50 replies to this topic

[Archanfel]

Seals aren't endangered and salmon is mostly farmed. That's not at all the same thing as sharks being hunted to extinction for just their fins while the rest of the animal is simply disposed.

Let's be honest here, it has nothing to do with sharks or we would have been working with the Hong Kong government rather than banning shark fins here. It was an easy choice to score some political points because it only impacts a very small minority of the society and does not cost jobs in Canada. Europeans banned seal pelts for the same reason.

Even if it was about sharks, and I agree finning is a terrible practice, target the practice itself. Or better yet, farm sharks and produce cheaper fins, bankrupt the fishermen who does finning. Banning shark fin in Toronto will accomplish nothing. On the contrary, it's likely the Chinese community feel so marginalized that the ban will backfire. Of course, I don't think the politicians will care since it was never about sharks, it was about scoring some cheap political points.

[Wilber]

My point is that you can't make it stop by banning shark fins in Toronto, but not in Markham. You can't even make it stop by banning it in Canada, but not in Hong Kong. It's stupid. We have laws that govern fishing, but we didn't ban eating fishes in certain cities, did we?

China is probably one of the "other countries", their fishermen drove their seafood stocks to the verge of collapse (probably did collapse). Yet China is the biggest seafood producer today because they "domesticated" all kinds of fishes and shrimps. Environmentalists didn't save their wild fishes, capitalists did. Instead of paying lip services to protecting sharks that we both know would do next to nothing, we perhaps should get off our moral high horse and making domesticating sharks a profitable business. Only then would the wild shark population be saved.

BTW, did you know the Chinese domesticated salmons? They keep them in a large cage, artificially feed them and sell them around the world. Who knew if raising salmons is even economically viable? But the Chinese tried and succeeded. Now environmentalists will tell you fish farming is bad for the environment and bad for people eating them. Animal lovers will tell you it's cruel to the fishes. So judge it for yourself. Should we ban salmon eating or should we find some creative way of preserving the wild stocks.

If the Chinese are so good at it why don't they domesticate sharks for their fins? If there was money to be made, I'm sure they would be doing it. They are the ones who consume them. Why should we do it for them? Why don't you give it a try?

We ban the importation of things like ivory and skins of exotic cats because the species are endangered. Should we start raising elephants so we can shoot them and cut their tusks out? Should we raise rhinos so their tusks can be cut out just because some old Chinese guy thinks grinding one up and consuming it will help give him a woody? Where do you draw the line when it comes to changing behaviour?

[Archanfel]

If the Chinese are so good at it why don't they domesticate sharks for their fins? If there was money to be made, I'm sure they would be doing it. They are the ones who consume them. Why should we do it for them? Why don't you give it a try?

We ban the importation of things like ivory and skins of exotic cats because the species are endangered. Should we start raising elephants so we can shoot them and cut their tusks out? Should we raise rhinos so their tusks can be cut out just because some old Chinese guy thinks grinding one up and consuming it will help give him a woody? Where do you draw the line when it comes to changing behaviour?

We should if we can. Unfortunately, elephants can't live in such cold weather. It might surprise you but many elephant reserves in Africa are funded by ivory sales to some old Chinese guy. Tigers are being farmed in China to provide bones to some old Chinese guy. Even Giant Salamander are being farmed to provide meats to some old Chinese guy. I know, disgusting, but what do I know about Salamander meat? While a bit too late, these efforts did ease the pressure on the wild population somewhat.

I don't know whether they are farming sharks as well, but there's a Taiwanese business selling Tilapia fins whereas others are trying to push expensive wines as an alternative to show wealth. Banning without providing an alternative to satisfy the underlying needs is not going to work.

[Wilber]

We should if we can. Unfortunately, elephants can't live in such cold weather. It might surprise you but many elephant reserves in Africa are funded by ivory sales to some old Chinese guy. Tigers are being farmed in China to provide bones to some old Chinese guy. Even Giant Salamander are being farmed to provide meats to some old Chinese guy. I know, disgusting, but what do I know about Salamander meat? While a bit too late, these efforts did ease the pressure on the wild population somewhat.

