Seafood Depletion, Why hasen't this been addressed!

I dug up some old articles from 2005-onward about seafood depletion,

according to MSNBC,

If current trends of overfishing and pollution continue, by 2050 the populations of just about all seafood face collapse, defined as 90 percent depletion, a team of ecologists and economists warns in a study published in Friday’s issue of the journal Science.

--Nov. 3, 2006, www.msnbc.msn.com...


and the Washington Post

"We really see the end of the line now," said lead author Boris Worm, a marine biologist at Canada's Dalhousie University. "It's within our lifetime. Our children will see a world without seafood if we don't change things."

--Nov 3, 2006, www.washingtonpost.com...


And a very good Scientific America Article on Nov 2nd, 2006

n 1994, seafood may have peaked. According to an analysis of 64 large marine ecosystems, which provide 83 percent of the world's seafood catch, global fishing yields have declined by 10.6 million metric tons since that year. And if that trend is not reversed, total collapse of all world fisheries should hit around 2048. "Unless we fundamentally change the way we manage all the oceans species together, as working ecosystems, then this century is the last century of wild seafood," notes marine biologist Stephen Palumbi of Stanford University.

--www.sciam.com...

These all came out right after a report released by scientists about this.

Obviously, there are alternatives to fish in the ocean for food, we can fish farm. But fish are essential to the animal kingdom's ecosystem. Without them, thousands of land mammals will go hunger, birds, etc... down fall of food supply.


THIS IS A REAL PROBLEM.

I have not seen ANYONE addressing this in government or here. I mean, this is a real issue that should be top priority if our food supply runs out in 40 years.

Just wanted to bring this up.

well, at least we know the Cause

I REALLY wish that we didnt rely on plastic soo much. I dont eat seafood, but its a pretty big part of the web of life, and you can bet if it fails, we will too.

After the oceans are depleted of life, there are still alternative food sources. In fact, some of these food sources address multiple problems simultaneously.

Anyone care for some Soylent Green?

On a more serious note, yes, this is a problem. The continent of trash in the Pacific is a grave concern. How could it have gotten so large without us noticing? People are hiding the truth to prevent scaring us. I am sure if we knew 100% of everything, we would be terrified. Ignorance is bliss when dealing with the masses.

Well according to many here on ATS, we can't possibly have an effect on the environment, so therefor, there is not a seafood problem. Because no way can humans fishout the oceans. And all the fish dying suddenly is a natural cycle of the planet.

OK here is my real answer.

Because our government seems to be beholden to the fishing industry for some reason.

I live in Maryland, known for crabs. And oysters a long time ago.

Well the crabs are almost gone, the oysters are now protected. But though we are in danger of losing the crab population entirely(they cost 2$ a piece now if you want one) in the near future. But the commerical fishermen get to keep fishing? why?

Because there seems to be some nostalgic attachment to the watermen. They cry that any moratorium will cause them to lose their jobs and somehow this will hurt the economy.

So they get to keep on fishing.

The way I see it, they can lose their jobs now or in five years.

I don't know how these fishing industries got such a hold of government officials, but they have. Maybe our officials really like tuna. I dunno. But while there may be some economic impact, not enough to be worthy of the elimination of entire species or even an ecosystem. Way I see it, protect them now, let them come back, and then start it up again.

For the most part, I have stopped eating seafood. Too many ramifications.I east salmon sometimes,that is it.
But even if over fishing isn't a concern, all the contaminants and mercury that they can be carrying is.

Its a fact that if we keep on overfishing the ocean's, many species will become extinct. This would create a collapse in the food chain. Lets say Fish A eats fish B, and Fish C eats fish A. Fish A is over fished, so Fish B wouldn't be prey anymore. Fish B would overpopulate and overeat Fish D, and Fish C would die because Fish A is extinct, and would not have any food.

Get my gist?

it is all about the money. As long as there is money to be made, the food the ocean supplies will be depleted. Sad thing is that by the time the governments get around to tackling the problem, it will be too late. Governments are just too reactive.

i am not too worried

i already knew earth was screwed and we were all facing mass extinctions globally due to our stupidity

luckily, we will reap what we sow

i see this as a good thing, Karma
balancing

Ya, we might be screwed, but why shouldn't we fight for our earth! I mean, this is our children and grandchildren that we are talking about!

