7 ms·

Oceans have been terribly overfished, but people need to eat. Many poorer countries rely on fishing to help then feed their populations. Banning commercial fish

Oceans have been terribly overfished, but people need to eat. Many poorer countries rely on fishing to help then feed their populations. Banning commercial fishing would be like banning commercial chicken. A huge loss of a major cheap source of protein, and nothing to replace it with.

zozbot234 4y ago
Commercial chicken is not hunted in the wild, so I'm not sure how that comparison makes any sense. The oceans are already being depleted of fish in a highly unsustainable way so if you care about that protein source, shutting down large-scale fishing altogether is exactly what you should do.
- dukeofdoom 4y ago
  The logistics of what you are proposing is just not there, unless you're cool with committing another man made famine like the Holodomor. I actually find it disturbing with the ease you're willing to starve the poor of the world. Ocean fishing requires very little energy input, but provides huge amounts of ready to eat food output. You can't replace that in many parts of the world. Not every place has good farm land for one, or the technological infrastructure, or even political stability. Give you and example. Egypt went from a population of 8 million to 80 million in the last century. Do you think they can grow all that food in the desert? or do they rely on fishing and on global imports of food items...like grain from Ukraine. How will the poor do when you take out one of their sources of food. While simultaneously the price of energy is sky rocketing and global trade is under threat do to conflict and as countries begin to hoard fertilizer and food for their own populations, in anticipation of the the coming winter.
  - wumpus 4y ago
    > Ocean fishing requires very little energy input So all of those studies pointing out that most ocean fishing only happens because of subsidized fuel are wrong?
    - djbebs 4y ago
      Anytime someone tries to argue that fossil fuels are being subsidized, it's safe to ignore every argument they will ever make on the subject. When someone can't even acknowledge reality there's really no point in engaging.
TaylorAlexander 4y ago
I mean we could absolutely replace a lot of this with plant based sources. Why do you say there is nothing to replace it?
maxbond 4y ago
Then when we get together as a global community to ban fishing, let's also agree to pay for the transition to aquaculture and other sustainable forms of acquiring protein (according to the renewable resources available in a given region). If "take away their livelihood without giving them an alternative" isn't acceptable - and of course it isn't - "let's do nothing" isn't the only alternative we should consider.
- Guthur 4y ago
  Oh you so benevolent, force people at gun point to abide by your will, right?
  - maxbond 4y ago
    Ignoring the snark, it's an interesting point and I'm not in favor of using violence to achieve any ends. Not interested in waiting around to die because some large fishing interests are structurally incapable of behaving responsibly, either, though. Just as I reject that our only options are to either screw over fishing communities or do nothing, I reject that our only alternatives are violence or doing nothing. I don't believe there is a single solution which can be applied in all situations that would resolve this, it would need to be worked out on a case by case basis and in cooperation with those communities. But just because it is complex and difficult does not mean it doesn't exist, and the alternative is an ecological collapse which we are unlikely to survive.
    - Guthur 4y ago
      Not you nor anyone else has any proof of any collapse, it is hyperbolic nonsense. The problem is that all and I mean all of these idealogical driven agendas require tyranny because I for one do not agree with your world view.
      - maxbond 4y ago
        I hope you'll reconsider this approach to conversation. You don't even know my worldview or my ideology, you seem to be reacting to some imagined worst case for what my world view could be. This is pretty gratuitous and makes it difficult to have a conversation with you; you aren't actually having a discussion with me, you're trying to engage with a phenomenon you imagine that I'm a part of. You're taking some views I've expressed and generalizing them to my entire world view, filling in the blanks with the least charitable assumptions you could make. For that reason, it doesn't seem there's a productive way for me to engage with you.
superchroma 4y ago
That's too bad. Nobody told people to have all those mouths to feed. The oceans are overfished and heavily polluted and people need the ocean to survive. If people rely on fucking up the ocean, we're all in trouble.
- ssizn 4y ago
  Humans > Environment.
  - waste_monk 4y ago
    All well and good until you run out of environment. If the ocean is overfished and its ecosystem collapses, the people who depend on it for food will starve anyway.
    - everforward 4y ago
      This. We either use the little bit of abusing the ocean we have left to flatten out population curves, or the population crashes to a much lower level later on. We wouldn't need such dramatic changes to combat global warming if the population didn't continually exponentially expand.
  - Beltalowda 4y ago
    In principle, I don't entirely disagree with that, however, humans are part of the environment. We need "the environment" to survive, such as a sustainable marine ecosystem. I mean, if there are no more fish to catch due to overfishing then humans will be in trouble, too.
dr_dshiv 4y ago
Here is a source of sustainable cheap protein! It is hard to compete with the commodity price of fish meal but we are very close to doing so. (I know, we are running a maggot farm, don’t judge) Inputs are based on restaurant food waste. Also looking for sources of cheap starch if you know any. Displacing fish meal is a major priority and motivation for this startup. Comments welcome: https://www.getprotyn.com/ https://www.getprotyn.com/
- rootlocus 4y ago
  Sounds like it has lots of benefits and no downsides, which begs more research. The website however seems to have a leftover placeholder text under "Our bugs are bettering the world" > "Disease Free": That wasn't real text. Just holding some space here. Real text is going to be awesome.
- Veen 4y ago
  Let them eat maggots.
goodpoint 4y ago
> Oceans have been terribly overfished, but people need to eat "but"? That's a non-sequitur. If we run out of fish there's no fish to eat.

