City councillors wants to ban shark fin soup

[dt_toronto_geek]

True. Thus all this really comes down to is human population and human activity combined. 7 billion people hurtling towards 9 billion isn't sustainable.

There's no way around this. Too many people stripping resources everywhere and a quiet desperation to maintain the unsustainable with reality staring us in the face. We're already seeing the writing on the walls with attempts to discredit the evidence. Because if the public knew what was waiting just around the corner, there'd be panic.

Policticians can't tell the public the cold, hard facts and remain in power. People want fantasy. Not reality.

So our future looks like this: Environmental damage/collapse of eco-systems, increasing famine spreading throughout the world, increasing food costs, topsoil erosion, disappearing of fresh water, peak oil and climate change. Some are optimistic. I'm not. There is going to be the mother of "corrections" in the coming decades and it's going to be ugly.

A little off topic I know. Back to the shark fin crisis of 11'....

You are so inside my head! One thing you missed are stronger and more frequent storm systems around the world. I get sad when I look into my niece and nephew's eyes, so sometimes I don't mind approaching middle age so much as I won't be around to see the end. Lopping off millions of shark fins each year will play a part in all of it.

 

[jje1000]

Canada and other northern countries will be relatively well off if such an ecological correction occurs, other countries, not so much.

As for the sharks, I feel that until fishermen start to return with nothing will people then make an effort to protect what's left. That happened with the cod fisheries not long ago, and will likely happen with the tuna and other fish stocks in the near future.

 

[tkip]

You are so inside my head! One thing you missed are stronger and more frequent storm systems around the world. I get sad when I look into my niece and nephew's eyes, so sometimes I don't mind approaching middle age so much as I won't be around to see the end. Lopping off millions of shark fins each year will play a part in all of it.

Thanks for pointing this out. I'm going to off topic again so please bear with me.

I don't doubt that human activity is behind some of the climate change unfolding. It has to be. What I think though is that no one really has a idea what's around the corner regarding changing weather patterns. What impact will this have. We won't know until it becomes our future reality.

I don't believe that changing weather patterns is bad everywhere either. But human societies will have to adopt and perhaps some might not be able to if the changes are extreme. My brother, who has a background in biology and zoology tried to talk about these many issues nearly 20 years ago while studying in university.

He was the first one to tell me about Peak Oil, for example. They were concepts so foreign and removed from my reality/mindset that I couldn't grasp the magnitude of what they represented. So I just dismissed and pretended they didn't matter. Something most people do. I suspect that a lot of our "distractions" in our society are devised to keep us unaware for a multitude of reasons.

Now decades later, what he quietly warned me of is officially unfolding.

If anyone follows oil and realizes that global oil production peaked in 2005, they aren't surprised at the spikes and volatility of prices or the recent announcement to release 60 million barrels from OPEC and countries like the US through it's Strategic Petroleum Reserve, to be sold to buyer(s) and put on the markets. If the world was so flush with plentiful oil, then why start raiding reserves and getting it to the market?

Same as trying to ramp up tar sands production even further or Canada, the States and Russia now "bickering" for rights to territory in the artic due to suspected oil. Someone is desperate.

I truly believe that the denial machine that tries to squash any attempts to talk about and deal with these issues is part of a plan to keep people in the dark about the true magnitude of our problems. I would guess that it's that we can't actually solve most of them due to the population issue.

Last year when Ford was ridiculed for having had the audacity for suggesting that maybe Toronto and the GTA might not be able to handle the sheer, continuing numbers of immigrants moving here, I posted that I thought he was onto to something. Cause we're stretching resources just maintaining the infrastructure and services we have now. Millions more moving here is only going to exacerbate the problem further.

It always comes back to the numbers. Eating exotic food wouldn't be an issue weren't it for the fact that huge numbers of people consume them.

 

[tkip]

Canada and other northern countries will be relatively well off if such an ecological correction occurs, other countries, not so much.

As for the sharks, I feel that until fishermen start to return with nothing will people then make an effort to protect what's left. That happened with the cod fisheries not long ago, and will likely happen with the tuna and other fish stocks in the near future.

I have some thoughts on this.

Unfortunately what's likely to happen is that these species will just collapse and take decades or never to recover. And we have billions to feed. Something has to give. People keep saying Canada is immune due to our size, tiny population and wealth of resources. On paper, it makes sense.

What they don't factor in though in the coming years is the very real possibility for collapse of the states where close to 400 million need to be provided for and a government trying to somehow sustain this population in the face of so many crippling problems. And next door to them is another country on the very of collapse, Mexico. 100 million, dirt poor and their oil production and revenues are going into terminal decline.

What happens when there's a potential mass migration to Canada as an escape for these people?

 

[gristle]

You are so inside my head! One thing you missed are stronger and more frequent storm systems around the world. I get sad when I look into my niece and nephew's eyes, so sometimes I don't mind approaching middle age so much as I won't be around to see the end. Lopping off millions of shark fins each year will play a part in all of it.

Just curious, but where are you getting the info about stronger and more frequent storm systems?

There's a bit of excess catastrophism occurring on this thread.

 

[tkip]

Just curious, but where are you getting the info about stronger and more frequent storm systems?

There's a bit of excess catastrophism occurring on this thread.

OMG!!!!! Panic out there on the streets. Wait, just a bunch of drunken teens. Never mind.

I've heard this stronger/frequent storms reference as well but I haven't actually looked into finding out whether there's any proof to back up claims. And I admit, there is a bit of catastrophism in this thread. Probably the wrong thread to be discussing the impending meltdown of our societies.

So we need to create a new we're DOOMED thread for us doomers....

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

So we need to create a new we're DOOMED thread for us doomers....

