Don't understand the ban on shooting some fish species

[Lorenzoid]

Greens

Contain all the nutrients and proteins a human needs.

Since plants get their energy from sunlight with a minimal amount of nutrients from the Earth, plants are indeed far easier on the planet's resources than animals as a source of food for humans. But eating plants alone wouldn't be sustainable either, if you're talking about the planet's entire population. As I understand it, chemical fertilizers are indispensable today to keep the world from starving. If everyone on the planet ate only plants, we might very well be in a pickle just as we are by so many people eating animals. What I was trying to get at was that, as I see it, no realistic diet is truly sustainable. Sure, we could all eat bricks of algae or insects or something along those lines for maximum sustainability. I'm not even sure that could be sustainable forever. Absent some cataclysm, humans will strip the Earth of its resources. Maybe then our population will return to a balanced level.

 

[Shotmaster]

Require all fishing to be done with rod and reel, speargun, by hand or small dip nets, and limit catch for each angler. I have watched shrimpers kill 10 lbs of juvenile fish for every pound of shrimp they catch, it has a cool name too "bycatch", sounds innocuous, but it doesn't quite capture the waste and carnage. I watch the shrimpers use a stick with a nail in it to stab the blue crabs when culling their catch, since it is bycatch, and dump it overnoard, they don't care what it does to the crab fisherman. Long lines and nets are the most destructive. The commercial interest only stop when there is nothing left to catch or it becomes unprofitable. Their political hirelings protect their control of the fish stocks, however the recreational voice is becoming stronger. It is time for all of us to stand up and stop/reduce the pillaging of "our" collective resource before there is nothing left to save.

 

[tilikum]

Start sinking commercial boats. All kidding aside, it is a downward spiral until all stocks dry up. Maybe after the human species is long gone, some other species will refill the lost niches.

 

[Wookie]

Greens

Contain all the nutrients and proteins a human needs.

My food eats greens. I'm a vegetarian once removed.

 

[mmadiver]

There is no fishery, none, that have been able to successfully deal with the harvesting levels and environmental compromises we have brought down on them.

I disagree. The Maine Lobster fishery is a good example.

 

[fmerkel]

I disagree. The Maine Lobster fishery is a good example.

If that's true, and those fisheries always claim it's true, then my respect for their accomplishment. I'm a long way from Maine, have no interest in lobster, so they aren't on my radar.

OK, one....maybe. Any others?

 

[mmadiver]

If that's true, and those fisheries always claim it's true, then my respect for their accomplishment. I'm a long way from Maine, have no interest in lobster, so they aren't on my radar.

OK, one....maybe. Any others?

Maine lobster is the only fishery I have some knowledge of, I have no experience with others and would only be speculating. However, a single example is enough to disprove your blanket statement that there isn't a single fishery that can deal with the harvesting levels. While I agree that the majority of fisheries have been over fished, I think it's counterproductive to sensationalize and make blanket statements not grounded in fact - it turns people off and is where environmentalists lose a lot of ground.

 

[fmerkel]

I don't get that. Things can be damn near a complete disaster but when pointed out to the population at large "the environmentalists lose a lot of ground". Me thinks those people are never going to get it anyway.

Do you know for a FACT that the Maine Lobster fishery is ACTUALLY being run in a way that is sustainable? I can guarantee you the fisherman won't tell you, and the fisheries authorities are not likely to tell you. The pollack fisheries in AK is deemed fully sustainable by the 'relevant authorities', but it isn't. They simply have too much invested to quit.

 

[BRT]

Absolutely, but it isn't. It's being decimated by huge corporations with no greater aim than profit. Same thing is happening to farm agriculture. We can't keep poisoning the hell out of the ground and then propping it back up with fertilizer. Organic small scale farming has been shown to work, and work well.

FWIW a single AWARE and KNOWLEDGEABLE diver is probably one of the better ways to harvest fish. What you are competing with really is massive fish trawlers with nets miles long that take EVERYTHING in their path, and stupidly discard the by-catch.....because it's illegal. How wasteful and stupid is that?
They now have to use more technological tools, go deeper, wider, and longer than they ever have before. They are still losing ground and desirable species faster than they are replenished.

A young man I know who just graduated from Marine Biology got his first job as a surveyor on the ships in AK. His report on that experience is really disturbing. The claim is that this is a sustainable fishery. What is the government going to say, "Everybody stop for say about 20-50 years and we'll see what happens.?" That just won't happen.

There used to be salmon in abundance on the west coast. Now there are few. Same thing is happening in AK, and fast. Sustainable.....not likely unless a whole lot of people are willing to go broke and not eat fish, which also seems unlikely.

Sad, I loved to fish when I was a teen. It was mostly lake and river trout but even back in the 60's as a kid could tell that fishery was about long gone. All we could catch was skinny 8" hatchery trout most of the time. People pay thousands of dollars to go where the fishing is still pristine. You have to be freaking rich and dedicated to do that anymore.

Could you give me an idea of what kind of output you get with organic small scale farming? You don't know what you are talking about.

 

[BRT]

Since plants get their energy from sunlight with a minimal amount of nutrients from the Earth, plants are indeed far easier on the planet's resources than animals as a source of food for humans. But eating plants alone wouldn't be sustainable either, if you're talking about the planet's entire population. As I understand it, chemical fertilizers are indispensable today to keep the world from starving. If everyone on the planet ate only plants, we might very well be in a pickle just as we are by so many people eating animals. What I was trying to get at was that, as I see it, no realistic diet is truly sustainable. Sure, we could all eat bricks of algae or insects or something along those lines for maximum sustainability. I'm not even sure that could be sustainable forever. Absent some cataclysm, humans will strip the Earth of its resources. Maybe then our population will return to a balanced level.

It has been predicted for most of civilization that man is going to outrun his ability to feed himself. We are fatter then ever. Not going to happen in any case or any place that Government does not cause it.