SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has processed the following story:
It has been claimed that fish farming is a sustainable source of food that will help us feed the growing global human population while protecting wild fish populations – but this isn’t true.
“Fish farming is not a substitute for catching wild fish out of the ocean,” says Matthew Hayek at New York University. “In fact, it relies on catching wild fish out of the ocean.”
Hayek and his colleagues have shown that the amount of wild fish killed in order to feed farmed fish is between 27 and 307 per cent higher than previous estimates.
Farmed carnivorous fish eat multiple times more weight in wild fish caught from the ocean than is obtained by farming them, says Hayek. For instance, producing a kilogram of salmon may require 4 or 5 kilograms of wild fish.
(Score: 1) by pTamok on Monday October 21 2024, @06:51PM (1 child)
The human race farms and exploits enough to generate enough food for everyone on the planet.
The trouble is, it is spread unequally, and some people who have more than they need are resultant to share. This is partly basic economics: if you are really, really poor, you cannot afford to pay enough for the middlemen to make enough profit to import it. There are also political considerations, tariff barriers and the like.
There is also the problem that the global rich can outbid the global poor, so can afford chicken, instead of eating grain. Feeding grain to chickens for people to eat is inefficient. But rich people like the taste of chicken. The same thing applies to beef, and other food produced inefficiently from animals eating human food. The world could, in principle, be almost completely vegetarian. Many, if not most, people choose not to follow a vegetarian diet.
If enough people with enough disposable income can afford farmed fish, and like the taste, they'll support the industry. Telling people how to spend their money rarely gives the results that those people attempting to direct desire.
The global rich don't care about the over-exploitation of sand-eels. They want salmon and will pay for it until it gets so scarce they can no longer afford it.
The global rich don't care about the issues with cattle raising. They want beef and will pay for it until it gets so scarce they can no longer afford it.
The global rich don't care about the over-exploitation of cod and tuna. They want fish, and will pay for it until it gets so scarce they can no longer afford it.
How does one stop people paying for things that they can afford that turn out, in aggregate, to be environmentally catastrophic?
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 22 2024, @04:45PM
So what you're saying is the global rich are like carnivorous fish that consume all resources until there's none left?