Fish, seafood on track to disappear by 2048

This is a discussion on Fish, seafood on track to disappear by 2048 within the Off Topic & Humor Discussion forums, part of the The Back Porch category; this is scary to think it would happen, something for our grandkids to worry about! http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061102...g_061102223843 Thu Nov 2, 5:38 PM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: Fish, seafood on track to disappear by 2048

  1. #1
    Distinguished Member
    Array soonerjh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Central Oklahoma
    Posts
    1,241

    Fish, seafood on track to disappear by 2048

    this is scary to think it would happen, something for our grandkids to worry about!


    http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061102...g_061102223843

    Thu Nov 2, 5:38 PM ET

    WASHINGTON (AFP) - The world's fish and seafood could disappear by 2048 as overfishing and pollution destroy ocean ecosystems at an accelerating pace, US and Canadian researchers reported.
    ADVERTISEMENT

    If current global trends continue, the loss of fish and seafood will threaten humans' food supplies and the environment, according to the most exhaustive study to date on the subject, published in the November 3 issue of the US journal Science.

    "Our analyzes suggest that business as usual would foreshadow serious threats to global food security, coastal water quality, and ecosystem stability, affecting current and future generations," the international team of ecologists and economists wrote in "Impact of Biodiversity Loss on Ocean Ecosystem Services."

    The four-year analysis was the first to study all existing data on ocean species and ecosystems and synthesize them to understand the importance of biodiversity at the global scale.

    "Whether we looked at tide pools or studies over the entire world's ocean, we saw the same picture emerging," lead author Boris Worm of Dalhousie University, in Canada, said in a statement.

    Worm said the disappearance of species from ocean ecosystems had been accelerating.

    "Now we begin to see some of the consequences. For example, if the long-term trend continues, all fish and seafood species are projected to collapse within my lifetime -- by 2048," Worm said.

    "In losing species we lose the productivity and stability of entire ecosystems. I was shocked and disturbed by how consistent these trends are -- beyond anything we expected."

    At this point, 29 of currently fished species were considered "collapsed" in 2003, that is, their catches have declined by 90 percent or more, he said.

    "It is a very clear trend, and it is accelerating," he said.
    RKBA

    John

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Member Array xercise2nd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Pennsylvania, northeast
    Posts
    246
    Believe what you want, folks. I for one find the prognostications to be laughable. Here's the opposing view: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/dai...k_a.guest.html

    It won't effect my concealed carry one way or the other. I don't use shark-skin for my holster.

  4. #3
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,418

    I Don't Believe This Crap Either...

    Quote Originally Posted by soonerjh View Post
    this is scary to think it would happen, something for our grandkids to worry about!...
    "It is a very clear trend, and it is accelerating," he said.

    Thirty years ago everyone was worried about the coming 'ice age', now it's global warming...

    Really don't eat that much fish anymore anyway...

    ret
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array sgtD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    2,292
    I agree with Rush most of the time, but on this issue he is misinformed. The stocks of commercial fish are being depleted at a rapid rate and in the case of some species like salmon, their reproducitve areas upstream are becoming threatened. As all ecosystems and species within them have connections to the health of other species, we do not fully know what effect "ecological extinction"(a species reaching a level of population where some still exist, but it's niche is no longer filled) will have on other species within the system. Ecological extinction can lead to chain reactions within the system that can lead to other commercially unnoticed extictions, which in turn have further effects.

    Rush seems to have a good understanding of neoclassical econimic theory so I am suprised at his ignorance as the theory applies to the subject of natural resources.

    Economic theory states that when a product is in demand, the price will rise, casuing supply to increase and demand to decrease until an equilibrium price is reached. With man made products this holds true in most cases, not taking into consideration certain market failures that I will not get into, except to say that with natural resources only harvest costs are considered; therfore, replacement costs are not factored into the end market price.

    Unfortunately, when we are dealing with limited natural resources which are not man-made and not readily replaceable, economic forces have a detrimental effect.

    When natural resources are plentiful, prices are kept low, and demand can remain relatively constant, increasing only with population growth or societal shifts. Profits will remain low as well, given this equilibrium scenario.

    When the resource is overtaxed however, then demand quickly begins to outstrip the supply, causing the price to rise. This creates an incentive to further stress the resource, as more people now see doing so as profitable. The pressure is put on to increase harvest in order to increase profit, which further depletes the resource base.

    In short, economic forces work adversly in the case of environmental resources, unless regulatory measures are taken to limit overall consumption.

    There is hope however, due to the fact that as prices rise, other forms of supplying fish become economically attractive, ie fish farming. This can theoretically remove some of the strain on the resource, but some types of fish farming have had negative effects on native fish populations as well.

