Ban on 'brutal' fishing blocked (bottom trawling continues)

[Barrett808]

Coral clearance: Bottom-trawling and its bycatch

United Nations negotiations on fisheries have ended without a global ban on trawling methods which destroy coral reefs and fish nurseries.

Conservation groups and some governments had argued for a ban on bottom-trawling, which drags heavy nets and crushing rollers on the sea floor.

Negotiators could only agree on a limited set of precautionary measures.

Last month, leading scientists warned there would be no sea fish left in 50 years if current practices continued.

Negotiations at the UN in New York aimed to secure an agreement to go before the General Assembly next month.

(more)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6181396.stm

[flvegan]

1. And when our officials fail, I count on Sea Shepherd and their lovely toys...

Each net ripper weighs 1,500 lbs and has 18 net-ripping blades on each device.

"These devices are experimental," said Captain Paul Watson. "We plan to deploy heavier steel girder and concrete ‘hedgehogs’ at a future date. What we deployed today are smaller devices to see if they will be effective. We call these ‘aquatic caltrops.’ I believe they will be effective. The devices are designed to anchor themselves into the bottom with two cables with two anchors. When a bottom trawl runs over the device, the objective is to rip open the net."

more:
http://www.seashepherd.org/news/media_050417_1.html

[Vidar]

6. Sounds like an admirable organization. Thanks for the link.

[OneBlueSky]

2. humankind is literally killing the oceans . . .

and no one's doing anything about it . . . the living ocean is critical to survival of all life on Earth . . . when it dies, the rest of us won't be far behind . . .

[Trillo]

3. Basic problem seems to be too many people.

Keeping the fisheries alive for the next 50-years pales in comparison to human pressure to put food on the table right now.

Too many people.

[msongs]

4. eliminating fish will solve that problem in fish eating nations eh?

where the majority of food comes from fish, and there are no fish left, the problem will take care of itself.

supply and demand and all that rot.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[Psephos]

10. You've got that right

I wish you were wrong.

Peace.

[Bandit]

5. There are other ways to harvest the fishery without total destruction

We don't need trawling....Hook and line works very well with minimal damage to the environment. The fish are hooked individually and it is an easy chore to release unharmed protected species or undersize fish. With trawling there is no way to protect the resource. Problem is there are too many important people such as Senator Stevens from Alaska that have a vested interest in bottom trawling. It is an easy way to rape the ocean with minimal effort so you know the Republicans are for it..

[karlrschneider]

7. For every fish "caught" this way, thousands are killed down the road.

The human virus will soon kill its host.

[truthisfreedom]

8. sounds like a job for bioengineering.

we need fish NOW, obviously. only science can save us, as scary as that may seem.

[flvegan]

9. Erm, "we need fish now" is a statement in which

the meaning escapes me.

[WindRavenX]

12. hey, we've always had fish

It's just humans that have fucked things up.

The science: stop overfishing and stop raping the ocean.

[Vogon_Glory]

11. Looks Like A Nation-By-Nation Policy Will Have To Suffice For Now

Since the UN won't ban bottom-trawling (And unless the ban had teeth, the ban would be flouted anyhow), it looks like bottom trawling will have to be outlawed by individual countries with ocean coastlines.

This may require some more serious measures than the US has been willing to employ in years past or Dubya Bush's Ghost Dance-and-Laissez-Faire marine fisheries policies. Maritime nations may not only have to enforce the ban beyond 12 mile limits, but in "zones of economic interest" up to 200 miles from shore. Violators operating beyond national boundaries may have to be intercepted and seized if they don't cease and desist, and be vigorously prosecuted if they don't.

I fear this won't help fisheries world-wide. Too many countries lack effective coast guards or have corrupt officials more than willing to ignore bottom trawling (for the right price, of course), and too many other countries are more than willing to allow "pirate fishing" that flouts international fishing quotas and regulations.