We are now finished with Four Fish and it is time to reflect on your major take-aways. In at least a 250 word post, share with the class what you thought were the most eye-opening, interesting, or otherwise like-able parts of the book. In addition, discuss how the book influenced your view regarding the role of aquaculture and wild-capture fisheries as part of the solution for feeding the ~8 billion people on Earth.
Submit your comment by 11:59 pm on Tuesday night and by Wednesday contribute to the discussion online by responding to at least two other posts.
45 thoughts on “FTT- Prompt Due October 25 by 11:59 pm”
I thought this book was interesting and very informative. I liked that it told his personal experience from his travels to see various fisheries from around the world alongside the histories of the fisheries. On a related side note, I thought it was kind of funny and sad that I have learned more about the history of Israel from one section of one chapter in this book about fish than I learned from all my years in the public school system. It was interesting to compare his description of the downfall of the northern cod fishery to the presentation last week, and how they both agreed that people knew the stocks were collapsing but didn’t do anything about it. However, there were some things that were different; the class presentation focused mostly on Newfoundland while the book talked about both the U.S. and Canada. The story from the book about the Conservation LNN Foundation suing the federal government for not protecting the fish stocks was interesting, and maybe it’s something that should happen more often when the government knows that there is a problem but is waiting until the last possible second to do anything about it. I thought the part about the Sustainable Fisheries Act, passed in 1996, stating that all commercial fish populations in the U.S. must be rebuilt by 2014 was interesting, because they are definitely not all rebuilt now. I also learned quite a bit more about fish farming, although I still stand by what I said in my first comment regarding the topic: farmed fish could be part of the solution to feeding our massive population but they can’t be the whole solution, and it can have unintended side effects. In regards to wild-capture fisheries, I appreciated the second-to-last sentence in the book: “If we hunt them and eat them, we must hunt them with care and eat them with the fullness of our appreciation.” This is kind of a subsistence mindset, and I thought it was a good way to end the book.
I appreciate you mentioning that it is unfortunate you’ve learned more about Israel in a fish book than during your time as a student in public school. This is somewhat an unrelated observation but sometimes literature can bring about topics and realizations that it might not have intended to. I agree that fish farming is part of the solution but not the whole solution. What did you think of Paul Greenberg’s criteria for sea animals we domesticate?
Like a few people said in class, it seems like those categories were developed for land animals and are not particularly fitting for fish at times, but some of them are also applicable to fish. To the first point, it was kind of an unrelated observation, but I was talking about how he did a good job describing the history of what he was talking about so I thought it fit.
Rio, I also learned more about Israel through a book about fish than I did in school. I agree that farmed fish should be a part of the solution but definitely not the entire solution. It has definitely turned into a necessity, even though most people would rather eat wild fish.
Yes, I agree that most people would rather eat wild fish, for me personally eating good quality, wild caught fish is one of the things I miss most from home. By “necessity” do you mean it will be necessary when the ocean cannot support wild stocks anymore, or do you mean it’s necessary now, to let wild stocks recover?
I also learned more about Isreal’s history just from the one section of the book and I agree it is quite sad that this is the reality. When I was little, I remember learning about the lack of cod in Massachusetts, specifically Cape Cod, so I was at least aware of the issue but I enjoyed learning about the issue in other parts of the world. I too think that farmed fish are a part of the solution, but not a long-term answer to a big problem.
I think the overall most eye-opening aspect of Four Fish was the fact that it was published in 2010. I think it’s interesting how Greenberg presents the problems of industrial fishing and fish farming and how a lot of those problems appear to be largely the same twelve years later. He provides some principles in aiding a healthy future for fish and fisheries, and how well one can judge our collective effort to follow those principles can give mixed results.
I don’t necessarily think that this is a sort of pessimistic judgement on how we’ve developed our management of fisheries in that span of time. I think we have made a lot of strides in our overall awareness of overfishing issues and sustainability across a broad spectrum of fish species, I think that international efforts to manage fisheries and establish areas and timeframes that wild populations can recover in has been more and more fruitful over time. Greenberg spends a lot of time contextualizing fishing and fisheries in a historical timeframe, I wonder what he would make of it twelve years after he published this book.
Otherwise, Greenberg does an excellent job throughout Four Fish in ensuring that we keep the human perspective in mind, and how that largely informs our practices and policies that impact fish stocks and fisheries management. In regards to aquaculture and fish farming, the book enforced my own belief that the practice can be part of the solution in giving a reprieve to depleted stocks while feeding the world population. It must be continually refined and developed to ensure a healthy relationship with wild ecosystems, but it is worth investing in out of principle.