zozbot234 4y ago

Commercial chicken is not hunted in the wild, so I'm not sure how that comparison makes any sense. The oceans are already being depleted of fish in a highly unsustainable way so if you care about that protein source, shutting down large-scale fishing altogether is exactly what you should do.

dukeofdoom 4y ago
The logistics of what you are proposing is just not there, unless you're cool with committing another man made famine like the Holodomor. I actually find it disturbing with the ease you're willing to starve the poor of the world. Ocean fishing requires very little energy input, but provides huge amounts of ready to eat food output. You can't replace that in many parts of the world. Not every place has good farm land for one, or the technological infrastructure, or even political stability. Give you and example. Egypt went from a population of 8 million to 80 million in the last century. Do you think they can grow all that food in the desert? or do they rely on fishing and on global imports of food items...like grain from Ukraine. How will the poor do when you take out one of their sources of food. While simultaneously the price of energy is sky rocketing and global trade is under threat do to conflict and as countries begin to hoard fertilizer and food for their own populations, in anticipation of the the coming winter.
- wumpus 4y ago
  > Ocean fishing requires very little energy input So all of those studies pointing out that most ocean fishing only happens because of subsidized fuel are wrong?
  - djbebs 4y ago
    Anytime someone tries to argue that fossil fuels are being subsidized, it's safe to ignore every argument they will ever make on the subject. When someone can't even acknowledge reality there's really no point in engaging.

TaylorAlexander 4y ago

I mean we could absolutely replace a lot of this with plant based sources. Why do you say there is nothing to replace it?

maxbond 4y ago

Then when we get together as a global community to ban fishing, let's also agree to pay for the transition to aquaculture and other sustainable forms of acquiring protein (according to the renewable resources available in a given region). If "take away their livelihood without giving them an alternative" isn't acceptable - and of course it isn't - "let's do nothing" isn't the only alternative we should consider.

Guthur 4y ago
Oh you so benevolent, force people at gun point to abide by your will, right?
- maxbond 4y ago
  Ignoring the snark, it's an interesting point and I'm not in favor of using violence to achieve any ends. Not interested in waiting around to die because some large fishing interests are structurally incapable of behaving responsibly, either, though. Just as I reject that our only options are to either screw over fishing communities or do nothing, I reject that our only alternatives are violence or doing nothing. I don't believe there is a single solution which can be applied in all situations that would resolve this, it would need to be worked out on a case by case basis and in cooperation with those communities. But just because it is complex and difficult does not mean it doesn't exist, and the alternative is an ecological collapse which we are unlikely to survive.
  - Guthur 4y ago
    Not you nor anyone else has any proof of any collapse, it is hyperbolic nonsense. The problem is that all and I mean all of these idealogical driven agendas require tyranny because I for one do not agree with your world view.
    - maxbond 4y ago
      I hope you'll reconsider this approach to conversation. You don't even know my worldview or my ideology, you seem to be reacting to some imagined worst case for what my world view could be. This is pretty gratuitous and makes it difficult to have a conversation with you; you aren't actually having a discussion with me, you're trying to engage with a phenomenon you imagine that I'm a part of. You're taking some views I've expressed and generalizing them to my entire world view, filling in the blanks with the least charitable assumptions you could make. For that reason, it doesn't seem there's a productive way for me to engage with you.

superchroma 4y ago

That's too bad. Nobody told people to have all those mouths to feed. The oceans are overfished and heavily polluted and people need the ocean to survive. If people rely on fucking up the ocean, we're all in trouble.

ssizn 4y ago
Humans > Environment.
- waste_monk 4y ago
  All well and good until you run out of environment. If the ocean is overfished and its ecosystem collapses, the people who depend on it for food will starve anyway.
  - everforward 4y ago
    This. We either use the little bit of abusing the ocean we have left to flatten out population curves, or the population crashes to a much lower level later on. We wouldn't need such dramatic changes to combat global warming if the population didn't continually exponentially expand.
- Beltalowda 4y ago
  In principle, I don't entirely disagree with that, however, humans are part of the environment. We need "the environment" to survive, such as a sustainable marine ecosystem. I mean, if there are no more fish to catch due to overfishing then humans will be in trouble, too.

dr_dshiv 4y ago

Here is a source of sustainable cheap protein! It is hard to compete with the commodity price of fish meal but we are very close to doing so. (I know, we are running a maggot farm, don’t judge) Inputs are based on restaurant food waste. Also looking for sources of cheap starch if you know any. Displacing fish meal is a major priority and motivation for this startup. Comments welcome: https://www.getprotyn.com/ https://www.getprotyn.com/

rootlocus 4y ago
Sounds like it has lots of benefits and no downsides, which begs more research. The website however seems to have a leftover placeholder text under "Our bugs are bettering the world" > "Disease Free": That wasn't real text. Just holding some space here. Real text is going to be awesome.
Veen 4y ago
Let them eat maggots.

goodpoint 4y ago

> Oceans have been terribly overfished, but people need to eat "but"? That's a non-sequitur. If we run out of fish there's no fish to eat.