October 22, 2019 at 10:32 pm #196203jlrogers4Participant
In the book, Four Fish the writer concludes a list of priorities that he believes the ocean needs. The list includes a reduction of fishing effort, no catch areas, species protection, and protection of species in food chains. Throughout the book and the semester, I have learned many other issues that the oceans face. I agree with all of Pual Greenburg’s list of solutions and believe they would make major positive impacts. If I had a choice of policy I would get rid of mass industrial fishing. It would benefit local coastal communities and put less stress on the fish. Many Alaskans fish commercially in the summer and it benefits the community because of increased local business. Industrial fishing can also cause business but the majority of profits leaving the local area where the fish are caught. With local fishing industries and smaller fleets, money circulates throughout the community and profits stay in the local area. This creates a beneficial economic incentive for the local areas and relieves stress that huge industry fishing fleets create on the fish. Getting rid of huge industrial fishing ships would decrease bycatch and would benefit the environment.October 23, 2019 at 5:40 pm #196225svsanchezbutlerParticipant
Mass industrial fishing would benefit the local communities, plus create more jobs in the area instead of just cheaply buying seafood from a mass company. Getting rid of mass harvest would be a huge advancement, especially since so much of what’s harvested isn’t used up and gets thrown away.October 23, 2019 at 11:00 pm #196254khteetsParticipant
I see what your trying to say but the way your putting it would do more harm than good. Mass industrial fishing actually creates jobs and is a great economic factor to the economy. Taking it away would get rid of jobs, the mass amounts of money coming into these industries would be gone, and certain areas that rely on these businesses would loose their lifestyles. At this point, the reasons we haven’t gotten rid of it already is because it would cause way too much harm to everyone around it to get rid of it.October 24, 2019 at 12:05 am #196256imatsuiParticipant
I have same idea with you that getting rid of mass industrial fishing might be solution, just we have to remember to consider about economical impact that could cause. If it produce too much job loss or money loss, I don’t think people want to implement that action. But when we look at long term, I think reducing over fishing pressure is as important as creating job for a lot of people.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.