I am also curious to know what Greenberg would make of the state of fish and fisheries now that significant time has passed. The state of fish and fisheries is dependent on a series of natural and anthropogenic variables, lots of which are constantly changing (some unpredictably). Greenberg would have a lot to take in.
What do you think about his proposed efforts necessary for recovering fish populations? Are there any you would add or change? I would add something that focuses on indigenous involvement.
Tony, I totally forgot this book was published in 2010! It’s kind of concerning to consider that this book was published 12 years ago (and probably written 13-14 years ago). Especially considering the monumental changes in climate and fisheries that have happened just within the past couple of years. And the research developments. I also thought Greenberg did a great job showing how perspectives can really alter how someone experiences a fishery.
I just realized this book was published only 12 years ago and how mind blowing that is and makes me wonder what these experiences Greenberg talked about look like today.
I do agree we have come a long way and are making astounding strides in the fisheries world every day. Which makes me curious of what the future has to hold.
You bring up an excellent fact that the book was published twelve years ago, and we continue to struggle with the same issues. Not that any of the issues are “easy fixes” by any means, but it is a noteworthy observation. It is a bit of an eye opener as to how much work we have ahead of us for implementing great change that will ideally be recognized in the future.
As indicated by the title, I learned a lot about fish and fisheries. Throughout the book, we learned of fish characteristics, fisheries management, fishing/fisheries history, Greenberg’s relationship with the subject, and anthropogenic implications. Though, as I write this, what sticks in my mind most profoundly is the conclusion; specifically, the steps Greenberg suggests to recover wild fish populations. He says we need to reduce fishing efforts, convert more of our oceans into no-catch zones, implement global protection of unmanageable species, and protect the bottom of the food chain. Because this book was written in 2010, I’ve reflected and continue to reflect upon how well we have performed the aforementioned actions. I would say we have increased the amount of action for each solution but not enough. We still have large populations of fish declining in number, health, size, and weight. There is still an issue of food security, threats to sustainable fishing, harmful commercial fishing efforts, disregard for wild populations, and too much faith being placed in the hands of aquaculture. I agree with Paul Greenberg’s idea but I think what this book lacks, among many similar pieces of fish–related literature, is the how. How do we implement these? I think a big reason the how is missing is because it is not consistent and is based on a variety of changing factors. We often don’t know or understand the specifics of it. I think a significant portion of the how lies in the people’s values, beliefs, education, experience, involvement, willingness, and care. Another significant portion lies in government- federal, state, and local.
As for aquaculture, I think it is part of the solution. Paul Greenberg’s work has reinforced the idea that restoring wild populations should be the first and foremost priority. However, due to the slow and uncertain process of recovery, aquaculture (done correctly) can fill in some of the holes poked in the world’s food security.
I’m going to be honest here, I haven’t quite gotten to the conclusion yet so your summary of Greenberg’s key points was appreciated. I definitely agree with him especially when he says that the lowest trophic levels should be protected (as they are used by all other trophic levels). I agree with you Elle that we aren’t quite meeting his proposed solutions; and there are things that should be done but aren’t in terms of protecting wild stock.
I appreciate you pointing out the lack of a “how” in regards to a lot of fish-related literature, as well as noting that input from individuals, communities, and the government is all required to come to any significant solutions. Working to reasonably satisfy as many groups as possible within the fishing industry is no small feat, and reaching any given goal within this subject will have to involve the collaboration between the 3 previously mentioned levels.
I agree with you that Greenberg lacks the implementation portion in his book. He never gets into the specifics of how we should proceed with fisheries and how to make them more sustainable. However, I think that maybe this was part of the point of the book. He was trying to call to the attention of the public the problems of fisheries, not necessarily trying to provide solutions to the problems that fisheries have.
Four Fish but Paul Greenberg continuously brought my attention back around to the commodification of global fish resources. Unlike a hundred years ago, modern refrigeration gives people all over the Earth access to fish caught in far away and exotic places. Greenberg emphasized the particularly intentional relationships with the fish species, salmon, tuna, cod, and sea bass. Each of these fish are associated with a fishery or multiple fisheries world-wide that either previously provided or continues to be global food sources. I hadn’t ever thought about each of these fish symbolizing a different step in the evolution of human’s relationship with fish, from fishing rivers to the deepest depths of the ocean. It is also interesting that some of these fish, such as cod, are still widely available.