And why is that? Because they can't obtain them legally any other way. Why is that? Because the use of wild species has been banned.

[Manny]

How about... killing potatoes for their roots? Where do we draw the line?

Indeed, it is a holocausst for the potatoes

[Archanfel]

And why is that? Because they can't obtain them legally any other way. Why is that? Because the use of wild species has been banned.

Are we banning fishing wild sharks? If so, I fully agree with you. Unfortunately, we are not. What we are doing will have little impact on the extinction of sharks. That's my point.

Indeed, it is a holocausst for the potatoes

If we had not cultivated potatoes, we would have the exact same problem as sharks. No wild animals or plants can sustain the ever growing number of humans. Can you imagine if we relied on wild sheep for meat? We can't even rely on herding sheep anymore. Of course, the ultimate fix is to reduce the number of people.

Edited by Archanfel, 30 November 2011 - 10:01 PM.

[Manny]

Are we banning fishing wild sharks? If so, I fully agree with you. Unfortunately, we are not. What we are doing will have little impact on the extinction of sharks. That's my point.



If we had not cultivated potatoes, we would have the exact same problem as sharks. No wild animals or plants can sustain the ever growing number of humans. Can you imagine if we relied on wild sheep for meat? We can't even rely on herding sheep anymore.

Actually eating wild food is better for us. Only wild salmon has the least amount of pollutants, and the most nutrition. Plus, those creatures get a chance to live in natural freedom for a while, instead of born in a cage or a factory, never see the sun, never roam around with their own freedom.

The only problem is learning how to balance out consumption to keep the population sustainable. Like with fish, many of them are eaten in the wild when they are still young. So instead of farms, raise small fish and release them into the wild. Help the population to grow, so we can harvest them later. And we need ot make sure their environment and food supply is healthy as well. That's a different way to do it, not enslaving nature.

Of course, the ultimate fix is to reduce the number of people.

You don't have to worry. The great justice will take care of it. You just have to believe that, and live the right life with an open heart.

[blueblood]

Actually eating wild food is better for us. Only wild salmon has the least amount of pollutants, and the most nutrition. Plus, those creatures get a chance to live in natural freedom for a while, instead of born in a cage or a factory, never see the sun, never roam around with their own freedom.

The only problem is learning how to balance out consumption to keep the population sustainable. Like with fish, many of them are eaten in the wild when they are still young. So instead of farms, raise small fish and release them into the wild. Help the population to grow, so we can harvest them later. And we need ot make sure their environment and food supply is healthy as well. That's a different way to do it, not enslaving nature.


You don't have to worry. The great justice will take care of it. You just have to believe that, and live the right life with an open heart.

Oh, you have much to learn about animal science. Fish farming is new and producers haven't yet found a production method that results in tasty meat (unless you count dousing said fish in Cajun batter). You take a steer fed grass vs. A steer that has been corn fed and tell me which steak is better.

As for making shark farming profitable like most other things produced there can be zero waste in order to break even. Heck cattle slaughter has next to no waste, almost the entire animal is used. Same as refining oil. Catching sharks for just the fin made as much sense as the buffalo hunt.

[Archanfel]

Oh, you have much to learn about animal science. Fish farming is new and producers haven't yet found a production method that results in tasty meat (unless you count dousing said fish in Cajun batter). You take a steer fed grass vs. A steer that has been corn fed and tell me which steak is better.

As for making shark farming profitable like most other things produced there can be zero waste in order to break even. Heck cattle slaughter has next to no waste, almost the entire animal is used. Same as refining oil. Catching sharks for just the fin made as much sense as the buffalo hunt.

There's little reason for a shark farm to catch the shark for just the fin. The reason finning practice exists is because it's easier to bring back fins only from the high sea. For shark farming, that would not a problem. And if fins are really where the money is (I doubt it), they can always engineer sharks with bigger fins. The real question is whether it's cost effective to farm sharks.