I live on an island in the middle of the Atlantic. Fishmarkets still have their usual amounts. Merlin fishing keeps breaking record weights. Whales are starting to come back. We still have a working fishing industry, although it employs far less people due to bigger ships being used.

Something is fishy about the fearmongering. Granted, we do have a big negative impact on the environment, nobody should be foolish enough to think otherwise. However, there is a lot of lies and manipulation around the environmental issue, so I would personally not be scared and realise that, perhaps, instead of one big problem we really have a multitude of localised problems that have not yet destroyed the overall system and may never actually do so, because it will destroy us first if we let things get that bad.

What is needed is green industries, that instead of just taking actually put back into the system. Little things, like throwing back fish spawns into the oceans before actually fishing the adults out would make all the difference in the world. The trick is not abstinence, it's sustainability.

but we're people,,, and we want whaT WE WANT,,, when we want it,,, damn it

no matter what the cost or consequence


we,, the people,,, feel so entitled don't we

i myself am guilty of this

"Charter Fishing is an Organized Crime", "Friends don't let friend's eat farmed fish", "Charter Fishing, How gay is that?" These are just a few of the bumper stickers that I see daily here in Alaska that describe the riff between Charter fishermen and Commercial fishermen. Over fishing is no doubt a hot topic up here. On the one hand you have the Commercial guys that pay the state and the Feds for the right to take a certain allotment of fish. Then you have the Charter guys that pay a charter operator and the state/feds for the right to fish on a daily basis. The Commercial guys claim the charter guys are taking too many fish. The Charter guys claim that the grounds here locally have been overfished and daily bag limits are too restrictive to entice clients to come up here and spend 7 grand for a week of fishing. Agggh it gets so complicated you wouldn't believe it. One experience I had one day I was boarding a plane flying off the rock here and a couple of charter guys were bragging in front of me. The one says to another "yeah were bringing home 1200lbs of fish". I immediately sayed to him from behind, What are you going to do with 1200lbs of fish? And not to my surprise, he said "eat it".
Alright, I can buy that but the typical serving of fish is approx 8 oz. Thats 2400 meals of fish. Cmon, srry but it's going to go bad in the freezer even tightly vaccum packed. My point here is that overfishing is taking place on both sides of the issue. At least here in AK.

Happy New Year.

TU

Originally posted by The Undertaker
The one says to another "yeah were bringing home 1200lbs of fish". I immediately sayed to him from behind, What are you going to do with 1200lbs of fish? And not to my surprise, he said "eat it".
Alright, I can buy that but the typical serving of fish is approx 8 oz. Thats 2400 meals of fish. Cmon, srry but it's going to go bad in the freezer even tightly vaccum packed. My point here is that overfishing is taking place on both sides of the issue. At least here in AK.

Happy New Year.

TU

here is a groaner...My first thought was that: that sounds fishy to me.

Then I caught myself.

Seriously, sounds like these people are going to sell it. Unless fish freezes for awhile.

reply to post by Zepherian


I have heard that the reason people are getting record fish is not because they are actually bigger, but because the way they measure them has changed, that the winners really are not bigger or record breaking by traditional standards. That to beef up sport fishing, they have changed this so more people get record breakers, and entice people into sport fishing.

I'm hardly an expert in sport fishing, so I won't comment, but from what I see of the other species I have a hard time reconciling the oficial stance and the physical evidence, at least on a regional basis. Could be a fluke of course, or the result of long term fishing reduction and proteccionism, I don't honestly know.

But I'll stay with my statement that there is a lot of deception and manipulation regarding environmental policy, as is to be expected in an elitist driven world.

Good thread

No easy solution to this issue other than to stop polluting the oceans and restricting fishing to certain areas only. I don't think farm raised seafood is the answer but with proper regulations it might be our only option in the future.

Yes, and without taking any action, there is no hope for us. This needs world-wide cooperation in order for us to save the ecosystem. That means putting away party politics and petty politics.

And (landlubber side) what about the disappearance of the honey bees and there role in plant (food crops) polination?