See you over there...

 

[Eug]

Because the shark population is collapsing. No sharks, no us.

I'll repeat what I posted earlier. After my brief research I have found that according to CITES, there are 3 species require control (Appendix II), but none are on the truly endangered species list (Appendix I). However, there is some debate, with some scientists thinking there should be as many as 8 in Appendix II. This is out of well over 400.

Their feeling is that shark fins are fine if the sharks are not in Appendix II. In an article written by one of the members of the CITES committee, it was also stated the practice of live finning is deplorable and not supported, but that the vast majority of fins collected are not from live finning.

 

[archanfel]

OMG!!!!! Panic out there on the streets. Wait, just a bunch of drunken teens. Never mind.

I've heard this stronger/frequent storms reference as well but I haven't actually looked into finding out whether there's any proof to back up claims. And I admit, there is a bit of catastrophism in this thread. Probably the wrong thread to be discussing the impending meltdown of our societies.

So we need to create a new we're DOOMED thread for us doomers....

It's my belief that human activities do change the environment. However, it has to be acknowledged that earth is not a static environment. We know storms were much more fierce at some points in earth history. Our current temperature is far below historical norm and some argue that we are in an ice age. I don't think that contradict with the necessity to study the impact of human on the environment, but getting alarmed by a few strong storms kind of undermines the case.

Back to shark fins, I find it hard to believe that shark fin soup eating in Toronto, or even in Canada, has any measurable impacts on shark population. Probably far less than the production of fish oil. Therefore I can't help but think the measure is symbolic at best, hypocritical at worst.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I'll repeat what I posted earlier. After my brief research I have found that according to CITES

Forget about CITES - that organization is like the UN, where getting a decision or ruling on the rapid decline in sharks due to finning would be nearly impossible. What is the greater scientific community saying about shark finning?

Eug, your position reminds of those politicans and locals from Asbestos, Quebec who are so blinded by the cultural and financial significance of their product that they care not of the product's impact.

 

[Eug]

Forget about CITES - that organization is like the UN, where getting a decision or ruling on the rapid decline in sharks due to finning would be nearly impossible. What is the greater scientific community saying about shark finning?

Some of the greater scientific community feel that 5-8 species should be in Appendix II, not just 3. I don't see anyone from the greater mainstream scientific community suggesting that any should be Appendix I.

As for live finning, most think it's deplorable, but the point here is that live finning isn't where the vast majority of shark fins come from.

My stance here is that sale of shark fins derived from non-protected species (or from Appendix II species, with the appropriate permits) should be allowed if produced through traditional means (not live finning).

Eug, your position reminds of those politicans and locals from Asbestos, Quebec who are so blinded by the cultural and financial significance of their product that they care not of the product's impact.

Funny you should mention that, because I oppose asbestos sales to companies that cannot demonstrate responsible management of asbestos or responsible sales of their asbestos based products. Furthermore, I am willing to consider a much wider ban of asbestos production in Canada.

It would seem to me that the case for banning asbestos production is much stronger than the case for banning shark fins. In fact, the case against shark fin soup is pretty much non-existent.

---

To put it another way... Do you agree with PETA's stance on meat production? If not, then you probably should not be agreeing with the anti-shark fin activists either. However, I suspect it's easier for some in the public to support the latter, since they have never eaten it before and have no desire to eat it anyway, so they don't really care.

 

[tkip]

Just how common/popular is eating shark fins anyway? In a city like Toronto it's probably marginal. In asian countries with much bigger populations and higher consumption, how much is consumed?

 

[doady]

If the fins are taken from sharks raised for meat production, I have no problem with it. Same with dogs raised for meat as well. It's all the same to me.

 

[tkip]

If the fins are taken from sharks raised for meat production, I have no problem with it. Same with dogs raised for meat as well. It's all the same to me.

Are there shark farms though? I've heard of this....

 

[gristle]

OMG!!!!! Panic out there on the streets. Wait, just a bunch of drunken teens. Never mind.

I've heard this stronger/frequent storms reference as well but I haven't actually looked into finding out whether there's any proof to back up claims. And I admit, there is a bit of catastrophism in this thread. Probably the wrong thread to be discussing the impending meltdown of our societies.

Here is something that might change what you admittedly heard:

http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/

Here is the Abstract of the paper mentioned:

Tropical cyclone accumulated cyclone energy (ACE) has exhibited strikingly large global interannual variability during the past 40‐years. In the pentad since 2006, Northern Hemisphere and global tropical cyclone ACE has decreased dramatically to the lowest levels since the late 1970s. Additionally, the global frequency of tropical cyclones has reached a historical low. Here evidence is presented demonstrating that considerable variability in tropical cyclone ACE is associated with the evolution of the character of observed large‐scale climate mechanisms including the El Niño Southern Oscillation and Pacific Decadal Oscillation. In contrast to record quiet North Pacific tropical cyclone activity in 2010, the North Atlantic basin remained very active by contributing almost one‐third of the overall calendar year global ACE.

Maue, R. N. (2011), Recent historically low global tropical cyclone activity, Geophysical Research Letters, 38, LXXXXX, doi:10.1029/2011GL047711.


When I was a little kid, there were just over three billion people. Back then, doom was to occur at five billion. It never happened. Today, people project doom at nine billion. We'll have to wait and see. When it comes to threats of species extinction, environmental groups often state numbers ranging in tens to hundreds disappearing every week due to human activities. Not one species is ever named. It seems no one can even cite one specific extinction once a week that can be attributed to human activity. That's not to say that there are not poor or damaging environmental practices. There certainly are, but the associated doom-saying is so prolific these days that it can tend to border on silliness.