat. Optimizing diet for land efficiency probably does not produce healthy diets. You can find strong evidence for this trade-off in the changes of average human health at the advent of agriculture.

Much lower water usage and impact on the land used though, even if it's bad soil and you have to use a ton of fertilizer.

Not to mention broccoli probably doesn't feel the conscious terror of its imminent death.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#195

Post by twic »

twic wrote: post #135
nanna wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be interested in an EU or UK version of this if anyone can link?

This is for the UK: https://www.mcsuk.org/goodfishguide/search The app page has links to Android and iOS apps, and a PDF (although the latter is dense and highly coloured, not ideal to print). This being for the UK, they also have a fish finger guide.

But what winds me up in the UK is how rarely i even have the option of eating sustainably. If i go to a fishmonger, or a decent-sized supermarket, sure. But in a small supermarket, or a pub or a fish and chip shop, it's always the standards: cod, haddock, skate, rock, plaice (and to be honest plaice is a pleasant surprise).

Of those, haddock is the only one that's really okay (scores 2-4): https://www.mcsuk.org/goodfishguide/search?name=Haddock

Cod is okay if it's from the far north, but most of the time you have no way of knowing (scores 1-5): https://www.mcsuk.org/goodfishguide/search?name=Cod%2C+Atlan...

Plaice is okay if it's from the east coast, but even then, the fishing methods are damaging (scores 2-5): https://www.mcsuk.org/goodfishguide/search?name=Plaice

Rock salmon is critically endangered (scores 5): https://www.mcsuk.org/goodfishguide/search?name=Spurdog%2C+S...

Skate is endangered and illegal to fish (scores 5): https://www.mcsuk.org/goodfishguide/search?name=Skate

Now, given that rock and skate are endangered, i have to admit i'm a bit confused about how they end up on menus. Are they being imported from other parts of the world where they're legal to fish? Or are they actually other, similar and legal, fish being sold under incorrect but familiar names?

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#196

Post by growlist »

When are people going to start acknowledging the elephant in the room: there are too many humans for us all to live western lifestyles, and unless we want our descendants to live vastly poorer lives we need to give serious attention to population control now.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#197

Post by mping »

missedthecue wrote: post #172
duhuh wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I eat seafood I rob from ocean species, illegal labor, the hungry poor, and the future. Sometimes, farmland represents the same problem, sometimes not. Seafood is an unsolved problem globally. It has no form of ethical consumption.

Most seafood is produced and sold by the hungry poor. You're not doing them any favors by boycotting their goods.

Not in the short run but in the long run everybody would win. If you lower demand I assume people would find another way of living that would be more sustainable.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#198

Post by rcMgD2BwE72F »

88840-8855 wrote: post #76

250 new humans are born every single minute. This is the biggest issue we are facing. This problem must be solve immediately. Once the population stops growing efficiency measures become effective.

Most of them will have a reasonable footprint on their environment for their lifetime. The actual issue is with all the people who consume as if there were 5 to 10 habitable planets within reach.

For some reasons, those who complain about population growth tend to consume the most.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#199

Post by kjs3 »

jeffbee wrote: post #34
kjs3 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which may be very much less desirable from an ecological or economic point of view.

Indeed, it could consist of 99% slime. We don't have a way to model the outcomes.

Literally: https://www.sciencebuzz.com/jellyfish-apocalypse-problems-ca...

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#200

Post by Stupulous »

duhuh wrote: post #63
Isamu wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>A science fiction style solution is going to be the only way to feed the world. I get what you are saying, I just want to clarify: we can feed everybody now, but mostly with vegetables. But yes, shared resources like ocean fish are under too much pressure right now. I feel as though it will take a major worldwide collapse of the fishing industry before there is better enforcement and treaties.

As a resident of a first world country I stopped eating all seafood about 15 years ago. It seems unethical to support over-fishing if I have plenty of other good food to eat.

I've been wondering lately if cutting out a product is less ethical than buying the ethical version and supporting that market. Relatedly, people often don't eat meat because they oppose unethical treatment of animals. But I imagine farmers who treat animals well are disadvantaged by that strategy- people who care enough to buy their more expensive product opt out of the market entirely.
Post reply on HN