4 ms·

How hard would it be to get nations to agree that all (new) fishing nets be made from line that contains a barcode-like pattern, with that pattern being registe

How hard would it be to get nations to agree that all (new) fishing nets be made from line that contains a barcode-like pattern, with that pattern being registered to each ship (just as each ship itself is registered by governments already)? Ideally governments would then do periodic random checks that boats in their ports have only the nets which they are registered as having. Fishing companies may even support this, as it would prevent stealing of nets (although I don't know how common a crime that is). In practice, some countries would probably have a lot of bribery and wouldn't pay fines for their old broken nets going "missing" while out at sea, but I think countries might be embarrassed if their nets were found to be responsible for a disproportionate amount of ocean pollution. There's an interesting technical/political question about how to implement a global append-only registry, and also maybe a question of whether navies could use drones to inspect the nets of foreign civilian ships in international waters, but this all depends on how feasible the initial agreement is.

tiernano 4y ago
Very hard.
dredmorbius 4y ago
Interesting suggestion. The general concept is called taggants, which tend to be microscopic and integrated into either objects or materials. The context I'm most familiar with are explosive taggants. Even if not specifically registered to ships, these might create a traceable chain at least back to manufacturers and/or wholesalers. What legal benefit that might provide isn't entirely clear. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taggant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taggant> Another possibility would be to forbid plastics entirely in favour of biodegradable materials (e.g., hemp or sisal) which would break down in time. No doubt this would entail far higher costs, and present similar regulatory challenges.
- dane-pgp 4y ago
  > which tend to be microscopic and integrated into either objects or materials. The advantage of a barcode is that it could be read remotely, potentially from a passing ship, or just a whistleblower on board with a camera.
  - dredmorbius 4y ago
    If you can find the barcode. The remnants within the GBP are often fragments, particles, or microscopic. Taggants for fibres might be based on specific banding patterns. These would not be dissimilar to barcodes. They'd probably require some degree of magnification but could otherwise be read with minimal equipment or complexity on at least reasonably macroscopic fragments.
    - dane-pgp 4y ago
      > The remnants within the GBP are often fragments, particles, or microscopic. Fair point. Having microscopic taggants sounds like a good idea, but I was thinking about the problems of companies stealing nets, or using counterfeit nets, or unregistered nets. Solving that would require (sometimes adversarial) checks of the nets while they are in use, with the checks potentially being performed by entities that can't get microscopically close to the nets to inspect them.
      - dredmorbius 4y ago
        ¿Porque no los dos? I could see a mandate to, say, include barcodes in every X units of net or line (say one every 10m of linear line, or every 100m^2 of net. These could be inspected, and where intact flotsam or jetsam is recovered, identified as to manufacturer, lot, or registered user. Taggants would be used for smaller debris. In either case, the larger hurdle is all but certainly maritime law and regulation, which is notoriously thorny, inconsistent, and tends strongly to Gresham's Law race-to-the-bottom dynamics.
        dane-pgp 4y ago
        That sounds like the right answer, thank you.
Arnt 4y ago
Difficult. Losing a net isn't rare, even if you try hard to avoid it. (Source: Common wisdom in the fishing village where I was born.)
- dane-pgp 4y ago
  Yes, any solution would have to take into account the reality that losing nets will continue to happen despite the best efforts of the crew. Ultimately, though, someone has to pay for the cost of removing these nets from the ocean, and ideally that cost should be recouped from the fishing company that bought the nets (possibly as part of some insurance scheme).

tiernano 4y ago

Very hard.

dredmorbius 4y ago

Interesting suggestion. The general concept is called taggants, which tend to be microscopic and integrated into either objects or materials. The context I'm most familiar with are explosive taggants. Even if not specifically registered to ships, these might create a traceable chain at least back to manufacturers and/or wholesalers. What legal benefit that might provide isn't entirely clear. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taggant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taggant> Another possibility would be to forbid plastics entirely in favour of biodegradable materials (e.g., hemp or sisal) which would break down in time. No doubt this would entail far higher costs, and present similar regulatory challenges.

dane-pgp 4y ago
> which tend to be microscopic and integrated into either objects or materials. The advantage of a barcode is that it could be read remotely, potentially from a passing ship, or just a whistleblower on board with a camera.
- dredmorbius 4y ago
  If you can find the barcode. The remnants within the GBP are often fragments, particles, or microscopic. Taggants for fibres might be based on specific banding patterns. These would not be dissimilar to barcodes. They'd probably require some degree of magnification but could otherwise be read with minimal equipment or complexity on at least reasonably macroscopic fragments.
  - dane-pgp 4y ago
    > The remnants within the GBP are often fragments, particles, or microscopic. Fair point. Having microscopic taggants sounds like a good idea, but I was thinking about the problems of companies stealing nets, or using counterfeit nets, or unregistered nets. Solving that would require (sometimes adversarial) checks of the nets while they are in use, with the checks potentially being performed by entities that can't get microscopically close to the nets to inspect them.
    - dredmorbius 4y ago
      ¿Porque no los dos? I could see a mandate to, say, include barcodes in every X units of net or line (say one every 10m of linear line, or every 100m^2 of net. These could be inspected, and where intact flotsam or jetsam is recovered, identified as to manufacturer, lot, or registered user. Taggants would be used for smaller debris. In either case, the larger hurdle is all but certainly maritime law and regulation, which is notoriously thorny, inconsistent, and tends strongly to Gresham's Law race-to-the-bottom dynamics.
      - dane-pgp 4y ago
        That sounds like the right answer, thank you.

Arnt 4y ago

Difficult. Losing a net isn't rare, even if you try hard to avoid it. (Source: Common wisdom in the fishing village where I was born.)

dane-pgp 4y ago
Yes, any solution would have to take into account the reality that losing nets will continue to happen despite the best efforts of the crew. Ultimately, though, someone has to pay for the cost of removing these nets from the ocean, and ideally that cost should be recouped from the fishing company that bought the nets (possibly as part of some insurance scheme).