I guess the following are kind of worst case scenario thoughts/ if management practices aren’t dramatically changed thoughts from this book. I feel like some of the previous tragedies of fisheries could also be extrapolated to the future. I could see access to wild fish going back to how it was pre-refrigeration, but not because the fish have returned, but because there are none left except for some especially preserved populations. I think aquaculture will continue replacing these wild populations once they are completely depleted. I am not sure if it really came down to it, if the government/ fisherpeople of some countries would comply with not fishing in MPAs if there were not many fish elsewhere. It is hard when the ocean is a community space and resource, so it makes it seem like everyone will exploit but nobody will take responsibility for the continued health. I do think there are people working on these complex relationships (and possible aquaculture solutions to food needs, most recent world events have me worrying for global cooperation over science and resources in general.
I agree that it’s extremely difficult to regulate a “community space”. It’s been something that’s frustrated me throughout the book, especially when Greenberg was introducing Hoki management from New Zealand in the Cod section. Why does no one care about these fish, why are people selfish to exploit every last morsel of fish? I have no answer.
People exploit out of desperation. While I’m no socialism fan, the alternative of capitalism means a system of create and exchange. What’s already created will then only be taken, and there’s never a replacement if we cannot recreate the very same thing. We create things like the original, but it is not the same.
This was a great book! I highly enjoyed reading through it (although I will admit that I’m only partway through the tuna section). Greenberg was such an engaging author and his way of displaying many ideas to discuss each individual fish was fascinating. I don’t even think I could pick a favorite fish. I know I’ve already said this but I think it was so cool how much Greenberg got to travel for this book. I would absolutely love to get to go to a fraction of the places he traveled to discuss fish. This is pretty embarrassing to say but 87% of the stuff he brought up, I didn’t know, so it was really great to learn so much new information.
If anything I’m more torn between the controversial battle of farmed fish and wild fish. I 100% agree that wild fish is preferred and should be top priority in terms of protection. But the wild fish population can’t support 8 billion people, that’s why the fish stocks are damaged in the first place. If we continue down this path of only relying on wild fish to feed people we will surely fish the ocean dry. And I doubt people will just stop eating fish for a couple years while the ocean attempts to bounce back. So what’s the solution? I guess farmed fish. I think people are taking the right steps to creating sustainable farmed fish, but here’s the catch, I argue they must be farmed fish that don’t negatively affect the rehabilitation of wild fish stocks. I’ll bring up the example again of the barramundi fish from the sea bass section. The barramundi fish is great in captivity and consumes far less wild harvested fish for feed compared to many other farmed fish. The barramundi fish “never have any contact with the living ocean” meaning there won’t be any escapes that could affect wild populations of fish (124). Species like these can “take pressure off wild stock and cause humans to lessen their impact on the ocean overall” which I think is pretty significant (124). The barramundi fish sounds like the perfect balance between feeding people while also benefiting the wild population of fish. Although I don’t agree with other fish farming techniques, such as escaped Atlantic Salmon. A possible solution would be to have better regulations on fish farms that are made to protect wild fish. I agree that having farmed fish will take pressure off the wild fish so I think there are some benefits to farmed fish as long as they don’t negatively impact the wild fish.
I definitely agree with you Gwen that Greenberg is quite the author and hearing all of his experiences were truly incredible. It was truly mind blowing about all of the things he has seen and been apart of over the years and this was 12 years ago which makes me wonder what those scenes look like today.
I agree that we need to protect the wild stocks of species. I personally think if you’re from an area where that species is native then sure go for it on the wild stocks and if you live in a different part of the world you should get the farmed variant. They won’t be able to tell the difference between the two. If you really wanna try the wild variant travel to that part of the world. This in turn would lower the harvest amount of these wild species and up the economy and market on farmed fish and probably wild caught as well.
Greenberg did a great job writing this book, engaging with his audience in a way that was truly interesting, and that if someone wasn’t in a fisheries class had read the book, they would enjoy it and understand what he is saying and where he is coming from. If it helps, I also didn’t know the majority of the things he wrote about, I truly learned so much from this book about these four fish. I’ve always dreamed of studying the ocean and/or the organisms within and being able to travel for it, and he found a way to make that possible. Now I don’t see myself writing a book, but it gives me hope that I can find a realistic way to make that happen.
