Live data from Hacker News

California cancels salmon fishing season

cbsnews.com

201–210 of 231 posts

Re: California cancels salmon fishing season

#201
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I began in my second paragraph above, people do need to eat something. Right now that means sacrifice the environment if we want to keep everyone alive in the short term. Long term we could have farming that has zero environmental impact, like vertical farming with fully contained and controlled environment. It would cost huge amount of money and with the current economical system it would be impossible to feed ev…

IMHO going vegan is the only practical strategy for reducing the impact of your diet. You have no practical way of knowing most of what's going on in the supply chain for most products, or their true carbon footprint, but overall, the footprint of growing plants and feeding them to animals is way higher than just eating plants yourself. The laws of physics are, to some extent, "on your side" when it comes to boycotti…

For some people it will feel like the best way to only have some amount of blood on their hand will be a vegan diet. Obviously not all vegan diets are the same, and foods like avocado which is popular in vegan diets are quiet bad and should be avoided. Basically anything which on the purchased packet says imported from an country that has rain forests should be avoided if one want to avoid having the blood of animals that live in rain forests.

Being a mass murder of fewer victim than some other mass murders can be an important distinction for some people.

Still I would highlight that a small scale farmer or hobbyist who raises his own animals has likely less blood on their hand than a vegan who live in a city and eat imported fresh veggies.

There is also the aspect of long term strategies. Vegan diets are not sustainable and long term we do need to change how we produce food. Shell fish and seaweed are one of the few sources of food that we could produce in very large quantities without harming the environment around us. Insect farms would be an alternative, but those seems much less likely to be effective in term of changing the world.

There is a lot of green washing in crop farming. Practically all production of artificial fertilizers uses natural gas, and leaks from those operations is one of the major contributors to global warming. We have waters as large as the Baltic ocean being turned into a desert from runoff. People may feel happy to not eat fish, but fish were killed in order to produce the food that people eat. The deaths "just" happen to be a byproduct that accumulate slowly under the surface, and slowly moves towards mass extinction.

Re: California cancels salmon fishing season

#202
post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't believe it can be done at scale Sustainable animal husbandry represents less than 5% of the total. > but it can be done We may also find farms where there are no animal inputs used. It can be done. > it should be reflected in its cost - people shouldn't be eating meat 3x times a day Removing all subsidies for dairy, meat & fishing would help a lot. >> The only sane and ethical response to this devastation i…

>>Sustainable animal husbandry represents less than 5% of the total. That sounds very different to "There is no such thing as sustainable animal agriculture - it is a lie used to greenwash products" >>Removing all subsidies for dairy, meat & fishing would help a lot. I agree. >>If you don't see the logic in it, then you just haven't found the power to really acknowledge all the problems associated with it. I absolute…

> the only way to solve global warming is to stop driving cars. Would that solve the problem? Of course it would

No it would not. We have to do many things to solve it, not just one thing or another.

And nobody argues that we should stop eating ... that would equal stopping driving. But as we can drive electric instead, we can also eat something else than animals.

We already get majority of calories out of plants ... animals supply only 18% of calories and 37% proteins (https://ourworldindata.org/land-use).

>> Sustainable animal husbandry represents less than 5% of the total.

Mea culpa. That max 5% is non-industrial farming. How big part of it is sustainable i do not know.

Re: California cancels salmon fishing season

#203
post #15

It's not just the draughts. https://www.seaspiracy.org/facts "Species like thresher, bull and hammerhead sharks have lost up to 80-99% of their populations in the last two decades. Seabird populations have declined by 70% since the 1950's. Studies estimate that up to 40% of all marine life caught is thrown overboard as bycatch. Six out of seven species of sea turtles are either threatened or endangered due to fishing…

Imagine someone just flying a helicopter through a forest scraping up the wildlife in huge nets, picking out the snails, and dropping the rest of what they scooped up to their death. Yet it happens all day every in the oceans and no one cares. It used to be for every pound of wild caught shrimp caught, more than 4.5-5 pounds of other fish species were caught as bycatch and discarded dead. But now thanks to by catch r…

I also feel that not building world-destroying robots should be something we should be able to reach consensus on. My current favorite world-destroying robot photo is from the battle of Lutzerath:

https://i.redd.it/bonkanv0xiba1.jpg

If that photo doesn't cause people to wake up to what's being done, ostensibly on our behalf, I don't know what will.

