Discussion in 'The Octopus' Den' started by Gaetan P., Mar 19, 2005.
I watched the video and I think it's sad how there's almost nobody there to see her address.
It is amazing to me how people are more concerned about the ending of a TV series than they are about the ending of the ocean's aquatic life forms...sickening, actually.
Indeed, a small group of crazy individuals that think they can change the world, usually do.
The funny thing is that this group is not-so small anymore.
Apathy and the cheap $ are what we're up against. You can deal to apathy rather quickly; the buck is a bigger obstacle. Greenpeace realise that they cannot save the oceans overnight, but their message is being read and seen by millions. A new campaign is about to begin.
The solution is simple. Just attach something to the bottom of your signature, whether it be here (if inclined), at work (if permitted), or from your personal account.
Ban bottom trawling! Fight weapons of mass, indiscriminate destruction. The holocaust did happen, yet people deny it; how sickening. Don't let the fishing industry deny this present environmental holocaust; let's learn from our lessons. It is simple; do not eat fish, crustaceans or shellfish caught by trawl or bottom dredge. Harass the poor person at the supermarket and ask a few very basic questions about their seafood - how was this fish caught - was it by trawl, and if so, bottom- or mid-water, and if not, by hook or culture; and if shellfish or crustacean, by dredge or by culture? They'll not know for sure, but they'll soon find out; and if you make a scene and insist on 'environmentally friendly' (at least relatively so) fish then the supermarket will get the message (and anyone listening to your 'scene' will shy away from fish, and very quickly get the message, especially if they (and others) ask the same question the next time they are there). Nobody would go near any fish if they knew that the environment was being r*ped in order to catch it!!! People are not like this. Simply do not go anywhere near anything caught by bottom trawl or dredge.
Hey, I love seafood - that's the sacrifice.
Consumption is market driven; no consumption, no market, no exploitation! I've told everyone I know (and everyone is aware of it); it's up to others to follow suit. And you need not be embarassed - what you are doing is for the good of the ocean.
Be a pain in the as* at the supermarket; boycott those that don't act!
People pay extra for free-range chicken eggs, or organic-grown vegetables. There is a market there!! You are not being unreasonable in your request!
A few months ago I posted here about a major TV series I’m working on for broadcast here in the UK, Germany and the US, I was looking for some info on Archie and Mesonychoteuthis which we’re going to build in CGI. Well, we’ve built our macquettes now for laser scanning (the next stage) and I couldn’t have advised the sculptors without all the amazing posters here and the biology and physiology you’ve been discussing, so thanks!
Ok, the point of this post: I’ve written into the series (which is about the deep oceans) a bottom trawling scene which will hopefully bring to life to the average TV viewer the real extent of destruction that this fishing method causes to marine ecosystems. I think it will be a shock to many people to actually see the damage up close in extremely realistic CGI, to see a seamount or canyon before and after trawling and to hear how important these ecosystems are (were? ). We’re not going to be judgemental about the fishing industry, that’s not our place, just truthful – people can make their own minds up what they’re prepared to accept. We’re not down to the final re-write yet so I can’t guarantee that the scene will make it into the final series, but I’m pretty sure it will, especially if I have anything to do with it. Just thought I’d let you know.
It sounds incredible! I'm so glad that you've decided to use your sci/entertainment forum to illustrate what's going on out there. So many people just... don't... know. By showing the before-and-after devastation, courtesy of CGI, you're bringing this horrific crime right into the living rooms of Jane and Joe Average and their 2.3 children. It's never too late to plant the seed of conservation. Rather gory documentaries about whaling in the early Seventies did it for me.
Keep up the good work!
Steve's right, changing one's shopping habits is part of it. I think is was Steve who mentioned how devastating shrimp farming can be. However, I've just read about two companies with sustainable aquaculture of shrimp in the US, Permian Sea Shrimp of Texas which is mostly available there, and another more nationally available under the brand EcoFish. I'll let you know if I find some.
Nik, good job!
My sap run to maine has been delayed a bit... will be leaving tomorrow..I'm glad I got to hear the discussion springboarded by the greenpeace video.
Steve is correct. I have been "bothering" the supermarket for years now. I have to say....they don't know a darn thing...I once got in a argument about MAHI MAHi...the fish monger insisted that I was horrible for eating flipper. I am sure you know what happened next.
thanks for the inspiring message, steve
Gee, I wonder where Whole Foods gets their shrimp from? It's where I get most of the beef we consume (grass-fed, free-range, no hormones, no animal-based feed), but I eat so little seafood now anyway do to concerns about mercury levels that I never thought to ask. One interesting tidbit, however; there's a tilapia farm about 9,000 feet up in the San Luis Valley in Colorado (home of America's highest aquifer). Wonder how environmentally safe that is...
Really, if you want to eat something making a positive ecological impact, might I suggest this delicious product called "Soylent Green"...
Soylent green is made from....People!!
A bit dated but good movie with an interesting theme.
"Where ARE we going to find all the food to feed everyone?"
Excuse my ignorance but what is 'tilapia'? Is it a shrimp?