I agree with your point on improving fish farming regulations in the interest of protecting wild fish. If fish farming is the route that the world ends up taking, it would make sense for there to be a strong set of policies in place to ensure that the practices associated with fish farming do no further harm to wild fish.
Four Fish taught me a lot about fisheries in general, as well as some of the major issues that are going on within the fisheries industry. As someone who knew almost nothing about fish and fisheries before this class, I definitely learned a lot from this book. I also enjoyed reading it, which was nice for a book required for school! I really appreciated all of the different opinions and approaches to facing and dealing with the issues about farmed and wild fish. It helped provide an idea for all of the different ways in which fisheries are experienced and influenced.
It was also very thought provoking to hear about the debate for farmed versus wild fish. Before reading this book, I just assumed farmed fish were bad (given what I knew about mass produced food products in general). After gaining some knowledge, I have a bit of a different opinion. Of course I would rather have wild fish (even though wild doesn’t mean the same thing that it did a couple hundred years ago), but I am now seeing that farmed fish are necessary. It’s almost like a rabbit hole or domino effect— we started something that we can’t really stop because so much of the world depends on it for basic survival. I also see the importance of protecting and maintaining the wild fish that we have left, even though that might make them less wild. I guess the overall conclusion here is: some fish (even if they’re farmed or highly regulated) is better than no fish.
I agree that this book definitely opened my eyes to how important farmed fish are, specifically in supporting to feed a growing world population. It also emphasized how important it is to protect wild fisheries.
Four Fish was an incredibly informative book that not only told the story of these fish and the fisheries but also the human lives behind them. Greenberg traveled around the world talking to many different people, from many different backgrounds, about fisheries. This particularly, really showed how much of the world is impacted by fisheries, how important they are in a multitude of cultures, and how drastic the effects of a depletion of a fishery can be. I think that there were multiple main takeaways from this book for myself. One that if we do not learn from our past mistakes with fish and fisheries many more will be recklessly overfished. Two that while protecting wild fish stocks should be at the forefront of policy and actions taken in regards to fish, wild fish stocks alone are not enough to feed a growing world population. And finally three, farmed fishing can have bad practices, but farmed fishing is necessary to feed the world population; as a result the focused of farmed fishing should be making it as sustainable and as ethical as possible.
I also liked how Greenberg was able to incorporate his travels and what he learned going to different places. It really does show how much fisheries have an impact on different cultures around the world, and how many are going through the same issues.
This book has definitely been an eye opener for me and quite the intriguing read. It was incredible to see how much these four species mean to the economy and play such an important role in feeding the world. After reading this book I do think that aquaculture is going to be a key ingredient in keeping this world fed. Reading about the salmon farms in Canada was amazing. Hearing about it definitely made me more curious and would make seeing the operation in person even more incredible. I think it is so smart to make a poly-system where the salmon are feeding the seaweed which in turn feeds the sea urchins or mussels or clams. This is such a genius system because you are getting a three for one deal out of it. You aren’t only putting healthy farm raised salmon on the menu and to markets but you also are putting crustaceans and seaweed out there too. Let alone the quality and quantity of these products you are bringing to the market. This made me think about what other species we could do this with as well. My brain automatically came to tilapia as they are hardy and aren’t picky feeders and can be raised on a large scale for a good price. Mahi Mahi was another species I thought about as well due to their nature of how quickly they grow and how a mature fish is anywhere around 2-3 years old. This made me wonder if we could do a similar operation with either of these species and create other poly-systems. This book was definitely something I enjoyed reading and learning along the way about things I had never thought about in the fisheries world.
Tilapia is amazing, especially with a nice crab meat stuffing. Never had Mahi Mahi, but I want to!
I also was really amazed by this “mini-ecosystem” that was developed in farmed seafood. I think when we talk about the ways that we can improve farmed fish and ensure a healthy population, we definitely ought to be looking at how we can do our best to recreate wild conditions to promote better quality fish (even if they aren’t actually wild).
I like the poly-system idea. I think similar concepts will populate a sustainable world — they’re already abundant! Rotational animals on sustainable meat farms already perform a similar function.
