4 ms·

I would avoid such black and white statements as "Commercial fishing is an extremely destructive industry". The term "commercial fishing" encompasses a multitu

I would avoid such black and white statements as "Commercial fishing is an extremely destructive industry". The term "commercial fishing" encompasses a multitude of different places, methods, regulatory regimes, monitoring practices, and more, and they range from _extremely_ well managed and sustainable to utterly disastrous. Bluefin Tuna happens to be one of the worst, because it's one of the very few where the species is so valuable that as it gets rarer, the price just climbs and continues to justify ever smaller catches. This is pretty bad for Bluefin Tuna, and could result in it being the first every commercially fished marine fish species to go extinct (yes; that's correct: no marine fish species has _ever_ gone extinct from human fishing). I'm an ecologist who got his degree in fisheries ecology. I'm very much in favor of better, more cohesive fisheries management. But I don't believe we will make any progress by tarring entire industries. All you do is create enemies out of allies.

myshpa 3y ago
I understand that commercial fishing, like everything else, is complex and diverse with both good and bad actors. However, if it were balanced, fish populations wouldn't be in such a dire state. This suggests to an outsider that the majority of the industry is harmful, and as such, I have no sympathy for it at all. Considering the fact that fishing is decimating fish populations globally (even sharks are facing extinction due to overfishing, bycatch, and plastic pollution) and causing havoc on sea floors with trawling for example, I don't feel sorry for having such a black and white viewpoint. > But I don't believe we will make any progress by tarring entire industries Considering that meat consumption is not essential for our sustenance or health, I believe that the only way to prevent further environmental damage and restore biodiversity is to ban all forms of animal farming, marine aquaculture, and fishing. We need to explore sustainable ways to harness the sea for our nourishment, sure, but I don't believe it has to involve fishing. I'm excited about the prospect of more affordable omega-3 from algae and seaweeds. I bet you'd prefer to see vibrant seaweed farms teeming with life rather than ecosystems devastated by overfishing or polluted by aquafarms.
- MostlyStable 3y ago
  That's my point though, fish populations are _not_ universally in such dire straights. Yes, bottom trawling does cause extensive habitat damage, but bottom trawling is completely banned in lots of places. Yes, sharks are in _extreme_ decline in lots of places and face lots of overfishing, but I'm not actually sure that many species (if any) are at risk of _extinction_. (That doesn't mean we shouldn't be against shark fishing, it's ecologically disastrous, but be wary of claims of extinction). It's fine if you don't want to eat meat. But lots of people do. I've worked with lots of commercial fisherman. They can be (and in many places already are) powerful allies for sane, sustainable fisheries regulation. When you say things like "commercial fishing is universally bad", you communicate that you don't care if they are willing to limit fishing pressure and sustain populations, that you are going to try and ban them anways. At that point, why shouldn't they just fish as much as they can? I'm 100% onboard with algal aquaculture. I think it has a lot of promise. But that is completely orthogonal to conventional commercial fishing. The two are not competitors and in fact can be complements to each other. The options are not "either seaweed farms or devastated ecosystems". It's exactly this kind of false dichotomy thinking that is counter productive.
  - myshpa 3y ago
    > I'm not actually sure that many species (if any) are at risk of _extinction_ Many sharks closer to extinction than feared: Red List https://phys.org/news/2019-03-sharks-closer-extinction-red.html https://phys.org/news/2019-03-sharks-closer-extinction-red.h... Overfishing puts more than one-third of all sharks, rays, and chimaeras at risk of extinction https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/overfishing-puts-more-than-one-third-of-all-sharks-rays-and-chimaeras-at-risk-of-extinction https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/overfishing-puts-more-... Overfishing is Driving Eels to Extinction https://vegnews.com/2022/9/forsea-foods-cell-technology-eels https://vegnews.com/2022/9/forsea-foods-cell-technology-eels Around a third of freshwater fish species are threatened with extinction, and 80 species have already been declared Extinct. Since 1970, mega-fish populations have crashed by 94% on average, while migratory fish populations have fallen by 76%. https://wwf.panda.org/discover/our_focus/freshwater_practice/the_world_s_forgotten_fishes/ https://wwf.panda.org/discover/our_focus/freshwater_practice... Endangered North Atlantic right whales are in 'crisis'; species approaching extinction https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/07/19/north-atlantic-right-wales-noaa-crisis-approaching-extinction/70429914007/ https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/07/19/north-a... Eating mackerel no longer sustainable, Good Fish Guide advises https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/apr/05/mackerel-loses-sustainable-status-as-overfishing-puts-species-at-risk https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/apr/05/mackerel... > It's fine if you don't want to eat meat. But lots of people do. Not necessary, destructive, unsustainable. > why shouldn't they just fish as much as they can And they don't? Really? They'd leave money in the ocean? > either seaweed farms or devastated ecosystems It sure looks like it.