Re: California cancels salmon fishing season

#204

everyone who is capable (there are a lot of us!) can we please just eat a little less of this stuff? I’m not asking for much, like a tiny tiny bit less, if you can. Just like one time consciously skip it and cackle “haha i’ll get you next time ocean” if it helps! this is not going well

I'll be the annoying one and say we could also eat a lot less. Eating fish is not a requirement

Re: California cancels salmon fishing season

#205
post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMHO going vegan is the only practical strategy for reducing the impact of your diet. You have no practical way of knowing most of what's going on in the supply chain for most products, or their true carbon footprint, but overall, the footprint of growing plants and feeding them to animals is way higher than just eating plants yourself. The laws of physics are, to some extent, "on your side" when it comes to boycotti…

For some people it will feel like the best way to only have some amount of blood on their hand will be a vegan diet. Obviously not all vegan diets are the same, and foods like avocado which is popular in vegan diets are quiet bad and should be avoided. Basically anything which on the purchased packet says imported from an country that has rain forests should be avoided if one want to avoid having the blood of animals…

> Basically anything which on the purchased packet says imported from an country that has rain forests should be avoided

Animal farming in EU is reliant on Brazilian soy from Amazon. Nowhere on the packet you'll read this. But sure, blame avocado toasts, and ignore the fact that avocados grow on trees and as such are (may be) very sustainable. Just don't do the same stupid stuff as californians do with their almond monocultures.

> small scale farmer or hobbyist who raises his own animals has likely less blood on their hand than a vegan who live in a city and eat imported fresh veggies

https://yourveganfallacyis.com/en/vegans-kill-animals-too

https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local

> Vegan diets are not sustainable

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/may/31/avoiding... - Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single biggest way’ to reduce your impact on Earth

https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets - if the world adopted a plant-based diet we would reduce global agricultural land use from 4 to 1 billion hectares

https://talkveganto.me/en/facts/suitable-for-all - a well planned vegan diet is suitable for people of all ages

https://plantbasednews.org/news/plant-based-lifestyles-imper... ... Plant-Based Lifestyles Now ‘Imperative’ For Survival, IPCC Climate Expert Says

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-11-11-sustainable-eating-chea... - Sustainable eating is cheaper and healthier - Oxford study

https://www.tech-paper.com/2022/07/plant-based-meat-by-far-b... - Plant-based meat by far the best climate investment, report finds

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaq0216

"Moving from current diets to a diet that excludes animal products (table S13) (35) has transformative potential, reducing food’s land use by 3.1 (2.8 to 3.3) billion ha (a 76% reduction), including a 19% reduction in arable land; food’s GHG emissions by 6.6 (5.5to 7.4) billion metric tons of CO2eq (a 49% reduction); acidification by 50% (45 to 54%); eutrophication by 49% (37 to 56%); and scarcity-weighted freshwater withdrawals by 19% (−5 to 32%) for a 2010 reference year."

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaw9908

"In total, the “no animal products” scenario delivers a 28% reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions across all sectors of the economy relative to 2010 emissions (table S17)."

https://doi.org/10.3390/su142114449

"Our study finds that all dietary patterns cause more GHGEs than the 1.5 degrees global warming limit allows. Only the vegan diet was in line with the 2 degrees threshold, while all other dietary patterns trespassed the threshold partly to entirely."

> There is a lot of green washing in crop farming.

Sure.

https://www.salon.com/2022/11/11/the-meat-industry-is-borrow... - The meat industry is borrowing tactics from Big Oil to obfuscate the truth about climate change

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/dec/09/academy-nutr... - group shaping US nutrition receives millions from big food industry

> artificial fertilizers uses natural gas, and leaks from those operations is one of the major contributors to global warming

At least 75% of those fertilizers are used for animal farming ( https://ourworldindata.org/land-use )

Re: California cancels salmon fishing season

#206
post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> my meat comes from locally raised grass-fed-and-finished cows https://yourveganfallacyis.com/en/humane-meat > It is actually much, much cheaper than buying meat from a supermarket Thanks to subsidies ... taxes taken also from vegans ;) > the massive, endless fields of soybeans "More than three-quarters (77%) of global soy is fed to livestock for meat and dairy production. Most of the rest is used for biofuels, indu…

Sorry, your first link is profoundly unpersuasive. I don’t see anything wrong with killing animals for a purpose, nor anything inherently evil in suffering. I appreciate that you have a different value system, but I don’t share it. I do have a problem with treating animals as commodities and as inputs to industrial processes. > Thanks to subsidies ... Incorrect. > "More than three-quarters (77%) of global soy is fed…

> I don’t see anything wrong with ... anything inherently evil in suffering

We won't be able to find a common ground.

> Ecosystems are not steady state without our inputs

Everything's going very well, indeed.

> It’s still true we all die.

Yes ... so there was nothing wrong with concentration camps, because all those people would have died anyway?

Let's agree to disagree.

Re: California cancels salmon fishing season

#207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I won't talk about this until you watch this: https://www.dominionmovement.com/watch (warning: very graphic content). False equivalences abound. Do you argue against people legally consuming marijuana because the cartels skin people alive? > And they don't matter less than you do. Do you think life in prison or even the death penalty should be on the table for a drunk driver that hits and kills a pregnant skunk? Be…

> Do you argue against people legally consuming marijuana because the cartels skin people alive? Skinning people alive is not vegan. Humans are animals too. > Do you think life in prison or even the death penalty should be on the table for a drunk driver that hits and kills a pregnant skunk? Because that’s what would happen if it was a pregnant woman instead. Driving over a sentient being with your car is not vegan,…

> Skinning people alive is not vegan. Humans are animals too.