Four Fish was packed full of information. I feel that I, and we, learned so much about fish and fisheries just from this one book. This book was written over a decade ago and is still so relevant to the issues fish and fisheries face today. Issues that Greenberg discussed are still issues that we are dealing with today. Issues such as fish populations decreasing, overall health declining, average size and weight in fish still declining, and much more. Food security and sustainability are still ongoing topics of conversation within the fishery industry. It was interesting how Greenberg was able to explain the relationships, globally, between the salmon, cod, sea bass, and tuna. All of these fish are connected to at least one fishery globally that actively provides a food source, or used to be a food source. Another one of my favorite parts throughout the novel are his stories from his travels to see the different fisheries from different parts of the world.
The book didn’t quite influence my view but taught me about fisheries and the role of aquaculture and gave me tons of information about them. I learned tons of information on fish and fisheries, from fish characteristics to fishery management and fishery histories to human activities’ consequences, and so much more. In one of my classes today (10/25) I caught myself thinking about the ongoing debate about farmed fish vs wild fish. I hadn’t really thought of any new points we haven’t already discussed, but was reviewing the points in my head with maybe the hope that something will stand out to me. Wild fish cannot support the 8+ million people we have. Farm fishing would allow wild fish populations to get back to more normal numbers. Some people won’t want to eat fish that is farmed because ‘it’s not natural’. If nothing changes, wild fish will eventually become extinct without change. And on.
Now when someone asks me about my opinion about farmed fish vs wild fish, I do feel that I can give them an educated answer. I may not quite know my opinion, but I feel way more knowledgeable on the topic.
Howdy Queenie! I wanted to speak to your comment about farm fish kind of being necessary at this point with the exponentially growing population (the other option being more people not eating fish I guess but that solution is less popular). I feel like that is the reality of the answer to the wild vs. farmed fish argument and therefore how management goals tend to be shaped/ the goals that they’re based on.
I definitely agree that, overall, I feel a lot more informed on farmed fishing and the debate that surrounds it. It’s obviously a lot more complex and intricate than a lot of people (including me previously!) give it credit for. Even if my opinion may change over time, it’s certainly more complete with the information we’ve been learning recently than it was before.
What is your opinion on farmed vs wild fish?
I thoroughly enjoyed reading Four Fish, this book struck a nice balance between educating on fishery history as well as entertaining and engaging personal stories from the author. Although the focus was on four specific species, many of the themes and lessons can be applied to vast amounts of other fisheries and fish species. I enjoyed honing in on just a few specific fish, as it allowed Greenberg to take a deep dive into exploring them, but still allowed us as readers to draw similarities and differences between each fish and the human relationship with them. Greenberg’s additions of his travels made elements within the book more memorable, sharing stories of places, people, and lives that have interacted with or been affected by fish in some way.
I found the section on cod to be the most jaw-dropping, alarming tale of overfishing. I wasn’t familiar with the history of cod and found it to be quite interesting learning about all the factors that led to the fall of the fishery. It serves as a cautionary tale to other fisheries and can help open our eyes to what is possible when a stock is overexploited to such an extreme. Like many others mentioned, a big takeaway for me from the book is the concept that fish farming can be a part of the solution when it comes to feeding our world’s populations. Although there are drawbacks, there are also multiple advantages of farming fish for food. I do appreciate Greenberg including some ideas for ways in which we can continue to improve our habits and hopefully mend some of the relationships we continue to have with fish and fisheries.
Hello Maureen! I appreciated reading about Greenberg’s telling of the downfall of cod followed by discussing it in class with Peter Wesley! Definitely a big topic with a lot of layers. I literally cannot get over the fact that 40,000 people lost their jobs in one day!
Paul Greenberg’s Four Fish provided an insightful overview of all of the components that compose fisheries as a whole (the ecosystem, the economy, and the management). I think that the book’s strongest and most interesting aspect was the sheer amount of perspectives Greenberg included when evaluating any given fisheries concept. Be it the Alaskan indigenous subsistence fishers he accompanied as they searched for salmon, the researchers in New England trying to decide how cod should be managed, or the scientists at AquaBounty who are trying to break new ground with their genetically modified approach to farmed fishing, Greenberg does his best to consider these groups and how their backgrounds have informed their views on how humanity should approach the subject of the fishing industry. A highlight of the book for me was its epilogue (maybe in part due to recency), as I appreciated how Greenberg was capable of stepping away from his academic outlook for a bit to illustrate the more “human” side of fishing, emphasizing just how much of an impact fish (as a pastime, a food source, and an industry) has had on humanity as a whole. This book has mainly corroborated my views on aquaculture and wild-capture fisheries already serving a vital role in feeding the world, with much room for improvement with the help of efficient and organized management. As Greenberg showed time and time again in the book, there are many people in the world of the fishing industry, and just as many theoretical approaches to managing this industry efficiently. However, all of these people share a common factor of wanting to change the fisheries they are involved in for the better (and by extent the communities that benefit from them).
