Serious problems in the oceans

[pErvinalia]

From 2006.

The apocalypse has a new date: 2048.

That's when the world's oceans will be empty of fish, predicts an international team of ecologists and economists. The cause: the disappearance of species due to overfishing, pollution, habitat loss, and climate change.

The study by Boris Worm, PhD, of Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, -- with colleagues in the U.K., U.S., Sweden, and Panama -- was an effort to understand what this loss of ocean species might mean to the world.

The researchers analyzed several different kinds of data. Even to these ecology-minded scientists, the results were an unpleasant surprise.

"I was shocked and disturbed by how consistent these trends are -- beyond anything we suspected," Worm says in a news release.

"This isn't predicted to happen. This is happening now," study researcher Nicola Beaumont, PhD, of the Plymouth Marine Laboratory, U.K., says in a news release.

"If biodiversity continues to decline, the marine environment will not be able to sustain our way of life. Indeed, it may not be able to sustain our lives at all," Beaumont adds.

----

Worm and colleagues report their findings in the Nov. 3 issue of Science.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/salt-water- ... n-by-2048/

[Hermit]

Already, 29% of edible fish and seafood species have declined by 90%

Faaaaaaark!

On the upside, commercial saltwater fish farming is doing very well, at least here in South Australia. If that is sufficient to sustain us is another matter. I think I'll start another goldfish pond just in case it isn't.

[FBM]

Problem: Commercial fishing will become economically unfeasible well before the last fish is caught. Imagine thousands of boats going out every day but only one of them returns with a fish or two.

[Hermit]

Problem: Commercial fishing will become economically unfeasible well before the last fish is caught. Imagine thousands of boats going out every day but only one of them returns with a fish or two.

You never heard of commercial saltwater fish farms? It's already a multimillion industry around here, and undoubtedly in other locations. Two of the biggest problems are that most of the food for farmed fish consists of other fish caught in the wild and suitably protected locations for fish farming, such as bays and gulfs are scarce and finite. I think the first problem can be surmounted. The second not so much.

[FBM]

Problem: Commercial fishing will become economically unfeasible well before the last fish is caught. Imagine thousands of boats going out every day but only one of them returns with a fish or two.

You never heard of commercial saltwater fish farms? It's already a multimillion industry around here, and undoubtedly in other locations. Two of the biggest problems are that most of the food for farmed fish consists of other fish caught in the wild and suitably protected locations for fish farming, such as bays and gulfs are scarce and finite. I think the first problem can be surmounted. The second not so much.

Commercial saltwater fish farms are also big around here. But whether the ocean-going fishing boats are looking for fish to feed us or to feed farmed fish that will eventually feed us, the problem with the economics remains. At some point way before all the unfarmed fish are totally depleted, fishing boats will no longer be able to catch enough to match the expense incurred in the effort. The only way they could would be if the price of fish were to increase in step. However, with the increased price would come decreased demand, etc etc. I do see over-fishing as a serious problem, to the point that I don't eat tuna anymore except on special occasions and generally keep my fish consumption to a minimum, but I don't see much credibility to the claim that all fish will be completely removed from the oceans by the year claimed in the OP. The oceans may become deplorably over-exploited, but totally devoid of fish? I just can't see how that could happen in the literal sense.

Caveat: Thinking of the inter-dependence of species, it may be possible to deplete certain key stocks to the point that the entire marine ecosystem would suffer a catastrophic setback while it re-structured itself. But I still can't imagine sterile oceans.

[Trinity]

Problem: Commercial fishing will become economically unfeasible well before the last fish is caught. Imagine thousands of boats going out every day but only one of them returns with a fish or two.

You never heard of commercial saltwater fish farms? It's already a multimillion industry around here, and undoubtedly in other locations. Two of the biggest problems are that most of the food for farmed fish consists of other fish caught in the wild and suitably protected locations for fish farming, such as bays and gulfs are scarce and finite. I think the first problem can be surmounted. The second not so much.

