Something for us all to think about

[Kevin876]

here is something I just read and all of us as lovers of the big blue should acknowledge at the very least...

Marine life slashed by half since 1970: WWF

I am still a young guy at 49 but have been a lover of the marine life since I was in diapers.. I have known about it for years I mean who hasn't ..but when I read that the tuna population is down 74%! I really thought what the !@#$% are we "humans" thinking...time to rethink...

Just thought I would mention...if you can help in some sort of way then lets do it....

[JPA Cate]

There are no politically correct solutions to problems of overpopulation.

[Nick & LA]

This world needs an enima


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Ann T. Cate

There are no politically correct solutions to problems of overpopulation.

Nor to over consumption.

[dpddj]

Originally Posted by Nick & LA

This world needs an enima
Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

Certainly a cleansing of some sort. From all angles and sides.

[Boathooked]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Nor to over consumption.

Even if you reduced consumption in those areas you think "over consume" by the time you DO feed those in poverty it would still be the same level of consumption. The issue is simple...too many humans not enough resources.

[DeepFrz]

Yes, and how many years has it been since the collapse of the Cod fisheries. Still we have not done anything to curtail the problem.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Boathooked

Even if you reduced consumption in those areas you think "over consume" by the time you DO feed those in poverty it would still be the same level of consumption. The issue is simple...too many humans not enough resources.

This is a first world fallacy. The intensity of resource use is at least as big a problem as all the over-populated areas of the world. Here's one stat from the OECD:

The 12 percent of the world’s population that lives in North America and Western Europe accounts for 60 percent of private consumption spending, while the one-third living in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa accounts for only 3.2 percent.

It's easy for those of us who live off the fat of the land to point our finger 'over there' and say it is those people's fault. The truth is harder to swallow, and harder to deal with. I'm not saying over-population isn't a problem -- it is. But the fact is this is a problem that is at least beginning to be dealt with. Population is expected to peak in around the mid to late century, and then start to decline. At the same time, growth in per-capita resource use by those of us in the so-called developed world continue to rise unabated.

Yes, population growth is a huge problem. But it is at best only 1/2 the problem.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Ann T. Cate

There are no politically correct solutions to problems of overpopulation.

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Nor to over consumption.

+1

And while I don't feel like I'm a big consumer, the fact I own a smallish boat, a house and some horses suggests that I am bigger consumer than most; especially as I could live without any of these items...

[socaldmax]

Originally Posted by Nick & LA

This world needs an enima


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

Not to mention a spell checker.

[socaldmax]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

This is a first world fallacy. The intensity of resource use is at least as big a problem as all the over-populated areas of the world. Here's one stat from the OECD:

The 12 percent of the world’s population that lives in North America and Western Europe accounts for 60 percent of private consumption spending, while the one-third living in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa accounts for only 3.2 percent.

It's easy for those of us who live off the fat of the land to point our finger 'over there' and say it is those people's fault. The truth is harder to swallow, and harder to deal with. I'm not saying over-population isn't a problem -- it is. But the fact is this is a problem that is at least beginning to be dealt with. Population is expected to peak in around the mid to late century, and then start to decline. At the same time, growth in per-capita resource use by those of us in the so-called developed world continue to rise unabated.

Yes, population growth is a huge problem. But it is at best only 1/2 the problem.

In the big picture, referring to resource consumption, yes, you are right.

But in the context of who is doing the over fishing and eating the majority of fish, you'd have to point to the Asian countries where fish is a major staple (more so than North America) and 1.36 billion Chinese is a lot of mouths to feed.

[northoceanbeach]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

This is a first world fallacy. The intensity of resource use is at least as big a problem as all the over-populated areas of the world. Here's one stat from the OECD:

The 12 percent of the world’s population that lives in North America and Western Europe accounts for 60 percent of private consumption spending, while the one-third living in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa accounts for only 3.2 percent.

It's easy for those of us who live off the fat of the land to point our finger 'over there' and say it is those people's fault. The truth is harder to swallow, and harder to deal with. I'm not saying over-population isn't a problem -- it is. But the fact is this is a problem that is at least beginning to be dealt with. Population is expected to peak in around the mid to late century, and then start to decline. At the same time, growth in per-capita resource use by those of us in the so-called developed world continue to rise unabated.

Yes, population growth is a huge problem. But it is at best only 1/2 the problem.

that fact tells nothing about the overuse of our planets resources. Just because Europe and North America spent so much more on consumptive spending, does;t mean that is contributing to overfishing, or polluting, or anything. These countries could be spending all this money on diamonds and rolexes, while Subsaharan africa could be pooping into their rivers and throwing plastic bags everywhere and creating a much bigger footprint.

Have you ever seen pictures of India or Kenya or China? They are so polluted and filthy it makes the worst parts of America look good.

[mstrebe]

Originally Posted by Ann T. Cate

There are no politically correct solutions to problems of overpopulation.

No truer words have ever been said. It's just a question of which option is least bad.

[mstrebe]

There's another point here that most people have never heard of.

Our concept of normal fish stocks was developed decades ago, when whale populations of all species were at extinction levels. It is certain that fish stocks were much lower prior to the 18th century when humans began to take whales in large numbers.

They've now rebounded. Whales are now the number one competitor with humans for fish, and the populations of most whale species are very near sustainable limits. Furthermore, baleen whales are the number one competitors against fish for planktonic life, reducing fish stocks at the bottom of the food chain as well as the top.

Like humans and basically every other species, whales will increase their population until food stocks no longer support growth.

With two top-predators (whales and humans) pressuring fish populations, dramatic declines are inevitable, and, unfortunately for us, take limits imposed on people won't result in more fish, it will result in more whales.

[Don C L]

And you are right to remind us to keep ringing the alarm bell, or there is no hope. This summer we saw firsthand the disappearance of starfish. Granted this is not due to overfishing, but it is one more example of all of us sailing out onto a sea that has changed tragically. In 1976 my Econ 101 professor asked the class "why are the whales going extinct?" Of course we all mentioned Japan or Norway, etc. but he said, "no, it is because no one owns the whales." At first it was surprising to think of owning a whale, but his point sunk in. We only protect what we own. The ocean, largely unowned and unguarded, suffers as a "commons." Those who take from it, like fishermen or oil companies, have no incentive to stop because someone else will not stop and they will have the advantage until the resource is completely depleted or polluted. Those who use it as a trash can have no incentive to stop, because someone else who does will have the advantage. This is not to say the situation is hopeless. Governments and people can step in to create incentives and disincentives... but the task is Herculean. There are small successes here and there to demonstrate that it is possible if we keep the pressure on. So keep reminding us, thank you!