myshpa 3y ago

I understand that commercial fishing, like everything else, is complex and diverse with both good and bad actors. However, if it were balanced, fish populations wouldn't be in such a dire state. This suggests to an outsider that the majority of the industry is harmful, and as such, I have no sympathy for it at all. Considering the fact that fishing is decimating fish populations globally (even sharks are facing extinction due to overfishing, bycatch, and plastic pollution) and causing havoc on sea floors with trawling for example, I don't feel sorry for having such a black and white viewpoint. > But I don't believe we will make any progress by tarring entire industries Considering that meat consumption is not essential for our sustenance or health, I believe that the only way to prevent further environmental damage and restore biodiversity is to ban all forms of animal farming, marine aquaculture, and fishing. We need to explore sustainable ways to harness the sea for our nourishment, sure, but I don't believe it has to involve fishing. I'm excited about the prospect of more affordable omega-3 from algae and seaweeds. I bet you'd prefer to see vibrant seaweed farms teeming with life rather than ecosystems devastated by overfishing or polluted by aquafarms.

MostlyStable 3y ago
That's my point though, fish populations are _not_ universally in such dire straights. Yes, bottom trawling does cause extensive habitat damage, but bottom trawling is completely banned in lots of places. Yes, sharks are in _extreme_ decline in lots of places and face lots of overfishing, but I'm not actually sure that many species (if any) are at risk of _extinction_. (That doesn't mean we shouldn't be against shark fishing, it's ecologically disastrous, but be wary of claims of extinction). It's fine if you don't want to eat meat. But lots of people do. I've worked with lots of commercial fisherman. They can be (and in many places already are) powerful allies for sane, sustainable fisheries regulation. When you say things like "commercial fishing is universally bad", you communicate that you don't care if they are willing to limit fishing pressure and sustain populations, that you are going to try and ban them anways. At that point, why shouldn't they just fish as much as they can? I'm 100% onboard with algal aquaculture. I think it has a lot of promise. But that is completely orthogonal to conventional commercial fishing. The two are not competitors and in fact can be complements to each other. The options are not "either seaweed farms or devastated ecosystems". It's exactly this kind of false dichotomy thinking that is counter productive.
- myshpa 3y ago
  > I'm not actually sure that many species (if any) are at risk of _extinction_ Many sharks closer to extinction than feared: Red List https://phys.org/news/2019-03-sharks-closer-extinction-red.html https://phys.org/news/2019-03-sharks-closer-extinction-red.h... Overfishing puts more than one-third of all sharks, rays, and chimaeras at risk of extinction https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/overfishing-puts-more-than-one-third-of-all-sharks-rays-and-chimaeras-at-risk-of-extinction https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/overfishing-puts-more-... Overfishing is Driving Eels to Extinction https://vegnews.com/2022/9/forsea-foods-cell-technology-eels https://vegnews.com/2022/9/forsea-foods-cell-technology-eels Around a third of freshwater fish species are threatened with extinction, and 80 species have already been declared Extinct. Since 1970, mega-fish populations have crashed by 94% on average, while migratory fish populations have fallen by 76%. https://wwf.panda.org/discover/our_focus/freshwater_practice/the_world_s_forgotten_fishes/ https://wwf.panda.org/discover/our_focus/freshwater_practice... Endangered North Atlantic right whales are in 'crisis'; species approaching extinction https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/07/19/north-atlantic-right-wales-noaa-crisis-approaching-extinction/70429914007/ https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/07/19/north-a... Eating mackerel no longer sustainable, Good Fish Guide advises https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/apr/05/mackerel-loses-sustainable-status-as-overfishing-puts-species-at-risk https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/apr/05/mackerel... > It's fine if you don't want to eat meat. But lots of people do. Not necessary, destructive, unsustainable. > why shouldn't they just fish as much as they can And they don't? Really? They'd leave money in the ocean? > either seaweed farms or devastated ecosystems It sure looks like it.