Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 12 submissions in the queue.
posted by CoolHand on Tuesday August 11 2015, @08:56PM   Printer-friendly
from the tasty-little-morsels dept.

Original URL: Ocean threat from Hong Kong's taste for seafood

A seafood lunch in Hong Kong is enjoyed by locals and visitors alike, but with threatened species on the menu and fishing practices that endanger marine life, campaigners want to change the city's appetite.

Hong Kong is the second-largest consumer of seafood per capita in Asia—an average resident consumes 71.2 kilos (157 pounds) of seafood each year, more than four times the global average, according to the World Wide Fund for Nature Hong Kong.

Yet the city of seven million has been forced to become one of the biggest seafood importers in the world as local waters are depleted of fish stocks.

Whether in high-end restaurants or waterside eateries, seafood is ubiquitous in the southern Chinese city, where customers often choose their fish live from a tank.

Baked lobster with noodles in cheese and deep-fried prawns in salted egg yolk are among local favourites.

But a "fish tank index" compiled by WWF Hong Kong found that more than 50 percent of the species available in the city's traditional restaurant tanks were from "highly unsustainable" sources.

"Overfishing is driving the collapse of the world's ocean fish stocks and edging many types of fish towards extinction, yet they are still on our menus," WWF Hong Kong conservation director Gavin Edwards told AFP.

"Hong Kong has a special responsibility to turn the tide as one of the biggest consumers of seafood."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Nerdfest on Tuesday August 11 2015, @09:26PM

    by Nerdfest (80) on Tuesday August 11 2015, @09:26PM (#221459)

    "Social Responsibility" seems near non-existent in the Western world and even worse in China. No raindrop feels responsible for the flood.

    • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 11 2015, @10:25PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 11 2015, @10:25PM (#221477)

      For what it is worth, most western consumers eat almost exclusively from sustainable, domesticated stock. Hogs, chicken, and cattle are as sustainable as meat gets.

      Where I live taxes that go to replenishing any wild fish stock every few years and there is a short leash on mammal hunting licenses to keep the population from being over-hunted or burning itself out.

      When it comes to meat those "country rednecks" with their guns, fishing poles, and tractors are as socially responsible as it gets. Their lives, culture, and even entertainment depend on it and they know it.

    • (Score: 2, Informative) by Francis on Tuesday August 11 2015, @11:50PM

      by Francis (5544) on Tuesday August 11 2015, @11:50PM (#221499)

      It depends what you mean by "western world." Around here most of the fisheries have bounced back after decades of overfishing with many of the species available for harvesting again.It's mostly things like tuna that cross over multiple jurisdictions that are the problem. You still have to pay attention to what is and isn't sustainable if you care about it being available in the future, but most of the local stocks are back to a level where you can eat them without any reason for guilt.

      Locally, we made some hard decisions, drastically cut back the limits, bought boats and after years of lower catches they're able to start fishing more again. But, it was a priority, fishing is one of our biggest industries, so it was either pain then or pain later. Either a bit of a haircut and hopefully fish in the future or fish the hell out of them now and definitely not have any in the future.

  • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 11 2015, @09:58PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 11 2015, @09:58PM (#221468)

    too many puppies

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Hartree on Tuesday August 11 2015, @11:12PM

    by Hartree (195) on Tuesday August 11 2015, @11:12PM (#221488)

    Given the amount of land in Hong Kong, what food aren't they going to have to import?

    It's only 7 million people. Even with that high a consumption per capita, it's a drop in the bucket compared to much larger countries nearby that also consume seafood (Japan, China, etc, etc,). Though those have much larger local fisheries to draw on, they still have large long range fishing fleets that can be found competing for fish in fisheries worldwide. Whether it was technically "imported" or caught by the country's own flagged fleet, the fish still comes from the same place and that place may be far from the home port.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 12 2015, @03:42AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 12 2015, @03:42AM (#221556)
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 12 2015, @05:27AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 12 2015, @05:27AM (#221578)

    Before we all are buried in them! Very soon nobody will be eating anything but...

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Wednesday August 12 2015, @11:08AM

    by VLM (445) on Wednesday August 12 2015, @11:08AM (#221648)

    an average resident consumes 71.2 kilos (157 pounds) of seafood each year, more than four times the global average

    Thats a lot of mercury

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 12 2015, @01:48PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 12 2015, @01:48PM (#221676)

      Chinamen are used to eating, drinking and breathing mercury as well as other toxic waste. I'm sure they'll be fine.

  • (Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 12 2015, @02:30PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 12 2015, @02:30PM (#221691)

    Is it me, or is the subject line hard to parse?