EPTOpinions on ban of shark fin - Page 31
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
adacan
United States117 Posts
| ||
|
saocyn
United States937 Posts
On October 27 2011 10:03 Rasun wrote: I recently got the chance to dive on a coral reef in the Florida Keys and swim with Black Tip Reef, and Nurse sharks. Gorgeous animals and really really cool. The thought of what people do to them and then throw them back to die is disgusting. I don't have an issue with controlled fishing for sharks to make a traditional food and just killing the shark humanely after you catch it. However catching the shark, cutting off its fins while it is still alive and throwing back in the ocean to slowly bleed or suffocate to death is horrifying. Why the hell do they even do that? Why not just kill the shark quickly and use the entire thing. I don't get it, its a completely idiotic thing to do, not to mention cruel. well you're an animal right's activist. not everyone believes that and not everyone especially those who take part in catching, hunting and harvesting them see it that way. for those who make a profit off of it, it IS WORK. and some people don't have a need for anything but the finn so why would they want to carry around extra luggage when they just want the fin? some people get lazy when they finally catch the shark they just rip the fin and dump the rest. also not everyone shares the same belief as you about doing things "humanely" or "ethically" some people see it as the fish dying anyway, so why does it matter how you kill it? you're still killing it. not that i'm saying it's RIGHT, i'm just saying it to point out the other point of view of the people who do this. your argument is based on everyone being not wasteful but we all know this is impossible. if you want to speak of not being wasteful you should first tackle the problem of world hunger. half the food we waste and throw away in america and probably all over the world could probably solve world hunger by now. you're arguing 1 instance when it's a much larger problem than that. so it's kind of stupid to just point 1 finger at 1 instance. when the concept of being "wasteful" runs in almost any and every food production. | ||
|
Kiarip
United States1835 Posts
On October 27 2011 10:10 adacan wrote: The practice of skinning should be banned and they should be forced to do it in a more ethical way. That being said the banning of shark fin most likely won't actually do that much to save the species. If they wanted it saved they should find a way to privatize the shark, not ban it. free market solutions for free market problems. | ||
|
imEnex
Canada500 Posts
On October 26 2011 18:35 Cyber_Cheese wrote: Eat the whole shark and it's fine, taking only the fin is almost a waste of time. Agreed. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15713 Posts
On October 27 2011 10:08 sunprince wrote: Depends why you take issue with it. If you're against it simply because it's different, while defending analogous practices in your own culture, then it's probably racist. For example, there's a number of people in this thread who would like to ban shark fins, but don't seem to be taking issue with the cruelties of the Western meat industry. Shark fishing isn't sustainable. It is being done in a way exactly like what happened to salmon in the united states. Ecosystems are at risk of collapsing, making the entire idea of shark fishing impossible. That's very different from the extremely sustainable practice of farming chickens. | ||
|
FishForThought
Canada88 Posts
On October 27 2011 09:56 NuKedUFirst wrote: Oh glad at least one of us majors in biology. Lets eat man's best friend while were at it. You're first argument is completely retarded. It is their habitat and that has nothing to do with extinct or anything. It doesn't matter if it's part of their "regular diet" BRB gonna go eat some endangered animal once a year.. its only one animal right? and then let the whole population of a country do the same. 1,331,460,000 for china. Dogs are only men best friend because we can keep them in the house and find them somewhat cute. They shouldn't have more rights to be on top of the food chain than say a cow, sheep, pig, duck, chicken or pigeon. It is their built in instinct that keeps their number low. Even if we remove all human interference, will their numbers suddenly pop back up like tuna? No, it won't. Some species are just destined to be extinct. Look at the pandas. We have to give them pornography to get them procreate. Like I said, shark fin isn't even part of the chinese's normal diet. They would only eat them in special occasions like in weddings. So a typical chinese would only consume sharkfin once every 10-15 years, or even never given the price nowadays. Edit: Oh I got Warned for saying Shark going to extinction on their own without a source: So here is evidence: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shark#Sexual "Scientists assert that asexual reproduction in the wild is rare, and probably a last ditch effort to reproduce when a mate is not present. Asexual reproduction diminishes genetic diversity, which helps build defenses against threats to the species. Species that rely solely on it risk extinction. Asexual reproduction may have contributed to the blue shark's decline off the Irish coast." | ||
|
Blasterion
China10272 Posts