Commercial saltwater fish farms are also big around here. But whether the ocean-going fishing boats are looking for fish to feed us or to feed farmed fish that will eventually feed us, the problem with the economics remains. At some point way before all the unfarmed fish are totally depleted, fishing boats will no longer be able to catch enough to match the expense incurred in the effort. The only way they could would be if the price of fish were to increase in step. However, with the increased price would come decreased demand, etc etc. I do see over-fishing as a serious problem, to the point that I don't eat tuna anymore except on special occasions and generally keep my fish consumption to a minimum, but I don't see much credibility to the claim that all fish will be completely removed from the oceans by the year claimed in the OP. The oceans may become deplorably over-exploited, but totally devoid of fish? I just can't see how that could happen in the literal sense.

Caveat: Thinking of the inter-dependence of species, it may be possible to deplete certain key stocks to the point that the entire marine ecosystem would suffer a catastrophic setback while it re-structured itself. But I still can't imagine sterile oceans.

I think the bigger threat is from pollution and agree with your thoughts above about overfishing.

[pErvinalia]

Your caveat is what they are talking about. They aren't suggesting that fishing will cause this. Fishing and pollution et al will reduce stocks to the point where ecological relationships will break down and things will start going extinct. I'm assuming they don't literally mean every single fish will be gone from the oceans then. But functionally it might be the case.

[Hermit]

whether the ocean-going fishing boats are looking for fish to feed us or to feed farmed fish that will eventually feed us, the problem with the economics remains. At some point way before all the unfarmed fish are totally depleted, fishing boats will no longer be able to catch enough to match the expense incurred in the effort.

So true, but I had in mind that it may be possible to farm fish that are not dependent on other fish for sustenance, which can then be fed to those farmed fish that are. At the moment that's obviously not economically feasible, but once fish caught in the wild are so scarce that they become basically unobtainable to you and me at any price, this may change. Initially, farmed fish grown in this way may be prohibitively expensive, but then the economy of scale sets in...

[pErvinalia]

We really need one of those food creator thingies from the Jetsons. Create food out of regular atoms/molecules.

[rainbow]

We really need one of those food creator thingies from the Jetsons. Create food out of regular atoms/molecules.

Wrong solution. We need fewer people, therefore eat people, save the fish.

[mistermack]

I still think that the solution is out there, if the World could agree on who pays for it, and who gets the benefit.
Most of the surface of the oceans is a sterile desert, producing no food at all. That's because the nutrients fall down from the surface, and lie around on the floor of the ocean doing no good at all.
The sunlight hitting the surface grows nothing, because the water is so devoid of the nutrients. This applies to over ninety percent of the ocean surface.

Where cold water wells up naturally from the deep, you get an incredible proliferation of fish of all species, because the organisms at the bottom of the food chain then have sufficient nutrients to grow.

So build huge pumping ships, to suck up nutrients from the sea bed, and you will get brand new fishing grounds, full of fish, for a tiny investment.

The problem is, there would have to be an international treaty, with everyone signed up, otherwise, you would just get people who had paid nothing, catching the fish for free. That's why it probably won't ever happen.

[Jason]

Solutions are already in the works. Like shit steaks: http://www.dailytech.com/Japanese+Make+ ... e21932.htm

[Svartalf]

Thanks, but no thanks

[mistermack]

Maybe they should make it law that people have to be ''buried'' at sea, rather than burnt or buried on land. After all, cremation produces loads of CO2, and burial uses up land, and pollutes the water.

Chop us up and chuck the bits into the sea, and the environment benefits, and so do the fish and crabs etc.
Actually, the nearest river would do, save on transport cost and carbon.

I'd be happy with that. In fact, I would choose that anyway, given the choice.

[Hermit]

Maybe they should make it law that people have to be ''buried'' at sea, rather than burnt or buried on land. After all, cremation produces loads of CO2, and burial uses up land, and pollutes the water.

Chop us up and chuck the bits into the sea, and the environment benefits, and so do the fish and crabs etc.
Actually, the nearest river would do, save on transport cost and carbon.

I'd be happy with that. In fact, I would choose that anyway, given the choice.

I'd be happy with that too.



The sooner the better.