Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I like the thought you put into your hashtag! It is veryy true that people don’t even know what they are actually eating, and I surely didn’t know until reading the book that there is pollock in lots of sushi.
I totally agree that we are fishing down the food webs in many areas, and that’s not good! People are just too familiarized with using up something then moving onto the next right away. People just need to learn to adjust to not always getting exactly what they want.
Although I do take notes, I definitely could make big improvements in what I’m writing down. I usually fall into the cycle of writing things straight from the board instead of the spoken parts of the lectures that tend to be much more important. I’m still struggling to figure out the best way to have active listening during lectures in all my classes.
I like your idea of reading the entire test before actually answering them. I definitely should have used this tactic and I will do this next time. I too revised all my answers several times.
It’s very true that pollock is very popular in all kinds of food around the world. I was intrigued to learn that pollock makes up imitation crab, which is in all kinds of seafood. Because pollock is so widely used, it makes sense that one day their population sizes could be depleted because of humans.
I like how you included the piece about the crash of the crab stocks being the issue and not fishing itself. It’s definitely true that other organisms can greatly affect other levels of the food chain.
Personally, I don’t love the idea of altering a animal that should be wild. Sure it would be beneficial to people who need food, but instead of altering an animal we decimated, why not teach people to restore the suffering fish stocks?
I think this is a cool idea! Half the time the fish being shipped across the world isn’t even in great condition anyways, so why pay soo much for what actually turns out to be low quality? This would hopefully decrease demand for fish and help both the economy and the populations of fishes.
I like how you not only talked about a decreasing baseline, but also described how a “shifting baseline” can also be an increase in the population size or in increase in a change. I hadn’t thought of that before. Perhaps a hatchery to restore cod fish could be beneficial, but they would be terrible fish-farming candidates!
I too agree that it is imperative for this generation to live in a sense that benefits us AND the following generation. It is pretty selfish to live in a way that is only good for us and totally jeopardizes our own descendants. I like how you said we shouldn’t just stick to our waning baseline because we need to give the planet some help.
I agree that neither of these fish really fit, but there are definitely more differences than in the amount of tending they need. As stated in the reading, the Sea Bass will actually completely stop their reproductive system while in captivity versus the Atlantic salmon’s ability to keep reproducing.
I also think that the Atlantic salmon is relatively hardy, especially when compared to the Sea Bass.
I like that you expanded on Solow’s idea that preserving the environment should be its own argument completely because it is true that people will find ways to feed themselves. I didn’t really consider how according to the definition of sustainability, it solely matters if a used up resource can be replaced and used for the same purpose. Even though this isn’t very ethical, I suppose it is the truth.
I agree with your statement regarding a temporary fix for issues this generation faces. By replacing a natural occurrence with something man-made, we are pretty much putting a bandaid over the problem instead of fixing it. Although I didn’t agree with most of what Solow was saying, he did make some fair points regarding distributional equity, meaning we can space out the resources we use and take from the environment.
Even though it seems “necessary” for humans to go into a future with more genetically engineered fish, I really don’t think people should. I hope that humans stop over-exploiting innocent populations of organisms then trying to half-heartedly amend the issue by farming their own solution.
I like how you discussed other animals and food sources being discovered now that some species are in decline. It is important for humans to spread out their demands amongst different life to avoid causing extinction. But even though genetic altering of these fish is profitable, I don’t find it very ethical to use technology to create sterile fish.