    I don't believe that fish species will become completely extinct, because protection measures will be taken, but IMO there may soon come a day when farm raised fish will be the only ones that are available on the comercial market. Just like waterfowl and other game species which were once harvested to low levels in the name of profit.

    Again JMO, Rush should stick to politics and leave ecological science to the scientists. Ok, I'm off my now.

    BTW: I don't yet believe that global warming is caused by human action. The science on this issue is pretty sketchy.
    Last edited by sgtD; November 4th, 2006 at 06:37 PM. Reason: add info.
    When you've got 'em by the balls, their hearts & minds will follow. Semper Fi.

  6. #5
    Senior Moderator
    Array pgrass101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    13,399

    My Soap Box

    Fellows,
    I'm a biologist, well a Microbiologist but, I did my research in ecology. You can believe what you want, but unless we do something we are going to cause the ocean fish stocks to collaspe.People didn't believe that cigarettes caused cancer or that DDT killed birds and they had scientists (who were paid by tobacco and DOW) to back them up.
    People don't believe in Global warining either, but ask any scientist who doesn't work for the oil compianies, and they will agree that the Earth is getting warmer and that humans are playing a role in it. The disagreement is over how much of a role humans play.
    With fish stocks it is overfishing combined with pollution, and loss of habitat due to increase in ocean temperatures. If you don't believe me ask some commerical fishermen in the Bering sea how far out they have to go now to get their catch.
    I have never hugged a tree and I try to get atleast 1 deer every year for the freezer. I am Catholic and a member of the NRA, so guess which way my politics go, and they don't start with a D.
    If you think God made the Earth for us to do with as we wish, shouldn't we take care of it out of respect for him? And if he appointed us stewards shouldn't we care for it as well as we can?

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array artz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    2,351
    Its just common sense that it would deplete. More people in the world equals more food.
    For those who have young kids, teach them chinese , and maybe to learn how to farm fish. Thats money in the bank for their future....
    " Refuse to be a victim, make sure there is a round chambered ! "

    Just call me a pessimistic optimist !

    U.S. Navy vet 1981-1992

  8. #7
    Member Array Manwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Newnan, GA
    Posts
    20
    I have a real hard time believing these whack-job scientists who predict doom and gloom that may happen in 40+ years from now. They can no more predict what will happen than you or I. In fact, with that thought in mind, I predict that the fish will take over and be running the world by 2040…

    Seriously though, if we start running short on fish we’ll most likely find something else to eat…

    Manwell

  9. #8
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 15,670'
    Posts
    12,145
    There's science that is good, there's science that is bad, and there's science that is ugly. I don't personally know enough about this particular issue, but this report was vetted hard by some substantial scientists and journals. On the other hand, NOAA found it a bit alarmist.

    I guess time will tell, but beyond that, it is an indication we should all take care of what we have and use, and be sensitive to the impact we personally have on the environment.

  10. #9
    Senior Member Array Musketeer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    701
    Quote Originally Posted by pgrass101 View Post
    Fellows,

    People don't believe in Global warining either, but ask any scientist who doesn't work for the oil compianies, and they will agree that the Earth is getting warmer and that humans are playing a role in it. The disagreement is over how much of a role humans play.
    That role would be as passengers. Certainly the earth gets warmer, it also gets cooler and it goes through cycles. PLenty of scientists also believe in that.

  11. #10
    Lead Moderator
    Array rstickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Laurel, MD
    Posts
    21,635
    Quote Originally Posted by Musketeer View Post
    That role would be as passengers. Certainly the earth gets warmer, it also gets cooler and it goes through cycles. PLenty of scientists also believe in that.
    I think what you say is partly true, but look at the "greenhouse" gas situation since the industrial revolution. Ice cores have never shown patterns like this before.

    I also remember when I was on college an outfit called "The Club of Rome" was warning about the end coming around 2020, which sure doesn't seem credible now. Guess the bottom line is there is both good and bad science on this stuff.

