No Fish Left in the Oceans in 50 years

[Sadena Meti]

BBC - 'Only 50 years left' for sea fish (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6108414.stm)

Un-be-fucking-leavable...

[piet11111]

same as the peak-oil theory total rubbish.

expect to pay 3x the current prize for fish next year.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

It's no surprise, really. Communist society is going to have a fun time cleaning up the messes capitalist society has left.

[Rollo]

I'm not 100% sure about this BUT.

As the russians and middle easterns have shown us with the sturgeon caviar farms fish farming does work and should be considered for the future.

[BreadBros]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2006 07:48 pm
same as the peak-oil theory total rubbish.

expect to pay 3x the current prize for fish next year.
I don't know much about Peak Oil, and it does sound pretty stupid to me, but I have a good friend who studies marine life and oceans, and, the oceans are in really fucked up shape at the moment. Pollution, over-fishing, dumping, industrial run-off, its leading to large amounts of sea life dying. Just look at the current rash of red-tides in Florida and parts of the West Coast, thats happening because of pollutants that cause the algae to bloom + less fish to eat it and keep populations in check.

[Rollo]

We should stop eating fish all together IMO. It's such a stupid thing to eat, you barely get any protein from it and it isn't very filling.

[Sadena Meti]

Eat the rich.

Interestingly though, fish always seems to be a signficiant part of the diet of the most long lived cultures (Japan, Cuba, etc).


As much as I hate the vegetarian political movements, people do need to increase the use of rice and beans as primary staples in order for us to become more sustainable. I'll die without my beef tenderloin ration :( And a world without salmon is too hideous to image, thank god that is one of the easiest fish to farm.

Also, a fish that people should start eating is Asian Carp. Most people won't eat it because it is called a "carp" and most carp tastes like moldy cardboard. But apparently this one tastes like salmon! And it is a hyper-efficient species, i.e. if you drop it in a waterway it will breed so much that within a decade you'll have an overpopulation problem.

Here's an interesting article (http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=519235) on it, and one on eating them. (http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=519236)

Sadly, tuna can't be farmed, and it is one of the main fish being fished into extinction. A world without tuna casserole and tekka don... :(

[Vanguard1917]

If this is happening, it's because the fishing industry is under-developed and under-cultivated. The solution is to fish more, not less.


people do need to increase the use of rice and beans as primary staples in order for us to become more sustainable

No they don't. What people need to do more is to give up their petit-bourgeois environmentalist prejudices.

The solution to the world's problems do not lie in rationing and cuts in production, but in massively increased, rapid industrial development throughout the world. The problem with capitalism is precisely that it stands in the way of this.

[Sadena Meti]

It's called science and math.

Species X, which can not be farmed, reproduces at rate Y. It is consumed at rate Z. If Z is greater than Y, then the consumption of X is unsustainable.


Those on the left who believe that infinite production and growth are possible are as deluded as neo-liberal capitalists. "If we get rid of capitalism we can stuff 10 billion people onto this planet and all live like first world gluttons." That makes "flat earth" theory sound progressive by comparison.

Those who don't believe in ecological footprints and ecosystem sustainability need to hit the textbooks. Oh, but I forgot, any textbook that doesn't back up your preconceived notions is part of a vast right-wing conspiracy.

Was capitalism around when our ancestors hunted the mammoth to extinction 10,000 years ago (or depending on which theory you believe, to levels so extreme that natural extinction became a certainty)?

The world is finite. Learn to live in it.

[which doctor]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2006 06:00 am
We should stop eating fish all together IMO. It's such a stupid thing to eat, you barely get any protein from it and it isn't very filling.
Try freshwater fish. It tastes awesome and is very healthy for you.

Just hope there's no mercury in it :P

[Vanguard1917]

Species X, which can not be farmed, reproduces at rate Y. It is consumed at rate Z. If Z is greater than Y, then the consumption of X is unsustainable.

Fish can be cultivated. Every farmer knows that if circumstances produce a poor harvest, the solution is to better prepare - by investing in new technology - for the next harvest.

Your knee-jerk response is not to call for more investment in and development of the fishing industry, but to reduce our consumption.

Such is the despicable logic of the environmentalists.


Those on the left who believe that infinite production and growth are possible are as deluded as neo-liberal capitalists. "If we get rid of capitalism we can stuff 10 billion people onto this planet and all live like first world gluttons."

