TUNA!!

[Benchwayze]

I had Tuna sandwiches every day for the whole of my school career.

If I like something I see no reason to change it

You may like it, but the tuna don't! There isn't a species of tuna that isn't endangered or seriously endangered, with Bluefin likely to become extinct in less than 3 years. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE53D00320090414

Sorry to be boring.

Mike

I posted here Mike.
I agree with what you say. However, I consider 'sushi' to be one of the major factors.

I don't eat 'sushi. Mainly because there are too many parasites in raw fish. As for the Tuna, the way in which it is fished is the problem, fuelled mostly by the demand for sushi, as much as anything.
John

 

[MikeG.]

Oh, just spotted this......

Well, as this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...s-bans-snacks-containing-endangered-fish.html link says, some tuna are as endangered as pandas and tigers, and you wouldn't eat those, would you?

Mike

 

[Mike.C]

I had Tuna sandwiches every day for the whole of my school career.

If I like something I see no reason to change it

You may like it, but the tuna don't! There isn't a species of tuna that isn't endangered or seriously endangered, with Bluefin likely to become extinct in less than 3 years. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE53D00320090414

Sorry to be boring.

Mike

I posted here Mike.
I agree with what you say. However, I consider 'sushi' to be one of the major factors.

I don't eat 'sushi. Mainly because there are too many parasites in raw fish. As for the Tuna, the way in which it is fished is the problem, fuelled mostly by the demand for sushi, as much as anything.
John

When you think that 1 adult Southern Bluefin tuna can fetch as much as $50,000 (thats US dollars), and that open ocean harvest is worth $150 million a year in Australia alone, we are going to have a hard job saving the tuna.
90% of all Bluefin consumed is done so by the Japanese, the very same people who cannot get enough whales and do not care if we drive them to extinction.

Cheers

Mike

 

[Benchwayze]

Mike,
What do you expect me to say? Something crass, like:

'Well I couldn't eat a whole Tiger?'

No, of course I wouldn't eat a Tiger, even if its flesh is edible. However, it's a fact that Tigers do eat humans occasionally. I'm not suggesting we eradicate the beast because of that, but enough locals in India know the serious side of it. Also, enough are going to be moved from their homes and their land, without a 'by your leave', to accommodate the Tiger. A similar situation to the disruption in the Serengeti.

We are going to have another such happening in East Anglia. Farmers will be expected to give up their land to accommodate wild fowl. If they don't do it voluntarily, someone will compel them. Where will it end?

It seems to me, there are those who believe humans don't have a right to be here. I empathise completely with your views, and maybe we are 'soiling our own nest', but I still have to put human beings first.

So, I'm sorry Mike. I refuse to feel guilty over the misdoings of others and I refuse to go on a crusade. All I can do to help endangered species is contribute to charities. I do that for a number of other causes besides WWLF.

I won't mention the 'J' word! Someone's done it for me.

If I am evil because of my views, then so be it!

Regards

John

 

[MikeG.]

Also, enough are going to be moved from their homes and their land, without a 'by your leave', to accommodate the Tiger.

I still have to put human beings first.

John

Firstly, the tiger has lived for thousands of generations without affecting human populations, which certainly can't be said in reverse.

If you put humans first, does that mean you accept that they can do absolutely anything they want to?

I'm on no crusade, and didn't start this thread. I've just chosen not to eat tuna any more.

Mike

 

[Benchwayze]

John !

 

[big soft moose]

Mike,
What do you expect me to say? Something crass, like:

'Well I couldn't eat a whole Tiger?'

No, of course I wouldn't eat a Tiger, even if its flesh is edible. However, it's a fact that Tigers do eat humans occasionally. I'm not suggesting we eradicate the beast because of that, but enough locals in India know the serious side of it. Also, enough are going to be moved from their homes and their land, without a 'by your leave', to accommodate the Tiger. A similar situation to the disruption in the Serengeti.

We are going to have another such happening in East Anglia. Farmers will be expected to give up their land to accommodate wild fowl. If they don't do it voluntarily, someone will compel them. Where will it end?

It seems to me, there are those who believe humans don't have a right to be here. I empathise completely with your views, and maybe we are 'soiling our own nest', but I still have to put human beings first.

So, I'm sorry Mike. I refuse to feel guilty over the misdoings of others and I refuse to go on a crusade. All I can do to help endangered species is contribute to charities. I do that for a number of other causes besides WWLF.

I won't mention the 'J' word! Someone's done it for me.

If I am evil because of my views, then so be it!

Regards

John

as regards the wildfowl farmers are being paid to leave some of their land out of cultivation to accomodate the birds - that is hardly a draconian compulsion. - and farming techniques that fail to accomodate nature only came about due to the CAP and over production.

and with regard to the tigers as mike points out a few years back places like ramthambore were jungle - the people who are being moved out have moved in recently the and pressured the tiger habitat. (a long time ago the jungle was palaces and monastries etc as evidenced by the ruins but it has never been previously cultivated. )

and with the tuna - a bluefin is only worth that ammount becauise of consumer demand , if people stop eating it the value will fall and there will be no major incentive to catch them - of course the fishermen claim that this would wreck their livelihoods but these will be wrecked anyway , and more permanently by the extinction of the tuna.

