No more fish by 2048?

[Genecks]

What do you think of this article?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/02/AR2006110200913.html

 

I'm thinking we will still have fish. It seems to me that more and more people are thinking the end of time is near.

[SkepticLance]

While this article contains an uncomfortable amount of truth, it is not 100% correct. The problem lies mainly with those who fish outside of their own territories. Since the fish stocks of the wider world are in common ownership, there is no incentive for a specific nation (eg. Japan) to exercise restraint in taking what is there. And there doea not seem to be any international legal mechanism for exercising control.

 

Where there are fish stocks in local waters, it is possible to control the catch and maintain fisheries indefinitely.

 

I would like to see national marine territories extended, so that most of the world's oceans lie within a specific nation's purview. That way, control can be exercised. It would also give more economic resources to many small and poor nations. Not a perfect solution, but perhaps a step along the way.

[babula jena]

What do you think of this article?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/02/AR2006110200913.html

 

I'm thinking we will still have fish. It seems to me that more and more people are thinking the end of time is near.

 

It is true that the extrapolated statisics shows a decrease trend in fish catch. But, the study may be confined to a limited space and time. We can not apply the same concept in general mode. One more factor is the relliablity of data. We need enough datasets to get a realistic conclusion.

[carol]

you posted it twice...

 

more and more people are thinking the end of time is near, I agree to that. the article was to warn the world for possible outcome of the decreasing supply of fish. however, its just a possibility and it might not be probable.