    What I think is the scariest part is the "editorial" changes made to some of the reports by the current administration, and I only say that because I work at Goddard Space Flight Center which is NASA's "Center for Earth Sciences".
    Rick

    EOD - Initial success or total failure

  12. #11
    Senior Moderator
    Array pgrass101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    13,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Musketeer View Post
    That role would be as passengers. Certainly the earth gets warmer, it also gets cooler and it goes through cycles. PLenty of scientists also believe in that.
    Yes the Earth does go through cycles, and we are in a warming cycle now. These cycles are in a large part governed by the tilt of the Earth on its axis. We had a cooling cycle in the late 1800's that was called the little ice age, we have emerged from that and are now in a warming cycle. With that being said what we are seeing is an increase beyond what is expected in global tempatures.
    Both sides of the arguement do themselves a dis-service by presenting the most extreme views. Either nothing is happening or the world's ecosytem will collaspe by next week. You have to dig through all of that to get to the meat of the issue. And that meat is presented by scientists who are apolitical and just do their research becuase that is their life.
    Greenhouse gases have increased to a level the Earth has never seen before to the best of our knowledge, and they are still increaseing. We as a nation can pretend this is not happening or do what has made America great in the past, and that is innovate develop new technology and sell it to the rest of the world.
    Look at what has happened to our automotive industry refusing to change. We know oil is a limited resource yet we still won't do serious research to find an alternative. Forget about the fact that every $1.00 you pump into your gas tank a $0.05 goes to some muslim extremist to help fund his bomb building program. (The previous sentence is not supported by any facts, just making a point that oil revenues are used by the Saudis to fund "reglious schools".)
    If you don't think that we have an impact on the planet, then put a styrofoam cooler in your yard and see how long it takes to get to the point that you won't recognize it as styrofoam. Be sure to include instructions in your will to have your great-grandkids continue the project.
    Lets just think about what we are doing we know that if we overfarm a field and don't fertilize it crops won't grow. Doesn't it make sense that the oceans are the same way.
    Last edited by pgrass101; November 5th, 2006 at 04:08 PM.

  13. #12
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    25,804
    Both sides of the arguement [sic] do themselves a dis-service [sic] by presenting the most extreme views.
    The science will play out out however it does. Yet it's hard to see things quite the same way after having seen a large overfished area, or a reef area, or a dead zone, where it's devoid of 98% of the life it once had. At one time, such areas were rare. Now, they're everywhere within the 200mi fishing zones of every major country of the world.

    Anyway, that said, it's astounding how quickly things can turn. Changing conditions can favor bacteria or a small, invasive species such that larger, endemic species simply cannot cope with the speed of change.

    The extremes are actually occurring more frequently, the greater the stresses being applied to the habitats. I'm of the opinion that no single stressor is pushing it over the edge, yet there are many stressors contributing to the trends. Many systems have broken as a result, in local zones. Such zones are increasing in frequency and size. Can it happen on a global scale? Dunno. It is happening in smaller areas all over the globe. If current trends continue, it will almost certainly continue.

    I think the human HIV virus is a good analogy. The attack on a body's ability to mount a defense is a lot like what happens in an eco-zone that's stressed to the point of collapse. The species of animals that withstand the ebb and flow of a change in that zone reach the point of no longer being able to react, or are no longer there.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  14. #13
    VIP Member Array sgtD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    2,292
    If you want to really understand what is, and is not known regarding climate change, read the Marshall Institute report, (2006) udated and revised edition of Climate Issues and Questions. It is the most definative paper to date IMO, as far as what we know, and don't know on the subject . I can't find a web link and it's too long for me to paste here. (40pgs)
    When you've got 'em by the balls, their hearts & minds will follow. Semper Fi.

  15. #14
    Senior Moderator
    Array pgrass101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    13,399
    http://www.marshall.org/pdf/materials/391.pdf#search='Climate%20Issues%20and%20Questions '

    This one?

    I don't know when it was updated. You can also check out the Union of Concerned Sciencitists. The are tree huggers but present the facts just be careful of the opinions

  16. #15
    VIP Member Array sgtD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    2,292
    Quote Originally Posted by pgrass101 View Post
    http://www.marshall.org/pdf/materials/391.pdf#search='Climate%20Issues%20and%20Questions '

    This one?

    I don't know when it was updated. You can also check out the Union of Concerned Sciencitists. The are tree huggers but present the facts just be careful of the opinions
    Yes, that is the report I was speaking of.

    The Marshal Institute are not tree huggers. That's why this report counters much of the, UN affiliate Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Control (IPCC) Climate Change 2000 report.

    The IPCC are the kool aid drinking tree huggers and doomsdayers.

    Their report is here:

    http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar...nglish/006.htm

    The Marshal Report points out the flaws in the original science. The same science that the IPCC accepts as valid enough to shape world policy.
    When you've got 'em by the balls, their hearts & minds will follow. Semper Fi.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Funny how things disappear!
    By tkruf in forum Forum News, Feedback, Problems & Comments
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: September 16th, 2010, 10:24 AM
  2. Shirts that will make your gun Disappear!
    By AKsrule in forum Defensive Carry Holsters & Carry Options
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: July 7th, 2006, 04:37 PM