I'm largely with mike on the eco view - the idea isnt to erradicate people or to put them second, but to find a balance between peoples imediate needs and the long term needs of the whole ecosystem - which includes people as a top predator , we are very naive if we belive that as an apex consumer we will be fine even if other species in the food web become extinct.

 

[Benchwayze]

Hi Moose,

I know about the 'fallow-fields' policy.

I was referring though to the project that is being considered, whereby they are trying to return whole tracts of land to salt-marsh by allowing the sea to encroach. One farmer was mightily upset about that!

Anyway subject closed, as I had the wrong end of the stick!

John

 

[RogerS]

There are too many people on this planet. Simples.

 

[Digit]

A subject not under discussion in Copenhagen I understand Roger.
apparently Earth's population is now rising at its fastest rate ever, though whether that means in percentage terms or numbers the report fails to make clear.

Roy.

 

[jlawrence]

agreed, there do appear to be too many people on the planet. perhaps we should have dropped more bombs at the end of the world war - might have helped both problems.
nothing other than a major plague is likely to reduce populations - there's no way we could risk another world war as reducing populations to next to zero ain't quite what we need.

 

[MikeG.]

Just have a little think about this population statistic:

Around 40% of all the people who have ever lived, in the entire history of the planet, are alive today.

That takes some believing, doesn't it!

Given that, you might ask which people we should be doing without.......Well, when considering that, do remember that one UK citizen has about the same impact as 100 Africans over a lifetime.......and one US citizen has the same impact as about 200 Africans. Who should stop breeding?

Mike

PS Here is one source for the above stats.......http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_energy_consumption_per_capita

 

[Digit]

Rather simplistic Mike, numbers are also part of the equation.

Roy.

 

[Ironballs]

I'm with you on the tuna Mike, haven't eat it for a long time, pretty much since I heard about the impending extinction. Speaking of whales, if you flick Discovery channel on now (or wait till 11pm for the +1) then you can watch whale wars as activists go toe to toe with the bloody japs.

Also agree with the human population issue, we're getting close to the point where there isn't enough food in the seas and the arable land is being fought over for food and fuel production. In other words, if we carry on at this rate we won't have enough food to go round, the western world relies quite heavily on the developing world for food, what happens if they decide they can't afford to export it any longer? Do they let their people go hungry but bring in the cash, or feed them all and be poor.

A little simplistic I know but you get the general drift

 

[big soft moose]

Hi Moose,

I know about the 'fallow-fields' policy.

I was referring though to the project that is being considered, whereby they are trying to return whole tracts of land to salt-marsh by allowing the sea to encroach. One farmer was mightily upset about that!

Anyway subject closed, as I had the wrong end of the stick!

John

ah managed retreat

but that isnt about the birds per se - its more about the huge expense and nigh on impossibility of defending all that land from storms, rising sea levels, and increased salination of the soil - the idea being that its better to let some land go and defend the rest (using that surendered as a buffer) than it is to try to defend all of it and have the defences breached

 

[Ironballs]

Just been watching Whale Wars and feel a little nauseous now. Not much more to say

 

[The Major]

Oh, just spotted this......

some tuna are as endangered as pandas and tigers, and you wouldn't eat those, would you?

Mike

Only the once, very chewy.

 

[lurker]

Given that, you might ask which people we should be doing without.......

I vote for the Japs.......................and the french of course :lol:

 

[mahking51]

Hi All,
Years ago I used to run two sport fishing boats in the BVI and we would troll for tuna (yellowfin), wahoo, dorado, marlin, sailfish etc.
Without doubt the best time of my life!
Our catch was always regulated by ourselves, keep enough for the punter and ourselves, release the rest and release all billfish at the transom.
We would be up to 30 miles out on the seamounts and therefore often came across large Korean longliners shooting kilometer after kilometer of gear.
When you see what this stuff can 'catch' it made you want to cry; particularly drowned dolphins, porpoise etc The sharks were killed just for their fins and chucked overboard still alive. They were the crews main bonus as they were so badly paid.
We use to take great pleasure in blowing the radar buoys full of holes with 00 buckshot and sinking the lot in about 4000 meters of water when ever we could.
These days they use the same system but with 20Km of drift net which takes everything includiing turtles. A f****** disgrace!
BTW 50k US for a big bluefin is not dear! close to $100 a kilo is often got. Saw one in a 14 foot poly box at Billingsgate last year, you could hardly get near it for Japs squabbling over it.
Cheers,
Martin

 

[Philly]

Does anyone watch Southpark? The episode "Whale Whores" from the last season gives an interesting view of the Japanese obsession with obliterating certain species of fish.
Philly