Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
This hashtag also sums up a lot of my thoughts on the state of the worlds fisheries. I agree with all of your points, especially that we do not focus enough on the entire ecosystem.
I agree that the people depleting fish stocks should be more concerned about how they are affecting future generations. Your post reminded me of the international meeting in chapter 5 held just before the fishery in the Donut Hole practically collapsed. China’s argument for keeping the fishery in the Donut Hole open was that they had just gotten a bunch of trawlers, and this seems like such a flimsy excuse for destroying the fishery.
I agree that most of the time, at least for me, it is better to just start writing for essays in exams, especially when you do not have a lot of time left. However, I usually do take just a second to set up a vary general outline of the topics for each paragraph of my essay in my head.
I also had a hard time remembering who did what, an I will definitely be studying the people mentioned in class more for the next exam. I never thought of doing the definitions last, but that makes sense.
I agree that the Alaska Pollock fishery had been managed far better than the Northern Cod fishery. However, I think that this is mostly because the managers of the Alaska Pollock fishery learned from the mistakes of the Northern Cod fishery’s managers. Had the collapse of the Northern Cod fishery not happened, or happened latter, the Alaska Pollock fishery would have collapsed the same way the cod did.
I also thought that the difference in desirability between Northern Cod and Alaska Pollock is interesting. I think that, in general, pollock are skinnier and smaller than cod as well, which could contribute to this.
I never thought about cleaning the waters, but now that I am it makes a lot of sense. Humans have left a lot of garbage in the ocean with an “out of site, out of mind” attitude that is certainly not helping fish.
I like this idea for fish markets that are in danger of being overfished, but I do not think that less shipping of food would work on a large scale. I think that the population has grown too big for that, and local food would not be enough to sustain people in cities or in densely populated areas. However, I do agree with your point that it should be local fishermen who are fishing, because they are the ones that actually care about the fish.
I agree that managers should gather as much information as possible before making decisions. It seems like there were a lot of people who were purposefully ignoring information about the cod population, and did not realize that by doing this they were actually hurting their future selves.
I agree that it is the long time fishermen who seem to develop the most accurate baseline. It seems like a part of the reason for the collapse of cod is that the scientists did not ask the fishermen what was normal, or their baseline for cod, before it was too late.
Aquaculture really does need a different standard for fish that Galton’s test. All fish automatically fail one category, and fall far below most land animals in almost all of the others. However, I think fish surpass most currently farmed animals in breeding freely, simply because of the sheer number of eggs that they produce at a time.
It is confusing how salmon seem to be the best candidate for aquaculture but they still do not pass the test. I do not think that any fish can really pass Galton’s test, mostly because fish were not taken into consideration when he made the test.
I agree that Solow is not entirely correct about substituting replacing resources. However, I think a major flaw in Solow’s reasoning is that he does not acknowledge the difference between renewable and nonrenewable resources. His theory about substitution works for nonrenewable resources, but, like you said, renewable resources can replenish themselves if they are given time. It is irresponsible for humans to be forced into substituting a renewable resource because we could not control ourselves.
I agree that you cannot really substitute something in for a species because there is not anything that can truly replace it. The substitute just cannot be equal to the original.
I also do not have a solid opinion on genetic engineering; I can see why it might be necessary, but there are also some problems. One of the major problems that I can see is ironically one of wild salmon’s greatest strengths, genetic diversity. By definition what is genetically engineered is not going to be genetically diverse, so diseases and other sicknesses that effect them can kill them all off. If people rely on genetically engineered food an outbreak can lead to a sudden food shortage.
