3 ms·
While I'd rather see mass fishing stopped entirely (and I don't eat fish, or any other meat, on ethical grounds), that's a valid point. I often think of the fac
by SwellJoe 9y ago
While I'd rather see mass fishing stopped entirely (and I don't eat fish, or any other meat, on ethical grounds), that's a valid point. I often think of the fact that lobster was once considered trash, or only to be consumed by the lowest classes, and only through an effective marketing campaign did it become a luxury food.
But, realistically, many ocean ecosystems are already on the brink of collapse. Merely increasing production won't save those ecosystems; though maybe it'd stave it off for a few years. Our industrial economies have produced seemingly limitless consumption and waste.
When you add up all of the wasted food at every stage of our agricultural systems, it is staggering. It's not just fish that's being wasted, it's everything. Solving the waste problem is more boring than growing meat in a lab, but it might be more effective at reducing hunger and reducing ecological destruction.
- belorn 9y agoThe waste problem in the other points of the production chain is indeed massive and solvable. The idea that fresh produce is sent to stores only to have a fraction being bought is a massive waste in both food and introduction of additional middle man. Online markets for food could fix this, but I have yet to see one that can compete on prices. It might happen once transport costs go down. To go back to marine ecosystem, those that are on the brink of collapse is so mainly because of 3 causes. Pollution, invasive species, and over overfishing towards specific fish stocks. Both invasive species and overpopulation caused by eutrophication could actually use an increase in fishing in order to increase biodiversity, but a common element in both is that no one want to pay for it. To my knowledge it actually common problem in many fresh water lakes.