Jay-qu Posted February 28, 2007 Report Share Posted February 28, 2007 we have marine parks where it is forbidden to fish. Not quite like a trout farm, but im sure we could come up with something of the sort! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgrmdave Posted February 28, 2007 Report Share Posted February 28, 2007 There is one problem with the idea - current fishing cannot continue at the same pace and be profitable. The fewer fish there are, the harder it is to catch them. The harder it is to catch them, the fewer fish are caught each day. The fewer fish caught each day, the less supply there is for the consumer. The less supply there is, the higher the prices. If prices are high, people will buy less and less fish. Since people buy less fish, less fish need to be caught. This continues until it becomes unreasonable - when fish costs so much as to be a luxary, modern fishing won't be economically feasible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigDog Posted March 1, 2007 Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 There is one problem with the idea - current fishing cannot continue at the same pace and be profitable. The fewer fish there are, the harder it is to catch them. The harder it is to catch them, the fewer fish are caught each day. The fewer fish caught each day, the less supply there is for the consumer. The less supply there is, the higher the prices. If prices are high, people will buy less and less fish. Since people buy less fish, less fish need to be caught. This continues until it becomes unreasonable - when fish costs so much as to be a luxary, modern fishing won't be economically feasible.Capitalism - the great balancing force of the universe. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay-qu Posted March 1, 2007 Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 and when that happens all the fish get a holiday and have to get to work re-populating the oceans :confused: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgrmdave Posted March 1, 2007 Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 Well, under the market model we'd find that the fish would never be terribly populous - but that there would be, at some point, an equilibrium. The potential problem is that there is a size beneath which a population may die out due to problems with finding mates. If the point of equilibrium were below this necessary size, it is possible that even the market forces couldn't prevent an extinction. However, if there is a way to profit from increasing the size of the population, then somebody will do it. If profit is there to be made, somebody will take advantage of it. This is both the blessing and the curse of capitalism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michaelangelica Posted March 1, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 Seriously, why don't we do this? Take a big section of the ocean - "fence" it off and raise fish in it? Works for everything else we eat on a massive industrialized scale. TFSThey are doing this is the cool, clean waters off TasmaniaIt can get a bit of weather so damage can occur and the seals love the farms!7.30 Report - 26/10/2000: Tasmanian fur seals create public outcryHence the outcry over the recent suggestion that fur seals should be put down because they cause problems on Tasmanian fish farms. ...7.30 Report - 26/10/2000: Tasmanian fur seals create public outcry - 18k - Cached - Similar pages PM - Mass fish escape raises concerns over fish farmingUp to 25000 salmon and trout recently escaped from a fish farm at Tasmania's Macquarie Harbour. Locals have described the aftermath as looking like an ...PM - Mass fish escape raises concerns over fish farming - 17k - Cached - Similar pages A Marine National Park near here, made about 25 years ago, has about 100 times more fish than adjacent waters according to a local scuba diver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michaelangelica Posted March 19, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 Online featureRequiem for a fish14 March 2007Louise GogginCosmos OnlineRequiem for a fishA 1994 Faroe Islands stamp depicting the unfortunate orange roughyImage: Wikipedia They can live for over a century, but overfishing has driven the remarkable orange roughy to the brink. What can we learn from their desperate plight? When fishermen began reeling in orange roughy in the 1980s, some of the fish they dragged from deep below Australia's ferocious southern seas were an astounding 150 years old. That means they would have hatched around the same time Charles Darwin embarked on his historic voyage aboard the HMS Beagle. But those orange roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus), dumped unceremoniously onto the trawlers' heaving and salt-sprayed decks, were not destined to become famous. Instead, they ended up on a dinner plate of someone likely not even half their age. Even for those that escaped the dinner table, survival is not guaranteed. This ugly species is blessed with two idiosyncratic traits: enormous eyes, which allow it to see in the deep ocean gloom; and one of the longest lifespans of any fish. Unfortunately these animals have a firm, white flesh that is highly prized by diners in the United States. More hereRequiem for a fish | COSMOS magazinealso on rss feed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michaelangelica Posted April 20, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 It seems BIG fish teach LITTLE fish.When we catch BIG fish, the little fish drop out of school:( Fish Schools – teaching the little tackers how to surviveReporter: Mark HorstmanProducer: Mark HorstmanResearcher: Holly Trueman, Amy JohnstonCamera: Underwater: Richard SmithKevin May, Geoff LyeSound: Nick Wood, Richard McDermottEditor: Ted Otton TranscriptRelated Info 12 April 2007 We’ve all heard the story about the goldfish with a three-second memory, rediscovering a brand new world with each lap of its bowl. But behavioural science is challenging this perception of fish as dim-witted swimming robots – with important implications for the conservation of fisheries. After fifty years of industrial fishing, the United Nations estimates that three quarters of the world’s 400 commercial fish stocks are at risk of collapse. While fish are the only wild animals that we hunt for food on an industrial scale, very little is known about the ecology and behaviour of most species. Over the last decade, an undercurrent of research reveals that fish are intelligent social animals that learn from direct experience and by watching how other fish behave. Using complex communication systems, they enjoy long memories and pass cultural knowledge between generations. Catalyst visits two young Australian scientists whose work adds new meaning to the idea of ‘schools of fish’. Catalyst: Fish Schools – teaching the little tackers how to survive - ABC TV Science Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michaelangelica Posted May 9, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 The Great lLakes must be an environmental disaster area? The Oil Drum | The Round-Up: May 8th 2007 Tens of thousands of fish have been bleeding to death from an aggressive Ebola-like virus in North America's Great Lakes. Officials fear that the plague will spread to devastate waters across the continent. The epidemic - caused by what one US government scientist calls "the most important and dangerous fish virus known worldwide" - is believed to have been brought into the lakes by ocean-going ships. It is focussing attention on the scores of alien species already spreading uncontrolled in the lakes, which contain a fifth of the world's fresh water. State governments are belatedly trying to introduce measures to control this "living pollution", only to be sued by shipping companies for "placing an undue burden" on them. The killer - called viral haemorrhagic septicemia (VHS) - has already affected some 37 species of fish in the lakes, including salmon, trout, perch and white bass. Almost every species caught commercially or for sport in the lakes' $4bn (£2bn) fishing business has been hit. Victims bloat up and bleed from bulging eyes before dying. The extraordinarily virulent disease is sweeping rapidly through the lakes and is expected to start going on full rampage again within the next couple of weeks when the water warms up to its favoured temperature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michaelangelica Posted June 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 3, 2007 This looks too good to be true. Can the net really do this?Care2's Race for the Oceans Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigDog Posted June 3, 2007 Report Share Posted June 3, 2007 This looks too good to be true. Can the net really do this?Care2's Race for the Oceans Click here to "Offset 1 pound of carbon" from the atmosphere! - 4268 pounds offset today!" Click the "Offset 1 Pound of Carbon" button every day to remove a pound of CO2 from the atmosphere. Care2 will then make a donation to pay for the removal. I am still laughing! I've heard of hollow symbolism, but this takes it. I am going to rig it so when my 4 year old is playing games on the net, each click to fire a weapon actually clicks this link. Within days the global temperature will be back to normal and all of our troubles will be gone. He is probably good for 5000 pounds per hour, if everyone followed along we could enter a new ice age by August. Admittedly I did not read about the fish solution, but I think it works on the same principle. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michaelangelica Posted June 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 3, 2007 I am still laughing! He is probably good for 5000 pounds per hour, if everyone followed along we could enter a new ice age by August. Admittedly I did not read about the fish solution, but I think it works on the same principle. BillThe "gullibility" principle? I would love to believe there is some truth in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted June 4, 2007 Report Share Posted June 4, 2007 Bill's point that clicking a link will not directly remove carbon from the atmosphere is correct. However, I don't believe anyone is claiming that it will. What clicking the link does is funnel money to environmentally responsible groups, it funds ideas that will have a positive impact, and provides monetary incentive to make those changes which are necessary. It also provides another method of increasing awareness and getting people involved. But yeah, clicking the link won't directly substract carbon from the atmosphere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigDog Posted June 4, 2007 Report Share Posted June 4, 2007 Bill's point that clicking a link will not directly remove carbon from the atmosphere is correct. However, I don't believe anyone is claiming that it will. What clicking the link does is funnel money to environmentally responsible groups, it funds ideas that will have a positive impact, and provides monetary incentive to make those changes which are necessary. It also provides another method of increasing awareness and getting people involved. But yeah, clicking the link won't directly substract carbon from the atmosphere. Thank you! You've offset 1 pound of carbon emissions, roughly the equivalent to your lunch today. They have a neat marketing scheme. After clicking you are encouraged to support their benevolent sponsors who are donating the money to offset the carbon. You are limited to one click per day (I think). They also have a toolbar that they advertise will make your computer carbon neutral. :D Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted June 5, 2007 Report Share Posted June 5, 2007 They have a neat marketing scheme. After clicking you are encouraged to support their benevolent sponsors who are donating the money to offset the carbon. You are limited to one click per day (I think). They also have a toolbar that they advertise will make your computer carbon neutral. :hihi: Bill I understand that you think there is a better way to do it, Bill (and I agree). I also understand that many people will think that clicking the link will push the carbon back into the tailpipe of their car and make magic atmosphere fairies crap out a bunch of pixie dust into the oceans making the dolphins play Lucy in the Sky... However, semantically, how can you be certain their claim is not regarding future carbon additions? Please treat that as rhetorical. I think you know what I mean. Basically, the link is setup under the auspices of helping society and the people and life on it. Maybe we can laugh at the people who don't spend their time and resources more wisely than clicking a link on a website, but laughing at the people setting up that website is wrong and is just as silly, since at least they're trying to do something. Buckets fill with drops of water and whatnot... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michaelangelica Posted December 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 15, 2007 21:40: The Unnatural History of the SeaThere was a fascinating review/interview with the author of anew book on the sea on the Science Show (Robyn Williams ABC Oz) today; talking about the last 1,000 years of fishing and the future of the oceansWe have really buggered things up badly.Well worth a listen. The whole show was excellent (probably only transcript available now)21:40: The Unnatural History of the SeaScience ShowA good British review of the book is hereThe Arran Voice - The Unnatural History of the Sea :D :doh: ;) The carbon dioxide produced by humans is turning the oceans into weak acids. This century, the seas will be more acidic than they have been for 20 million years.Aquatic Food Sources May Be Threatened By Rising Carbon Dioxide:hihi: :hihi: :doh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted December 15, 2007 Report Share Posted December 15, 2007 21:40: The Unnatural History of the SeaThere was a fascinating review/interview with the author of anew book on the sea on the Science Show (Robyn Williams ABC Oz) today; talking about the last 1,000 years of fishing and the future of the oceansWe have really buggered things up badly.Well worth a listen. The whole show was excellent21:40: The Unnatural History of the SeaScience Show Great program, Mike. Thanks. Here's the journal cover that is being disucssed in this particular program: Science/AAAS | About the Cover: 14 December 2007; 318 (5857) Coral polyps with exquisite coral pigments (pocilloporin) remain after bleaching of the southern Great Barrier Reef around Great Keppel Island (Wappaburra), a result of elevated sea temperatures in January 2006. During heat stress, the symbiosis between corals and dinoflagellates fails, leading to mass exodus of the brown plant-like symbionts from the tissues of the coral host. See the Editorial on page 1695, the News Focus on page 1712, and the Review on page 1737. Image: Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, University of Queensland Michaelangelica 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.