More reasons to eat your fish...

Jan 30, 2008 17:04

...assuming you plan to eat those species from responsibly managed stocks and/or culture operations ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 3

calypso72 January 31 2008, 02:07:27 UTC
You know, even if it weren't for the bioaccumulation of toxins, I still wouldn't eat fish because of the impact of factory fishing on fish stocks and the environment. I don't really have a problem with subsistence fishing, but the mass quantity at which the fish most people eat is just not sustainable (IMO).

Reply

euge_o_rama January 31 2008, 04:26:00 UTC
I really think much depends upon the stock being fished and how it's being fished. Never should a case like that of the Atlantic cod be permitted to happen, but it doesn't have to. Under ordinary circumstances, most populations can sustain some level of harvest. I take no issue with them doing so, but the regulations really should reflect a realistically sustainable yield. Where there are fisheries not being managed well and subject to non-sustainable harvests comfortably outside of rational regulation (Chilean sea bass, e.g.), I will not indulge.

However, I admit, it is extremely rare for me to ever buy fish. I catch my own, and not only do I do so within the letter of the law, but the moral standards to which I hold myself when harvesting wild fish is more stringent than the regulations. I will not harvest from easily exploited, habitat-limited lotic populations, for example, even where it is permitted.

What I perceive to be the real issue regarding the sustainability of any of our renewable resources unfortunately is one ( ... )

Reply

calypso72 January 31 2008, 13:08:02 UTC
"there are too many damned people"

Amen, brother.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up