And those on the right like yourself (and Greens are rightwing by any progressive standards) want a reduced human presence on earth.

Progressives want humanity to flourish and prosper. We believe that there are no limits to what human ingenuity can achieve. However, we believe that in order for tens of billions of people to prosper - on earth and, one day, beyond - mankind needs to bring about a level of economic development that has never before been close to being witnessed. The kind of economic development that the Greens see in their worst nightmares.

Like it or not, humanity has only just learnt to crawl.

[lvleph]

All I have to say is that we know barely anything about the oceans, so one in my opinion cannot make this estimation. However, one can see from fishing trends what may occur. So what am I saying? It is a possibility. I am a vegetarian anyway, so I am doing my part.

[Sadena Meti]

Fish can be cultivated. Every farmer knows that if circumstances produce a poor harvest, the solution is to better prepare - by investing in new technology - for the next harvest.

You clearly know nothing about aquaculture. Or economics or agriculture for that matter. The vast majority of fish can not be be cultivated. In fact, almost EVERY salt water fish can not be cultivated. And salt water fish represent 90% of the fish people eat. Unless of you are counting on magical technology which has not even been dreamed up yet. There are no sudden inventions, everything is developed from previous technology. Your reasoning there would be like the clean coal impossibility.

And in agriculture, farmers know that if they have a bad crop, one of the solutions is to not grow anything on those fields in the next year. It's called "field resting" and crop rotation. Try actually learning about a subject before you pretend to know anything about it. The simplest yokel farmer knows that the way to sustain production is to alter it, not increase it. Double your fertilizer and you burn the field. Continue farming and you degrade the soil to sterility.


However, we believe that in order for tens of billions of people to prosper - on earth and, one day, beyond - mankind needs to bring about a level of economic development that has never before been close to being witnessed.
*must rest I'm laughing so hard*
First of all, "we" don't believe that. Your trying to pass off your idea though group association. Why don't you put forth a SINGLE scientific, economic, or agricultural estimation that would suggest a carrying capacity greater than 18 billion?

Now why did I use that figure... 18 billion? Gee, maybe because I actually bothered researching this (though I admit that was months ago). And that is the highest peer reviewed estimate for subsistance carrying capacity, external to political or economic systems. Simple biology.

*edit - Note - Subsistance carrying capacity results in living conditions comparable to rural India *

18.40 billion results in a per person footprint of 0.4, which is the maxiumum the planet can sustain at a subsistance level using perfect efficency.


Gawd I wish schools would teach kids more science. Bioliogy, physics, mathematics, chemistry, zoology, economics, anything! Considering rationality and scientific thought are some of the hallmarks of communism... I can't even believe I need to explain this on this board...


Next thing I know you'll be advocating Intelligent Design.

*footnote - you may think of bring up the Iter project as an example of magical technology that will save our future. Please do, I'm an expert on that topic and will enjoy replying to that *

[Vanguard1917]

You clearly know nothing about aquaculture. Or economics or agriculture for that matter. The vast majority of fish can not be be cultivated. In fact, almost EVERY salt water fish can not be cultivated. And salt water fish represent 90% of the fish people eat.

Then this is a problem to be dealt with - through human innovation, ingenuity, inventiveness... through human intervention.

Your immediate and automatic proposal to the problem was to limit consumption. My issue with that is the flaw in your Green logic. Rather than call for increased human intervention, you call for humanity to limit its effects by practising restraint (in this case, decrease consumption). The underlying message is that humanity is the problem, rather than the solution.


Unless of you are counting on magical technology which has not even been dreamed up yet. There are no sudden inventions, everything is developed from previous technology.

The truth is that in today's climate of low expectations for humanity - which the ascendancy of environmentalism is one representation of - scientific and technological progress is already being undermined. Hence the rise of the 'precautionary principle'.

Scientific and technological progress is a product of risk-taking. Humanity cannot always anticipate the outcomes of its scientific, technological, economic and social experiments. New things are discovered along the way, often unexpectedly.

Scientific and technological progress also goes hand in hand with economic development. You can't have the former without the latter. If you want to restrain economic development, you have already accepted that science and technology should also be restrained.

Capitalism stands in the way of economic development. Therefore it stands in the way of human science and technology. Therefore it stands in the way of the prosperity of humanity. That's why it needs to be smashed.


