The ocean is broken

Are we really having this discussion? If there are low numbers of fish in the sea, it isn't because of fishing. It's something more natural and dangerous occurring beyond the control of a few million fishermen around the world. There are billions of fish in the sea. I doubt that a few million fishermen can kill off the fish count spread out over the vast amount of oceans. Something like ocean temperature change, dangerous gases, oxygen depletion and such are more likely. We need to stop ignoring these facts and blaming it on something as ridiculous as over-fishing and start accepting the truth that something is happening. Just what it is, you and I may not know for sure, but someone probably does. They're just not sharing yet. Pay attention folks to the amount of fish die-offs occurring on a daily basis around the world. This should alarm you more than the fact that millions of fishermen have families to feed and do what they have to. As far as dumping dead fish back into the sea...what would you rather have them do? At least another fish species gets to eat!

reply to post by Rezlooper


You must not be aware of the term, "overfishing" and and it's impact on marine life. It absolutely can wipe out large colonies of fish in the oceans over time. We know this for a fact.

Cruff

I live in Sydney, Australia and so many times I see disrespectful idiots at beaches leave all their rubbish on the beach which of course ends up back in the ocean and all over the place. Then these people wonder why the waters are so polluted...it sickens me.

How about that last comment in the article...saying that there would be more environmental damage by going out to clean it. What a load of crap...

I remember reading on here somewhere about a device someone had invented which could skim all sorts of rubbish and pollutants on the ocean surface. I hope that they get made en masse and really soon!...

People simply don't think that what they do is going to have an impact. "Ah, one little bottle cap in the ocean won't hurt a thing." Tell that to the fish who eats it and then dies of a ruptured gut.

EVERY THING COUNTS !

I tell people all the time, think before you act, or speak. Because your actions have am impact, good or bad on your environment and everything and one in it. If we thought of ourselves as water or smoke maybe we would get it. Everything water touches gets wet. Smoke leaves a smell trace on everything even if you can't see where it has been, we are very much like that only you can definitely see where we have been.

As far as there being more impact trying to clean it up, that is definitely a statement made by someone who does not want to invest the time, money or effort in doing so. This problem is way beyond a money issue. Money does not matter at all when the survival of the creatures of the earth are at risk. (For those who don't have a clue... people are creatures of the earth )

BT

Kratos40
I just read an article today that the Mitsubishi Corporation (or Group), who buys up the most Bluefin Tuna from the Atlantic and Mediterrenean, is ramping up its frozen storage capacity. They are predicting that the Atlantic Bluefin tuna will be fished out of existence in a few years, so they are planning on gradually selling their inventory at VERY high prices when this occurs.
I almost fell out of my chair when I read this. A huge corporation that is involved in car manufacturing, electronics, financial, mining, pharma...etc., instead of using its pool of engineers and scientists to find a way to conserve this fish, instead is looking at means of how to buy up all the Bluefin tuna, store it, and then turn a huge profit because of market demand.

All I can do is throw my hands up in the air and just walk away. I can't get mad anymore.

And this is a perfect example of why the problems just keep growing and compounding. It is because of profit and ignorance. Instead of looking to the future and using their scientific resources to save the species for future generations, they will stockpile for the short term wind fall. That is pitiful. And what is even worse... some one will buy it.

rickymouse

We need to eat fish but we should not be overfishing areas. We need to quit adding so much concentrated and unnatural chemistry in the waters. We need to quit wasting and buying things we do not really need. We need to make things well so we do not have to keep remaking them. This is in direct opposition of consumerism though so I doubt if it will ever be fixed. I can't understand how come people are so blinded by their personal wants. Keeping up with the Jones's used to be a bad thing.

We also need to take responsibility for being in this situation now. We already have the mess. We need to recycle all the plastics and metals. We need to seriously clean up our waters, not just the oceans, but our lakes and rivers too. WE made this mess. And we, humanity, need to clean it up.

At this point, it really doesn't matter who did it first, or most.

BT

reply to post by Rezlooper


I know what you are saying. I agree that the earth changes and shifting, earthquakes and methane leaks all play a part in this too. But the truth is, there was major damage occurring before those problems started spiking. The fact that Fukishima may have been the result of a major earthquake which was a result of these earth changes caused by unknown factors does not change the fact that the multitudinous pollutants now floating in the ocean are man made and in some cases deadly toxic.

We can do nothing about the natural and unknown factors at this point. But we can work to resolve the issues that are man made. I guess I would rather be a doer than just a viewer.

BT

webedoomed
reply to post by Rezlooper

 

You must not be aware of the term, "overfishing" and and it's impact on marine life. It absolutely can wipe out large colonies of fish in the oceans over time. We know this for a fact.

You know this for a fact? Provide some more details please so that I'll know this for a fact.

BearTruth
reply to post by Rezlooper

 

I know what you are saying. I agree that the earth changes and shifting, earthquakes and methane leaks all play a part in this too. But the truth is, there was major damage occurring before those problems started spiking. The fact that Fukishima may have been the result of a major earthquake which was a result of these earth changes caused by unknown factors does not change the fact that the multitudinous pollutants now floating in the ocean are man made and in some cases deadly toxic.