Tilapia is a tropical fish that can be effectively aquacultured, which is what a friend of mine with land in the San Luis Valley told me they're doing up at that lofty altitude. Considering how cold the Rockies get, i can only assume that they're doing it indoors! It's rather tasty.
I actually don't eat seafood. Well, Tuna on the odd occasion, but basically that's it. Unfortunately my shopping habits will not make a difference.
I do agree with Steve that apathy and money are the keys, but I kinda look at them a little differently. I think people in a general sense care about the environment, they don't want to destroy the oceans through bottom-trawling. They probably don't know or feel they cannot afford to care. 80% of the worlds population lives in poverty. We have 6 billion people on this planet that we have to clothe, feed and provide shelter. In Thailand they used (still do?) to use dynamite to catch fish as it was far more effective than trawling! How insane is that?! Coral reefs were being blown apart to catch fish. I think people are far more pre-occupied with getting dinner on the table than where it came from. I am NOT one of these - I just like to point that out. We can argue how can people ignore what is going on, but if you ask the everyday person (in developed countries) what they care about it is usually health, education and their personal chequebook that occupies most of their time. The only way to get bottom trawling banned is to get the pollies to care. The only way the pollies are going to care is if people care. The only way to make people care is ? Actually, I have no idea. If I did I would probably be in great demand for pollies PR services.
I definately endorse Steve's stance on one person making a difference through the signature or supermarket stance. By setting examples we can possibly influence those around us. I'm afraid it will take too long to change enough habits to save species. We must keep the issue in the public eye. The media is powerful and influential. To change a mass of habits, you need to appeal to the masses. However, we just don't want to be 'another environmental problem'. Any thoughts would be great.
Oh, by the way, I am in the School of Aquaculture and we focus on salmon, trout, greenback flounder, seahorses..... There is a big stigma against farmed fish. People will eat beef, lamb and chicken. All high denisity farming, yet as soon as you go to the water, fish should be wild. Go figure! People want their fish freshly caught, yet strangely they don't care how it was caught.
It's a short reference to fisheries impacts on the news; sad that it has to come from American scientists working in NZ, rather than from the so-called New Zealand scientists (effectively gagged from making any-such statement). It's about time!!
The disturbing thing is that the Kermadec region is probably one of the least-fished regions in NZ waters!!
Thankfully, because it is an international issue, and because American scientists aren't answerable to the NZ fishing industry, we might see something more substantial (as in imagery, more information, examples and eventually a publication) soon.
As a CHINESE, we like our fish freshly caught, but since farmed fish and all the other things we eat are cheaper....we eat all the farmed stuff.
But then again....DOWN WITH BOTTOM TRAWLING!
Maybe if the aquaculture industry was
1) more involved with closed containment tanks on land, instead of disease, sewage and parasite spreading net pens in the ocean that destroy native species (eg. farmed Atlantic salmon infecting native Pacific salmon with sea lice)
2) focussed on fish like carp and tilapia that eat a vegetarian diet, instead of trawling up coarse fish in Chile, grinding them to fishmeal, and feeding the fishmeal to farmed Atlantic salmon in BC or Scotland or wherever;
people wouldn't have such a negative view of it??
Just a suggestion....
You can't compare beef, lamb and chicken to farmed salmon. Salmon are carnivores. It is inherently wasteful and ineficient to raise farmed fish on a diet of trawled wild fish.There's not much of a market for ranch-raised tiger, bear, or wolf is there?
Number one - just because I am with aquaculture does not mean I endorse its practices.
Number two - okay so we move the fish to land. The land required to support a farm would be huge. So which do we choose to destroy - the land or water environment? You would still get disease, sewage and parasites because of the nature of the beast. I do all my experiemnts on a land based facility and it is not physically possible to have a disease free system. I should know as I work on disease. There will always be sewage and it depends on the country's goverment and their legislation that dicatates if and how the sewage is to be treated. The difference would be if it was moved to land, the sewage would be concentrated into one area.
Number three - yes using other species would be a great idea, except for one thing - there has to be a market for it. One area of research we do here is to look at alternative feeds for salmon and trout like soy, lupin and other plant based feeds.
We are all working here to try and make better practice out of aquaculture. But as long as there are billions of mouths to feed we need aquaculture. Without it the seas would be dead, we would over fish to the point where we have nothing left.
Instead of whinging at the problem, why don't people become part of the solution. Aquaculture is not perfect, not by a long shot. We have farmers that are only interested in profit, governements that don't care about environmental impact and scientists that are trying to make compromises and solutions.
Do you want to eat fish or not?
And yes chicken and cows and pigs are all herbivores. Their food comes from the land which is intensively farmed and stripped of nurtrients, turned over and eroded by hoofed animals. Australia has been in drought for over 10 years. Our once fertile soil has been stripped bare by over farming and lack of water. We destroy the earth in so many ways it is sad. Whether we are on the land or in water we need to respect and nuture our environment.
Its no small issue and I don't think it should be treated as such.
Separate names with a comma.