First of all, "we" don't believe that. Your trying to pass off your idea though group association. Why don't you put forth a SINGLE scientific, economic, or agricultural estimation that would suggest a carrying capacity greater than 18 billion?

With 12 billion more people, human beings will be in a much better position to solve such a problem than we currently can now. The mere fact that so many people are living on earth will suggest - and even imply - that humanity has progressed to a currently unforseeable degree, socially and economically.

Who do you think you are to place such limitations now? God?

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

This thread makes me hungry.
Reminds me that tonight I'll be enjoying a nice filet of red snapper.
can't wait

Future generations can fuck off

[ichneumon]

okay, here we go....

agriculture today depends on oil. we turn oil into food, producing CO2. the process of producing food lowers the earth's ability to sustain human life. the more food we produce, the more we pollute. unless fusion becomes real VERY soon, this must stop.

without limitless nonpolluting energy, which may very well be impossible, the earth might support 3 billion people in some kind of comfort.

we could farm the oceans themselves. with globally coordinated harvests at sustainable levels. eating lots of plankton, too. have to kill off the whales and dolphins, first, no competitors allowed, but still...

you can't farm saltwater fish like you do freshwater, let me make that clear - but you could manage the oceans sustainably.

how the hell do you think capitalism limits technological growth if you favor mass consumption? wtf? isn't that what capitalism *does*?

[Vargha Poralli]

Vanguard1917 :

seriously you sound like an Earth-Is-Flat believer.

ichneumon

have to kill off the whales and dolphins, first, no competitors allowed, but still...

Yea Lest destroy all those rainforests too. what to do with those useless trees ....we can grow maize in it.......and eat those grass growing on... Nxt

Seriously dudes a capitalist can know better

as far as the food problem is concerned the first problem to tackle is pop xplosion. i thought a serious hurdle to that is religions ...

seriously guys u got to learn math and sciece well as rev-stoic pointed out

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

Vanguard1917, your environmental politics are crap. Your entire argument assumes that humanity will always overcome any problems it creates without having to make sacrifices. Idealism at its worst. Green politics are left-wing. You are the reactionary, here. Humanity is some invincible entity that can always triumph.

[ichneumon]

i was being sarcastic about the whales and dolphins, y'all - just fyi. i am an ecologist.

we could farm the oceans, though. it would take global cooperation with the goal of benefits all humans, no competition allowed AT ALL.

[Vargha Poralli]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2006 08:53 pm
i was being sarcastic about the whales and dolphins, y'all - just fyi. i am an ecologist.

we could farm the oceans, though. it would take global cooperation with the goal of benefits all humans, no competition allowed AT ALL.
sorry ichneumon didn't read you post completely so missed the sarcasm ....

Sincerely apologize for my outburst towards you!!!

[Rodack]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2006 11:00 am
We should stop eating fish all together IMO. It's such a stupid thing to eat, you barely get any protein from it and it isn't very filling.
Tell that to the Eskimos, Comrade

[Rodack]

Originally posted by Dooga Aetrus [email protected] 03, 2006 06:18 am
It's no surprise, really. Communist society is going to have a fun time cleaning up the messes capitalist society has left.
How is the clean up going in Chernobyl, Comrade?

I'm sorry if I seem flippint but please think about what you are going to type before you make a fool of yourself

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

Originally posted by Rodack+November 03, 2006 02:47 pm--> (Rodack @ November 03, 2006 02:47 pm)
Dooga Aetrus [email protected] 03, 2006 06:18 am
It's no surprise, really. Communist society is going to have a fun time cleaning up the messes capitalist society has left.
How is the clean up going in Chernobyl, Comrade?

I'm sorry if I seem flippint but please think about what you are going to type before you make a fool of yourself [/b]
I'm not sure what you are saying here. I am saying capitalist society has resulted in a lot of environmental problems and done nothing about them. Communist society, I am saying, will do something about them. Unfortunately, there will be a lot to be dealt with.

And I don't believe the USSR was communist, if that is what you mean. No one does. It may have been socialist, but I am not sure my opinion on that as I don't support socialism as a viable political ideology.