On October 27 2011 10:00 Brutaxilos wrote: im Chinese and i actually support the ban. however, TL has too much anti-Chinese beliefs so please still be respectful to our culture. It's something we need to get used to, it happens about twice a month-ish, They just don't like us lol | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
Mostly because it isn't sustainable more than anything else. Throw culture and taste out of the window. It is mindless fishing and you are wasting a ridiculous amount of meat. | ||
|
InvalidID
United States1050 Posts
On October 27 2011 10:12 Kiarip wrote: free market solutions for free market problems. You simply cannot farm sharks, at least without undue R&D effort into something that is ultimately pointless. They have tried. They cant even keep them very successfully in most aquariums. There is no human need, or even rational want, for shark meat, beyond irrational tradition. I tend to lean towards liberal(in the classical sense) policies, but your argument makes no sense whatsoever. | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On October 27 2011 10:13 Mohdoo wrote: Shark fishing isn't sustainable. It is being done in a way exactly like what happened to salmon in the united states. Ecosystems are at risk of collapsing, making the entire idea of shark fishing impossible. That's very different from the extremely sustainable practice of farming chickens. I agree. That's why my arguments in this thread against shark fishing have been based on the fact that it's unsustainable and ecologically dangerous, not because it's a "cruel, barbaric practice". On October 27 2011 10:14 StarStruck wrote: sun, Mostly because it isn't sustainable more than anything else. Throw culture and taste out of the window. It is mindless fishing and you are wasting a ridiculous amount of meat. Agreed. | ||
|
Eurekastreet
1308 Posts
On October 27 2011 09:42 Eps wrote: Posts like these make me ashamed of Canadians like you. The racism runs high in any thread that has to do with China. It's especially sad to see how xenophobic people can get, and generalize stereotypes to an entire culture of people. Considering the current nation was built by Immigrants, one would think that people would be more accepting. I like how you talk of Canadians and put them on a moral highground. What right do we have to point fingers at other cultures and act as we've done no wrong? Really? Like Chinese Head Taxes, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_tax_(Canada). Anti-Asian labour laws, the White Woman's labour law. http://esask.uregina.ca/entry/yee_clun.html Japanese Canadian Internment Camps. "Residential" Schools where it was essentially forced assimilation/conversion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Indian_residential_school_system This is just a few that pop up in mind. If I actually researched, I'm sure I can find much more. As much as it pains me to discuss the unsavory actions of Canada, the xenophobic hate that some Canadians show is a disgrace to the country. Unless you were of native descent, we're all children of Immigrants in Canada. What it comes down to is that no country has the right to point fingers and look down their nose on the action of others. I'm no canadian but you're my hero, thanks for putting this down in terms I could not keep as mild as yours (and therefore never clicked on the "post" button), and glad to see another side of canada here, coz the poster above, jeeeeeeeeez... | ||
|
Dfgj
Singapore5922 Posts
On October 27 2011 10:08 sunprince wrote: Depends why you take issue with it. If you're against it simply because it's different, while defending analogous practices in your own culture, then it's probably racist. For example, there's a number of people in this thread who would like to ban shark fins, but don't seem to be taking issue with the cruelties of the Western meat industry. You've got a valid point so long as those people taking issue with shark fin harvesting are doing so on grounds of cruelty, where you can then show a contradiction. Even then, their double standard may not be due to the fact that it's Chinese culture - if it is, then you are correct. Cruelty isn't the only issue here though, it's environmental (and economic) sustainability, as well as potential wastage (though I don't know how this compared to other meat industries). | ||
|
gosuMalicE
Canada676 Posts
| ||
|
Eps
Canada240 Posts
On October 27 2011 09:53 sevencck wrote: Frankly, I think you're being a little heavy handed in evaluating me as a racist. There's a difference between racism and cultural critique. I'm very critical of certain aspects of Chinese culture, and I feel I have every right to be, particularly in defense of being summed up as an ignorant westerner for holding the view that I do. That doesn't mean I'm racist or xenophobic. It might interest you to know that my father is an immigrant to Canada. You're ashamed of me for saying that we don't need people in our country who value status symbols above environmentally sustainable practices? Well I'm sorry but I stand by that statement. It wasn't made based on racial considerations, I would apply it equally to any culture. Yes, I said Chinese people, because the issue of shark fin soup applies almost exclusively to Chinese people. I didn't say Canada had a perfect human rights record, I said they had a very good one, and I think that's fair. And I disagree strongly with your last statement. I think we can and should be willing to judge the actions of others. We already do so in so many ways, yet we're afraid to across cultural lines? I don't think we should be in instances where there is so much at stake. Racism, cultural critique, ethnocentricism. To me it's all the same and inherently related. You say it is exclusive to Chinese people, I'd argue that it shouldn't be generalized to the entire culture. I'll leave that aside though. But that point just goes to show that the actions of the state here is singling out a particular culture. Yet we do not have Fois Gras banned in Canada. Does anyone actually think we treat Chicken or any live stock well? Veal anyone? We can't critique some while ignoring others. I also forgot, about the environment. Alberta Oil Sands > Environment. I'd say we're putting other needs above our Environment. http://one-blue-marble.com/alberta-tar-sands2.html http://one-blue-marble.com/images/photos/tailing-pond-alberta.jpg | ||
