Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I usually an avid note-taker but have also had issues taking notes in this and other fisheries classes. I am more of a person who grasps big concepts opposed to details, so I find myself not studying as often for this class as the concepts seem to make a lot of sense to me.
Kevin Bailey states that most often the Polluck industry is seen as the ‘poster child’ of fisheries management. Do you agree?
I think that this 5th idea falls along the ideas of creating marine protected areas, but I do think it is a good idea.
I agree that limiting and regulating the types of gear we use for fishing would be really beneficial to the marine environments. However, the fishing gear industry is a multi-million dollar industry and there would be significant amount of backlash. Additionally, trying to enforce regulations on types of fishing gear in use would be difficult in remote areas. Though, all of the ways to help our environment involve large amount of effort.
I agree with you that we need to ensure that we are not depleting one resource and just moving to another, and to do this we need to significantly improve our management strategies. In many cases managers of natural resources often don’t rely on scientific analysis of data and recommendations by the scientists who know how to interpret the numbers. The scientists are the ones who can realize when baselines are shifting and managers need to weigh their recommendations heavier than the need for profit when considering their fishery.
I agree that the management of all the cod fisheries had many ways of which they could improve upon. As you mentioned, one of their main errors was communication. If there had been more structure to guarantee communication between fisheries managers, fisheries biologists, and the people actually doing the fishing I think many of their problems could have been avoided.
I like the way you went in and examined the features of salmon and agree with your 56% score. Well thought through.
I agree with your idea that neither of these fish pass Galton’s test for captivity, but I do believe there are some animals that are better suited for captivity thrive in those circumstance like dogs.
So, do you agree with the ideas of effective substitutes? Or is the act of using aquaculture as a substitute causing more issues than it is solving?
Do you agree with the idea of an “equal substitute”? Could we substitute for example our natural stocks of salmon with farmed salmon or perhaps protein substitutes? Or does this not fit into our ideas of sustainability? I feel like thee two concepts of preserving natural resources and “equal substitutes” are very conflicting.
I think that the quote “life finds a way” is a perfect example of how humans are engineering their way out of the food/population crisis we are finding ourselves in. Not only with salmon but with food in general we have to repeatedly find ways to make protein sources more and more efficient. Though not necessarily great for the environment or the future of salmon, I agree the engineering of food has become a necessary evil.
I also agree with your idea that genetic engineering is an important strategy for humans to use in the future but humans should proceed with extreme caution. As you mentioned, little genetic variation can cause our newfound food sources to be both more susceptible to diseases and causes issues with reproduction. I also like the idea of using bugs as a protien source.
I think it is interesting how decisions were made to create these large dams and sacrifice large areas of salmon habitat. It makes me wonder if the ecology of where the dam was to be built was truly understood and if the people who made the decisions even looked into the impacts forfeiting such a large food source could have on communities and surrounding economies.