[Rollo]

Originally posted by Rodack+November 04, 2006 07:44 am--> (Rodack @ November 04, 2006 07:44 am)
[email protected] 03, 2006 11:00 am
We should stop eating fish all together IMO. It's such a stupid thing to eat, you barely get any protein from it and it isn't very filling.
Tell that to the Eskimos, Comrade [/b]
Inuits Don't eat as much fish as you think. They also eat a lot of blubber from sea lions and the such. Never been to Alaska before?

[Sadena Meti]

I've heard that they make an "ice cream" out of fish up there.

I can't even imagine anything that hideous.

[Rodack]

Originally posted by Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor+November 04, 2006 01:43 am--> (Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor @ November 04, 2006 01:43 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2006 02:47 pm

Dooga Aetrus [email protected] 03, 2006 06:18 am
It's no surprise, really. Communist society is going to have a fun time cleaning up the messes capitalist society has left.
How is the clean up going in Chernobyl, Comrade?

I'm sorry if I seem flippint but please think about what you are going to type before you make a fool of yourself
I'm not sure what you are saying here. I am saying capitalist society has resulted in a lot of environmental problems and done nothing about them. Communist society, I am saying, will do something about them. Unfortunately, there will be a lot to be dealt with.

And I don't believe the USSR was communist, if that is what you mean. No one does. It may have been socialist, but I am not sure my opinion on that as I don't support socialism as a viable political ideology. [/b]
Which country has ever been Communist, should we preach a political theory that has never worked or should we try to force our political theory on society to show it can work, Comrade?

[Vargha Poralli]

Originally posted by Rodack+November 05, 2006 12:32 am--> (Rodack @ November 05, 2006 12:32 am)
Originally posted by Dooga Aetrus [email protected] 04, 2006 01:43 am

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2006 02:47 pm

Dooga Aetrus [email protected] 03, 2006 06:18 am
It's no surprise, really. Communist society is going to have a fun time cleaning up the messes capitalist society has left.
How is the clean up going in Chernobyl, Comrade?

I'm sorry if I seem flippint but please think about what you are going to type before you make a fool of yourself
I'm not sure what you are saying here. I am saying capitalist society has resulted in a lot of environmental problems and done nothing about them. Communist society, I am saying, will do something about them. Unfortunately, there will be a lot to be dealt with.

And I don't believe the USSR was communist, if that is what you mean. No one does. It may have been socialist, but I am not sure my opinion on that as I don't support socialism as a viable political ideology.
Which country has ever been Communist, should we preach a political theory that has never worked or should we try to force our political theory on society to show it can work, Comrade? [/b]
so wat is your point ?

[Rodack]

Originally posted by g.ram+November 05, 2006 06:19 am--> (g.ram @ November 05, 2006 06:19 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 12:32 am

Originally posted by Dooga Aetrus [email protected] 04, 2006 01:43 am

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2006 02:47 pm

Dooga Aetrus [email protected] 03, 2006 06:18 am
It's no surprise, really. Communist society is going to have a fun time cleaning up the messes capitalist society has left.
How is the clean up going in Chernobyl, Comrade?

I'm sorry if I seem flippint but please think about what you are going to type before you make a fool of yourself
I'm not sure what you are saying here. I am saying capitalist society has resulted in a lot of environmental problems and done nothing about them. Communist society, I am saying, will do something about them. Unfortunately, there will be a lot to be dealt with.

And I don't believe the USSR was communist, if that is what you mean. No one does. It may have been socialist, but I am not sure my opinion on that as I don't support socialism as a viable political ideology.
Which country has ever been Communist, should we preach a political theory that has never worked or should we try to force our political theory on society to show it can work, Comrade?
so wat is your point ? [/b]
I made my point :)

[EwokUtopia]

Well at least we can still eat fish from lakes. Yummy fish like those found in Lake Erie and Lake Ontario.....Yeah, nevermind, we're fucked.

Especially because I sell fish at a department store, oh well, to fuck with their profits, I want my minimum wage.

[Sadena Meti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 02:58 pm
Yummy fish like those found in Lake Erie...
On the bright side, we could set Lake Erie on fire again, and the fish will be precooked.

[randomorder]

Wasn't it Aneurin Bevan who said something along the lines of:

This island is built out of coal and surrounded by fish, it would take an organising genius to arrange a shortage of both at the same time.