My point is not necessarily about shark farming. It's about finding real solutions for the problem rather than make a grant gesture that does nothing. The goal of any solution should be saving wild sharks, not making some people feel more righteous.

Edited by Archanfel, 01 December 2011 - 05:23 AM.

[Shwa]

My point is not necessarily about shark farming. It's about finding real solutions for the problem rather than make a grant gesture that does nothing. The goal of any solution should be saving wild sharks, not making some people feel more righteous.

Soylent Green.

[Manny]

Oh, you have much to learn about animal science. Fish farming is new and producers haven't yet found a production method that results in tasty meat (unless you count dousing said fish in Cajun batter). You take a steer fed grass vs. A steer that has been corn fed and tell me which steak is better.

As for making shark farming profitable like most other things produced there can be zero waste in order to break even. Heck cattle slaughter has next to no waste, almost the entire animal is used. Same as refining oil. Catching sharks for just the fin made as much sense as the buffalo hunt.

I am always happy to learn more so I ask you to explain to me why. I don't understand your post. You seem to put down the fish farming method, which I am doing as well. I believe when the fish are held in a container, even in a river stream they are in too close a contact and their urine and fices is too high a concentration.

I would ges a grass fed cow is better, but I never had the opportunity to compare. Grass fed meaning they are roaming freely, not in a box indoors. Plus the hormones of stress from unhappiness may affect the quality of the food somehow. Just my theory. But I hope you will explain it more.

Shark meat tastes disgusting, I tried it one time and no way. That's why they only take the fins man.

[wyly]

shark farming isn't viable, unlike salmon or tilapia which lay thousands of eggs and do so at a young age...sharks have very few young and can take many years before they reach sexual maturity...the cost of feeding a shark for 10 yrs to harvest the fins of one or two young is not economical, and fishers will just go out to sea and harvest them for free...

[Wilber]

My point is not necessarily about shark farming. It's about finding real solutions for the problem rather than make a grant gesture that does nothing. The goal of any solution should be saving wild sharks, not making some people feel more righteous.

I doubt there is much of a shark fishery in Canada, certainly not for fins. The only thing we can do is what we do with other endangered species that are not native to this country. Ban their import and sale. This is not a feel good excercise, it is denying a market to those who would exterminate a species for profit.

[Archanfel]

I doubt there is much of a shark fishery in Canada, certainly not for fins. The only thing we can do is what we do with other endangered species that are not native to this country. Ban their import and sale. This is not a feel good excercise, it is denying a market to those who would exterminate a species for profit.

But that's not what we are doing, is it? We are not banning the import of shark fins, we just moved the consumption from Toronto to Markham, probably along with several tons of CO2 produced. And we are not banning the sales of all shark products in Toronto either. Given how little effect this ban will have on the shark population, can you really say with a straight face that this is about saving sharks? I highly doubt it.

Also, sharks are not threatened by Torontonians eating them. They are threatened because a large part of the Chinese population were lifted out of poverty over the last 20, 30 years. Therefore, I'd think banning all Chinese imports and throw them right back to poverty will help a lot more than banning shark fins in Toronto. The question is do you have the stomach for it when it inconvenient your life and possibly run against your morality.

And if we think a bit broader than sharks. The best way to save endangered species is to reduce world population. Even if we could ban all consumption of animals, sharks and other animals would be threaten by the constant human intruding into their habitat. Other than things like tats and cockroaches, every species is being threatened by human population growth. And you know what's the two best tools to reduce population? Wars and Famines. Again, do you have the stomach for them?

Given our ideologies and to be honest, our humanity, we can't save endangered species by limiting our consumption without a global efforts. The best thing we can do is to find alternative supplies and share the technology or knowledge with the rest of the world.

Edited by Archanfel, 03 December 2011 - 05:52 AM.

[Wilber]

Every movement has to start somewhere. California has already banned them and Toronto is the first in Canada. As more and more people learn what is going on, governments will be under more pressure to act.

You seem to be of the attitude that if we can't do everything, we shouldn't do anything.