We can do nothing about the natural and unknown factors at this point. But we can work to resolve the issues that are man made. I guess I would rather be a doer than just a viewer.

BT

You're right there. I agree on the pollutants part of this thread, but not the over-fishing. I simply refuse to accept that the billions of fish in the sea can be wiped out by man. Maybe in a thousand years when we've infected, oops, I mean overpopulated, this planet beyond belief.

And, the Fukishima radiation thing should be of great concern. I know I won't be eating seafood too much in the future.

This is ridiculously sad - our great ocean which is the cradle of life, to be dealt such a cruel fate.

I have many years ago given up my fish and seafood, and wish that others would follow suit. The ocean indeed requires a few years of undisturbed rest. However, to put this into practice is simply not feasible, and until we come up with a complete different solution to the manner in which our planet conducts itself economically, the oceans will just become emptier.

For many years I lived in a village on the Western shore of South Africa. This village's residents were nearly completely reliant on fishing for income. Many of these fishermen have never done anything else in their life - the sea and the salty air has become part of their souls. To remove them from an industry that has basically become one with them - an industry passed down through generations, would be akin to removing the fish from the sea. These people cannot simply abandon fishing, and turn their hand to another industry - they are incapable of doing so.

But the total lack of control and manner in which the fishing quotas are distributed each and every year, are simply appalling. I saw many years ago how the big pelagic trawlers would stand in tow in our little harbour forming long lines to the offloading zone - their hulls fat with fish (the amount of fish that one of these trawlers can hold is absolutely staggering). Astonishingly enough - once the fishing factory had taken in its quota of fish for food-production, the remainder of the fish (usually about 90% of the total catch) would just be processed into fish meal. Such a superb wastage!

Fish stocks in our water have now dwindled to its lowest levels in history, and the entire economies of the towns in the area are suffering as a result. It is a very real problem - and my heart bleeds for the planet and for its enslaved population! But more so for the creatures of the ocean!

reply to post by Rezlooper


There is not a chance in hell you will get me to provide information about this.

I learned this in grade school, and there are plenty of resources which you could EASILY use to verify the truth of this.

I'm quite disgusted that you don't think overfishing has ALREADY lead to VERY decreased stock in oceans worldwide.

This is common knowledge.

Go back to school.

reply to post by webedoomed


Lol, you learned it in school, huh? I trust teachers to teach the truth these days about as much as I trust Obama to lead us out from our national debt. Zero, zilch, about as much chance as a snowball has in hell.

reply to post by shimmeringsilver73


It is sad to say but it may take the depleted oceans to bring the fishing societies to the realization that they must learn a new method of survival. Then maybe our oceans will have a chance to heal.

BT

reply to post by Rezlooper


Yes, second or third grade. The concept of overfishing, which you seem to have very little grasp of, was further reenforced in the national geographic magazines I was subscribed to as a child. I periodically check various sites about the health of marine life in the world's oceans. It's estimated that we've already lost the majority of large fish from the world's oceans, as far back as late 20th century.

Judging from your signature threads, you're biased towards the belief that most (all recent?!) environmental events are caused by methane releases. That's called confirmation bias. Yes, ocean acidification, and pollution play a role. No, there is no good reason to think this is the primary cause here.

What we're seeing is a direct result of exponential increases in human population, and demand for fish, in the face of ever decreasing numbers of fish in the seas and oceans. It seems a "tipping point" has been reached, where the rate of decrease accelerates to a marked degree.

webedoomed
reply to post by Rezlooper

 

Yes, second or third grade. The concept of overfishing, which you seem to have very little grasp of, was further reenforced in the national geographic magazines I was subscribed to as a child. I periodically check various sites about the health of marine life in the world's oceans. It's estimated that we've already lost the majority of large fish from the world's oceans, as far back as late 20th century.

Judging from your signature threads, you're biased towards the belief that most (all recent?!) environmental events are caused by methane releases. That's called confirmation bias. Yes, ocean acidification, and pollution play a role. No, there is no good reason to think this is the primary cause here.

What we're seeing is a direct result of exponential increases in human population, and demand for fish, in the face of ever decreasing numbers of fish in the seas and oceans. It seems a "tipping point" has been reached, where the rate of decrease accelerates to a marked degree.

It may be confirmation bias, yes, after studying this for over a year now. And yes, I agree a tipping point will be reached, I just don't think it has yet.

reply to post by BearTruth


the link gave me an avast warning of trojan horse...

reply to post by glowdog


well that is definitely something new and was not there yesterday. Maybe someone doesn't want the information referenced. hmmmm

Ivan MacFadyen's sea odyssey

Ivan MacFadyen's sea odyssey

Here are two more links that pertain to the same story, just in case the original Yahoo News! link has been compromised.

Thank you glowdog.

BT

reply to post by BearTruth


GOOD GRIEF!

I have never seen such inane crap!

Do you people ever bother to look IN-DEPTH at an issue before jumping on the SKY IS FALLING BAND WAGON?