[LuXe]

Here in Norway we maintain quotas. Although we are fishing too much cod. This is currently beeing cut down. (Most of it is "stolen" by russian thrawlers)

[Janus]

I really don't think all fish species are going to be gone so I don't think this is actually going to pan out since fish are replenishable. However, there are still fish farms,etc. so I really don't think that full extinction is going to occur in any way.

[anarchista feminista]

same as the peak-oil theory total rubbish.

expect to pay 3x the current prize for fish next year.

Apparantly with the drought water prices are going to increase. I hope it stops people wasting so much water. All the same, we shouldn't have to pay for it. It's a neccessity.
Oh and peak oil... I went to a forum on that a couple of months ago. It was pretty daunting. I didn't really have much of an idea of what it all meant until then. Although it is just a theory I think it's important to conserve our resources.

[kurt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2006 03:00 am
We should stop eating fish all together IMO. It's such a stupid thing to eat, you barely get any protein from it and it isn't very filling.
Are you kidding me? Tuna has a massive amount of protein. True, it's not very filling, but that just means you can eat more without feeling full, which can be a good thing :)

[Rollo]

Originally posted by kurt+November 08, 2006 06:16 pm--> (kurt @ November 08, 2006 06:16 pm)
[email protected] 03, 2006 03:00 am
We should stop eating fish all together IMO. It's such a stupid thing to eat, you barely get any protein from it and it isn't very filling.
Are you kidding me? Tuna has a massive amount of protein. True, it's not very filling, but that just means you can eat more without feeling full, which can be a good thing :) [/b]
yeah but the problem with tuna is it tastes bad :P

[SPK]

Fish. Yum! Though the mercury poisoning is starting to affect my brain. :wacko:

[Physco Bitch]

I wouldn't be suprised if this happened in fifty years or less. They are breeding fish in "Fish farms" now, but they are still going out and catching loads of fish every day. People don't think of the long term harm things like this do, and even when they are told that a certain species is becoming extinct (wether fish or other things) they don't care and don't listen - they either think it will never happen - or that if it does then it won't be their problem because they will be dead by then.
Even if this is just pre-cautionary warning - and it doesn't happen, we still need to think of the maybe's. But for now we will carryon fishing and fishing - the prices will rise and raise - then one day there will be nothing left and eveyone will sit back going what happened there then? Of course there is the problem of the fishers themselves, if they do slow down - or temparaily stop fishing certain species until the population can rise again - the fishers will suffer - looseing their jobs and so on, but the way it is going with them catching less and less each time they come back from fishing trips - then there won't be much chose soon - they will also end up out of jobs from that way instead.
Yet another lovely mess we are getting into. <_<

[tecumseh]

Very interesting. Too bad the governments are not doing anything about it. They care about economy first, conservation later.


__________________________________
Not enough fish in the sea

Threatened with the loss of one of its top industries, Alaska began limiting the number of boats and fishermen, restricting the size of their catches, and giving fishermen a stake in the long-term viability of salmon and other fish.

If only the rest of the world had learned from Alaska&#39;s response to the crisis. Today, records show that 90% of the big fish—tuna, cod and swordfish—are gone from the oceans. If the serial depletions continue unabated, a group of scientists recently predicted, major seafood stocks will collapse by 2048.

Alaska&#39;s policy shifts are still an exception. By and large, ocean fishing, especially in international waters, remains a free-for-all with too many boats chasing too few fish.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/na...=la-home-nation (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-savefish26nov26,0,6936819.story?coll=la-home-nation)

[pedro san pedro]

I like to blame Canada, myself (http://oceans.greenpeace.org/en/take-action/e-cards/blame-canada-and-espa-a)

[iffandonlyiff]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2006 11:00 am
We should stop eating fish all together IMO. It&#39;s such a stupid thing to eat, you barely get any protein from it and it isn&#39;t very filling.

Where are you getting your information?
Fish has about 20g protein for every 100 calories... For a woman, that&#39;s nearly half of the sufficient protein needed for a day. Compare that to vegetarian products that have 10g/100 cal (normally, at most...)

Tuna, for instance, boasts 57% protein calories to total calories while chicken has 46%, beef 41%. Beans range from around 20-30%... peanuts even less, at 16%


I do agree with you that the oceans are in bad shape and I do think that increasing fish farming (to whatever extent it even is possible) is a good idea... but I have no idea where you are coming from on the nutritional value of fish.