I didn’t say it was. But you support it if you smoke marijuana by the logic being proposed.

> Driving over a sentient being with your car is not vegan, skunk or woman, pregnant or not.

I didn’t say it was. But the equivalence of animal and human life leads to the conclusion that life in prison (or the death penalty) would be appropriate for the “murder” of the skunk.

Re: California cancels salmon fishing season

#208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The meat I eat comes from a ten minute bike ride's distance from my house. The heavily-processed vegetable-based "product" aggressively marketed to you has been shipped halfway round the world, having been farmed using just about the least sustainable farming practices imaginable. Which one is harming the environment?

If your grocery doesn't have locally produced, affordable, delicious vegan junk food by now you should be pissed off at the people producing your food and demand better.

I don't eat junk food.

Re: California cancels salmon fishing season

#209
post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

s someone who degreed in economics, and has been studying the economic resource situation formally and informally for nearly five decades, what I've come to realise is that economics has a very shaky grasp on the actual, and sensible, pricing of extractive resources. Economically, mining is exploitation of any resource on a basis which fails to account for the full ecological formation costs of that resource. In the…

> someone who degreed in economics Condolences ;) > I've come to realise is that economics has a very shaky grasp on the actual It can't be taken seriously if the first thing it does is disregard externalities. Economics is here only to validate the current system, has no other meaning than that.

Condolences ;)

As Herman Daly has noted: know your enemy.

I've found in particular the rationale around land rents for minerals and extraction, dating to David Ricardo, are an interesting place to poke around. Hotelling's Rule is based on that, though through an intermediary.

There's also the associated legal concept of the Rule of Capture, which is applied to the notion of property rights in mineral resources is also based on some curiously fallacious legal argument. Which also leads me to realise that amongst various categories of knowledge, legal practice seems to be its own animal, based variously on statute, precedent, and persuasion, rather than empirical foundations.

(Other realms of knowledge include revelatory knowledge, commonly in religion; convention and authority, in various fields; communities of practice as with technical arts and some societies; and poetic or literary knowledge, essentially of narrative and record which are passed down but again need have no basis in any external empirical foundations.)

There's the equivocation between economic wealth and accounting profits, which are ... somewhat related ... but divided by the fact that the former includes all accounting of external costs and benefits, whilst the latter does not. Financial systems are cost- and risk-externalising machines.

I've recently discovered Katharina Pistor through the Ezra Klein podcast. She writes on the relationship of property to economics. She is hitting on themes I'd been struggling towards and does some excellent analysis and research. Transcript:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/13/podcasts/transcript-ezra-...>

Book: The Code of Capital (2019) https://libgen.rs/book/index.php?md5=D936D0247CB138F23F157A7...>

Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway have just published The Big Myth, which looks at the selling of the notion of free markets, specifically in the US. It's an outgrowth of their earlier work on disinformation in the tobacco, CFCs/ozone layer, lead, and oil / global warming disinformation campaigns by major corporations.

https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/naomi-oreskes/the...>

I've yet to land a copy, but from several interviews the work seems useful though quite probably incomplete, as there was an earlier practice of such advocacy in Britain, as evidenced by The Economist's prospectus announcing in 1843 a new publication "THE ECONOMIST, which will contain— First.—ORIGINAL LEADING ARTICLES, in which free-trade principles will be most rigidly applied to all the important questions of the day..."

https://www.economist.com/unknown/1843/08/05/prospectus>

A later editor of the Economist, Francis Wrigley Hirst, was key in persuading Oliver Wendell Holmes of the concepts of free markets and their applicability to the realm of free speech, ultimately leading to the expression "the free market of ideas" in a 1950s US Supreme Court judgement. That draws on (though mischaracterises) John Stuart Mill's writings on free speech and liberty as well.

I've written on that last variously on HN, this seems a reasonably coherent summary:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22850549>

For those interested in more, an Algolia search: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...>

Susan Gordon's written on how J.S. Mill's notions have been distorted and misrepresented in "John Stuart Mill and the 'Marketplace of Ideas'" (1997) https://philpapers.org/rec/GORJSM> (full text on Sci-Hub / LibGen).

Other criticism of the concept, Stanley Ingber, "The Marketplace of Ideas: A legitimizing myth": https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article...> (PDF)

There's more, though this is a good start and seems to be less generally acknowledged even amongst notable critics of economic orthodoxy. Steve Keen, Philip Mirowski, and Mariana Mazzucato would be other good names to read.

Re: California cancels salmon fishing season

#210
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always been impressed by vegetarians, because of their comfort in the moral convictions that keep cows alive and suffering for their dairy and children, but never dead for their meat (and an end to their suffering).

A lot of them don't seem to realize dairy and veal go hand in hand. Or some are vegetarian for other reasons (health, ecological, religous, etc)

The thought-terminating cliche raises its head again.

There is nothing "ecologically" sound about keeping cows alive and burping on the cheapest feed available. This is not a criticism of your response, just pointing out that these kinds of cliches become culturally embedded after a certain amount of time, even if they do not reflect the reality.

Post reply on HN