DIRECT FROM NASA

Pacific Decadal Oscillation:

The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) is a long-term ocean fluctuation of the Pacific Ocean. The PDO waxes and wanes approximately every 20 to 30 years. From TOPEX/Poseidon data (see below) together with other oceans and atmospheres data, scientists think we have just entered the 'cool' phase. The 'cool' phase is characterised by a cool wedge of lower than normal sea-surface heights/ocean temperatures in the eastern equatorial Pacific and a warm horseshoe pattern of higher than normal sea-surface heights connecting the north, west and southern Pacific. In the 'warm' or 'positive' phase, which appears to have lasted from 1977- 1999, the west Pacific Ocean becomes cool and the wedge in the east warms....

The term PDO was coined in about 1996 by Steven Hare at the University of Washington. He, along with colleagues Nathan Mantua, Yuan Zhang, Robert Francis and Mike Wallace discovered the pattern as part of work on fish population fluctuations. ....

ABSTRACT of the paper: A Pacific Interdecadal Climate Oscillation with Impacts on Salmon Production

Evidence gleaned from the instrumental record of climate data identifies a robust, recurring pattern of ocean–atmosphere climate variability centered over the midlatitude North Pacific basin. Over the past century, the amplitude of this climate pattern has varied irregularly at interannual-to-interdecadal timescales. There is evidence of reversals in the prevailing polarity of the oscillation occurring around 1925, 1947, and 1977; the last two reversals correspond to dramatic shifts in salmon production regimes in the North Pacific Ocean. This climate pattern also affects coastal sea and continental surface air temperatures, as well as streamflow in major west coast river systems, from Alaska to California.

This is not to say that Japan, Russia and China have not put large fishing ships out to sea that suck up EVERYTHING in the vicinity. American Fishermen have complained bitterly about this for years. Start on page 110 for a history of the clash between the USA and Japan over fisheries. The Tragedy of Enclosure: Fish, Fisheries Science, and United States Foreign Policy 1920 -1960

Conservation zones in the Ocean is on pg 203 This issue was addressed on Sep.28 1945 when Truman signed two proclimations and two EOs. The first dealt with oil rights and the second dealt with fish and conservations zones protectingfish in the high seas contiguous to the US where fishing activities were fully developed.

The New England fish stocks were also depleted despite US quotas because of foreign fishing fleets.

New England’s famed groundfish species of cod, haddock, and flounder have been depleted by overfishing and have been slow to regain their place in the ecosystem, even as managers have dramatically reduced catch limits in recent years. Their departure has left room for an explosion in the population of the 3-to-4-foot dogfish shark. As dogfish have taken over, they have fed voraciously on juvenile fish, further hindering the rebuilding process.

From a management perspective, dogfish present a bit of a conundrum. Like all sharks, dogfish are slow to reproduce. They birth their pups live rather than laying eggs as fish do. They also have the longest gestation period of any vertebrate—between 18 and 24 months—and females don’t reach reproductive age until they’re nearly 20 years old. In sum, the population is precarious. But now that the sharks have established a presence, they’ve dug in.

After years of fishermen’s complaints, scientists accumulated enough data to confirm that the ecosystem was out of balance. In 2008 the National Marine Fisheries Service tripled the annual catch limit for spiny dogfish in the Northeast from 4 million pounds to 12 million pounds. By 2013 that figure had nearly doubled again, to 23.6 million pounds. The fishery has even been certified as sustainable by the independent Marine Stewardship Council, whose review process, while not perfect, is as close to a gold standard as the seafood industry currently has... www.americanprogress.org...

news.google.com...,994501

Fishermen in Sierra Leone complain that foreign trawlers are depleting the country's fish stocks

The government has granted fishing rights to Egyptian, Chinese and Russian trawlers, according to the Fisheries Ministry.

crimvelvet
reply to post by BearTruth

 

GOOD GRIEF!

I have never seen such inane crap!

Do you people ever bother to look IN-DEPTH at an issue before jumping on the SKY IS FALLING BAND WAGON?

DIRECT FROM NASA

Pacific Decadal Oscillation:

Except for the part about inane crap, I do not dispute anything that you are saying. I am adding to it. When you add to it the fact that there has been a humongous pollution disaster thrown into the ocean which is not only adding to the decimation of the sea life, but is also contaminating the ocean with man made crap (stealing your terminology

) then I am hoping that people who don't usually pay attention, will finally do so.

Ten or Fifteen people, or even Ten or Fifteen Thousand people will not make a dent in this problem. It is going to take a large portion of our population to reverse this. The natural cycles of the earth will continue no matter what we do. We can complicate them, but I don't believe we can stop them. We can change our own actions, however. At least, I hope we can.

I do thank you for the information you provided, though, it really enhances the available information.

BT

reply to post by iunlimited491










Have to embed to watch parts 2 & 3 - for some reason I can watch as an embed but need the Adobe-Flash Plug-in to view directly on YouTube - Yea, that makes perfect sense!

The ocean is literally the most terrifying place on this planet.

On one hand, a shockingly huge amount of it is unknown, but on the other, it is possibly the biggest reflection of how barbaric and out of touch with nature humanity is.