I love that you bring up the variety of perspectives that Greenberg introduces to us as readers of his book. That definitely was a big part of what I enjoyed about this read. I appreciate when I’m given multiple viewpoints on a topic that allows me to have an understanding for each side and simply have a more well-rounded understanding on a specific topic. I agree that Greenberg represented many of these groups within his findings.
Four Fish was a great read and provided a lot of information about salmon, cod, tuna, and bass. Normally I am not a big fan of reading but I like how he shared his perspective along with fishermen’s, scientists, and conservationists. I also enjoyed hearing about all of the places he went in each chapter. It was cool to learn about fisheries in other places outside the U.S. because most research I have done involves fisheries in Alaska or in the states. The book also taught me a lot about aquaculture, before reading the book I had not heard much about this topic. I thought he did a good job at highlighting the pros and cons with aquaculture and how it could be a possible solution for food security. For the sake of wild salmon I hope aquaculture is a last resort considering the things that could go wrong. I understand the high demand for fish but I dont think farmed fish is the answer quite yet. It was very interesting that the issues he wrote about 12 years ago are still very present today. We still have large numbers of declining fish, some cases of fishing down the food web, issues with commercial fishing, etc. I liked how he suggested solutions to some of these issues and how we can move towards healthier fisheries. After reading the book I know more about each of the topics and the information about aquaculture is something that will stick with me.
This book is profound, disturbing, and eye-opening. His words take on so many aspects of the physical and emotional endurance and power of fish. While I haven’t finished the book, it was worth buying to keep and will remain in my personal library for years to come. Greenberg takes on childhood memories, industries for the masses, as well as some of the biggest names in terms of our dinner plate species: Cod, salmon, tuna, and bass. These four fish alone make up a part of all of our lives, from fishing in the summer with our dads and friends, to homecooked meals with our partner’s parents for the first time. And, with the degree I’m going for in mind, this book shows the good and the bad that come with raising these fish as if they’re some kind of replacement for the wild breeds we’ve destroyed. Humans have left such a deep impact on all life, our own lives included, but these fish have a story that can never be stopped from being told. It’s a story that continues to be written as we, the people who live above and amongst these amazing creatures, ever change their lives. We capture, devour, breed, and study these animals and yet have so much more to learn. Books like these help us see their story through a language we can understand, through a part of ourselves we can only understand through them. To conclude, this book is a masterpiece of literature and fisheries alike.
I agree with what you said about the impact humans have on other lives. In my some of my previous courses we learned about certain animals that humans almost caused to go extinct and I would hate to see that happen with any fish species. I believe that books do help tell the stories of the past hoping we don’t repeat them.
“…these fish have a story that can never be stopped from being told.” Well said. Those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Greenberg’s book is informative and gripping, but not without losing it’s focus on the state of our planet, now: he understands we have mouths to feed, and cutting ties to the fishing industry isn’t going to cut it, even in the dire condition of Tuna.
Much of Paul’s book, I felt, echoed sentiments I’d read in The Unnatural History of the Sea (I feel like it’d be a great supplement), that we’ve moved too fast and with far too much fervor for the oceans to swim along with us – my personal biggest takeaway was that there’s a plethora of more-sustainable fish we haven’t taken advantage of (tilapia, kahala) and it fills me with hope: perhaps we can make it, after all – and that the fish I personally considered to be most the plentiful and most regenerative (salmon) is far from it. His writing leaves me with a deep sense of cynicism: I’ve never particularly trusted humans to make the right decisions pre-disaster, and it was published a decade ago. Until we can rely without a guilty conscious on wild fish stocks (which may be decades, I realize) we should shift focus from marine protein to other sources of nourishment, given that aquaculture, in a lot of facets, is still an upwards battle. However, there is solid cultural opposition to this idea and I fully realize it. Maybe we should trust Paul and fish for ourselves, where we can, regardless of availability: after all, many generations of humans have lived and died without so much as smelling cod.
In what ways was it gripping?
In all honesty I can not remember anything off the book, I am going off a foggy semilance of things and various different comments. My view has stayed the same because of my horrible memory and my lack of an attention span.