|
kidcrash
United States620 Posts
On October 27 2011 10:12 saocyn wrote: well you're an animal right's activist. not everyone believes that and not everyone especially those who take part in catching, hunting and harvesting them see it that way. for those who make a profit off of it, it IS WORK. and some people don't have a need for anything but the finn so why would they want to carry around extra luggage when they just want the fin? some people get lazy when they finally catch the shark they just rip the fin and dump the rest. also not everyone shares the same belief as you about doing things "humanely" or "ethically" some people see it as the fish dying anyway, so why does it matter how you kill it? you're still killing it. not that i'm saying it's RIGHT, i'm just saying it to point out the other point of view of the people who do this. your argument is based on everyone being not wasteful but we all know this is impossible. if you want to speak of not being wasteful you should first tackle the problem of world hunger. half the food we waste and throw away in america and probably all over the world could probably solve world hunger by now. you're arguing 1 instance when it's a much larger problem than that. so it's kind of stupid to just point 1 finger at 1 instance. when the concept of being "wasteful" runs in almost any and every food production. These are examples of what are called nirvana fallacies. When solutions to problems are rejected because they are not perfect. Examples (from Wikipedia): Posit (fallacious) These anti-drunk driving ad campaigns are not going to work. People are still going to drink and drive no matter what. Rebuttal Complete eradication of drunk driving is not the expected outcome. The goal is reduction. Posit (fallacious) Seat belts are a bad idea. People are still going to die in car wrecks. Rebuttal While seat belts could never save 100% of people involved in car accidents, the number of lives that would be saved is enough to far outweigh any negative consequences of wearing a seat belt. | ||
|
Kiarip
United States1835 Posts
On October 27 2011 10:15 InvalidID wrote: You simply cannot farm sharks, at least without undue R&D effort into something that is ultimately pointless. They have tried. They cant even keep them very successfully in most aquariums. There is no human need, or even rational want, for shark meat, beyond irrational tradition. I tend to lean towards liberal(in the classical sense) policies, but your argument makes no sense whatsoever. Well the possible consequences of shark extinction are as catastrophic as the people here are making them out to be, then ok I'm for a more authoritarian solution, but the problem here is that it's very hard to solve free market problems with regulations, it's gonna cost everyone a shit ton of money, and it's only going to make sharkfins more expensive, and therefore desirable. | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On October 27 2011 10:15 InvalidID wrote:You simply cannot farm sharks, at least without undue R&D effort into something that is ultimately pointless. They have tried. They cant even keep them very successfully in most aquariums. There is no human need, or even rational want, for shark meat, beyond irrational tradition. I tend to lean towards liberal(in the classical sense) policies, but your argument makes no sense whatsoever. Farming sharks is not the only free market solution. As I've argued a few pages ago, you can regulate shark fishing by requiring fishers to pay the cost of the negative externalities that shark fishing generates, in the form of taxes/fees. | ||
|
InvalidID
United States1050 Posts
On October 27 2011 10:19 sunprince wrote: Farming sharks is not the only free market solution. As I've argued a few pages ago, you can regulate shark fishing by requiring fishers to pay the cost of the negative externalities that shark fishing generates, in the form of taxes/fees. How do you cost that in any reasonable way? Biologists have correlated removal of sharks from habitat with total ecosystem collapse. You have to cost in very long term effects, and the risks are extreme. A fair tax for the externalities would be prohibitive to the extent that it wouldn't be much better or different then a total prohibition. | ||
|
Kiarip
United States1835 Posts
On October 27 2011 10:24 InvalidID wrote: How do you cost that in any reasonable way? Biologists have correlated removal of sharks from habitat with total ecosystem collapse. You have to cost in very long term effects, and the risks are extreme. A fair tax for the externalities would be prohibitive to the extent that it wouldn't be much better or different then a total prohibition. Neither would work tbh. | ||
|
Shaok
297 Posts
| ||
| ||
