Are we still going to eat fish?
One of the luxuries about living in Sydney, is being able to go to the fish markets and see the incredible variety and volume of fresh fish. Elsewhere in the world, the fish markets are even more spectacular - and bizarre.
Fish is wildly heralded as an excellent source of protein and essential acids, a healthy substitute for the slabs of red meat that we normally eat. At the same time, however, fish is eyed suspiciously for its mercury content and concerns over whether we should be eating it.
Alex Renton in the Guardian has a gloomy article about the decline of fish stocks in the world's oceans. He notes that the scientific community has identified that the fishing industry is unsustainable since the 50s, but governments have done little to reverse the trend.
"Do they not know that industrial fishing is so inefficient that a third of the catch, some 32 million tonnes a year, is thrown away? For every ocean prawn you eat, fish weighing 10-20 times as much have been thrown overboard."
That's hard to digest, thinking about the sheer waste of fish. As consumers, we're safely insulated to the actual process that fishing boats use. What is the effect on marine life?
And for people - fish could be a magnificent way to feed the world's population, but if it's approached with this short term vision, we're in for trouble:
"Callum Roberts, professor of marine conservation at York University, predicts that by 2050 we will only be able to meet the fish protein needs of half the world population: all that will be left for the unlucky half may be, as he puts it, 'jellyfish and slime'."
Climate Red
randomthoughts
Phil's Wellness Tips
unlucky_ fishermen.com
Angling Fish
Check this out...
Hunt Famous
Orble Post of the Day
Fat Cult
Techbreak
bianca, you're missing out!
james, it'll kill you most of all, eh?
Diving About
You know I am just going to have to chime in when you write a post about declining fish populations...
What we 'see' and know about this 'trend' is only the tip of the iceberg... we anihilate fish habitat with our methods of harvesting them, thus reducing the survival chances of the next fish generation.
We now have the technology to locate fish in the deep sea - something we were completely unable to do 50 yrs ago - and as a result we now fish for fish which are extremely long lived and slow to reproduce. The 'orange roughy' (which has earned the retail name of deep sea perch) is a case in point. This fish and many other species have been forced to the point of extinction, by human greed and ignorance.
We 'farm' fish, but we need to fish to feed them. Fish - such as Tuna - eat enormous quantities of fish, and yield relatively little in comparison. But Tuna makes more money on the market, so we continue to feed tonnes of fish into our tuna farms, so a few individuals can make lots of money!!
Louie, you are right - as individual people - there is little we can do about illegal fishing. But it is the mainstream commerical fishing industry which controls the future of our oceans.
The Australian Marine Conservation Society (AMCS) has a fantastic Sustainable Seafood Guide. Anyone who likes seafood, but wants to know there will be fish left in 50 years, should use it to make sustainable choices. The guide helps users identify endangered species, including their (often numerous) retail names and offers better choices.
Check it out - you can buy them from the AMCS and also read about sustainable seafood issues here AMCS
We need to demand sustainable product from our retailers. If enough people care (even if it is only because you like to eat fish and don't want to stop soon) we can put pressure on retailers to stock sustainable choices and the industry will follow suit.
Ok, i'll get off the soapbox now...
Kim