EPT
, alternatively sharks are known for having ridiculously high mercury levels so i dont know about consuming any shark that hasnt been properly broken down and cleaned in a labratory but thats just meOpinions on ban of shark fin - Page 52
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Sgonzo
Canada202 Posts
, alternatively sharks are known for having ridiculously high mercury levels so i dont know about consuming any shark that hasnt been properly broken down and cleaned in a labratory but thats just me | ||
|
smokeyhoodoo
United States1021 Posts
On November 01 2011 00:35 Gescom wrote: sigma: You may not be wrong in the sense that the positives of this are less than they seem, but I still see zero negatives. The ban creates a black market for shark fin, the price multiplies several times, organized crime see's it as a lucrative opportunity and gets involved. Gangs are so well armed and equipped they become less and less afraid of the police, committing more crimes and robberies etc. Their new found wealth makes recruitment of youth easier, and the gang grows. Every time the police confront them it is costly in terms of lives. Spending on the police force increases in an attempt to contain the crime spree sweeping the city. The increased taxes adversely affects the local economy, as families have less disposable income than they did before. Shops and businesses layoff workers and lower wages. Unemployment and poverty increase, creating more potential recruits for gangs. etc etc etc | ||
|
andrea20
Canada441 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:56 ZiegFeld wrote: Do you know how much money is going to waste lighting Christmas trees every year? Today where energy is becoming ever more scare, we got 50 foot trees caked Christmas lights all over major cities. Yet, we make no attempt to change. This is a good point. When you think about it, there's far more overall environmental harm when it comes to Christmas as a whole. Electricity lighting up Christmas trees, people taking extended vacations via air or car, and all the plastic used in creating toys which will be thrown away in a few months. Let's ban Christmas, too! | ||
|
Taekwon
United States8155 Posts
On November 01 2011 01:07 andrea20 wrote: This is a good point. When you think about it, there's far more overall environmental harm when it comes to Christmas as a whole. Electricity lighting up Christmas trees, people taking extended vacations via air or car, and all the plastic used in creating toys which will be thrown away in a few months. Let's ban Christmas, too! This is the most unsarcastic sarcastic post ever rofl. | ||
|
HackBenjamin
Canada1094 Posts
| ||
|
Taekwon
United States8155 Posts
On November 01 2011 01:16 HackBenjamin wrote: Culture is cool and all, but I think it should be illegal to perpetuate a tradition like this at the expense of marine life. Humans need to stop thinking their shit doesn't stink. Well, not entirely ban the practice, but at least etch in some stern regulations. Overfishing of sharks always had been without amercement imo. | ||
|
Sabin010
United States1892 Posts
| ||
|
Whyzguy
Canada263 Posts
As for sustainability, this is the only argument that makes sense to me. If you told me that they would go extinct unless we do something about it then fine let's do something about it. However, if the sharks were seriously endangered why ban only the fin? Additionally, why an all out ban? If we just limited the supply, wouldn't that be enough? On a similar note, have you ever seen those "this packaging was made freom ___% recycled materials"? Is that sort of gimmick not good enough for shark fin? Maybe have like a "98.5% of this fin's owner was used"... lol I don't know. But I do know that shark fin is important in our culture Now a bit of "huh?": On October 31 2011 20:21 Pleiades wrote: Oh please, too many people use the race card too much nowadays. Should I tell people to fuck off in poaching tigers, certain brown bears, rhinos, and other endangered plants and animals because they're involved in cultural traditions or medicine? No, I want to say that they're in danger of going on extinction if we don't control it. If they don't like the ban then they should go somewhere else. Plenty of countries or jurisdictions that allow this kind of practice. So you're saying deal with it or leave? As much as I can begin to see an argument for banning shark fin, this didn't help. What sort of discussion is that? Makes me wonder if you'd be willing to move from your home if something relevant to your culture were banned. I really wanted to take a stab at the comment but your country's been subject to many burger jokes and I know a country has little to do with cultural heritage. Also, I love burgers. | ||
|
Gescom
Canada3482 Posts
On November 01 2011 01:02 smokeyhoodoo wrote: The ban creates a black market for shark fin, the price multiplies several times, organized crime see's it as a lucrative opportunity and gets involved. Gangs are so well armed and equipped they become less and less afraid of the police, committing more crimes and robberies etc. Their new found wealth makes recruitment of youth easier, and the gang grows. Every time the police confront them it is costly in terms of lives. Spending on the police force increases in an attempt to contain the crime spree sweeping the city. The increased taxes adversely affects the local economy, as families have less disposable income than they did before. Shops and businesses layoff workers and lower wages. Unemployment and poverty increase, creating more potential recruits for gangs. etc etc etc You don't think you're taking this a tad far...? =/ | ||
|
Tanukki
Finland579 Posts
However, it's never possible to fully predict how an ecosystem responds to this kind of thing. It's easy to make a case against finning from an ethical stand. However, will asian countries impose stricter regulations on their fishing because of an animal rights concern? Unlikely. So I'm not sure what to do about this. Someone should try to make a really convincing fake shark fin soup. | ||
|
HackBenjamin
Canada1094 Posts
On November 01 2011 01:20 Taekwon wrote: Well, not entirely ban the practice, but at least etch in some stern regulations. Overfishing of sharks always had been without amercement imo. These regulations would need to be incredibly stern, but let's be honest; If you try and regulate it, the only people who profit are black marketeers. There's nothing anyone can really do, and it's disgusting. | ||
|
JaBrOnI
Philippines59 Posts
Wouldn't be wanting to eat the authentic ones because that video really made me sad on how they treat the animals. | ||
|
Herculix
United States946 Posts
| ||
|
r_con
United States824 Posts
On October 28 2011 23:25 Myles wrote: Changes in ecosystems generally happen much slower then we are causing. That is the major concern. Also, here is a a link to story about how over fishing of sharks is causing the destruction of the shell fish industry due the overpopulation of fish that sharks normally eat. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11495-us-shellfish-industry-destroyed-by-shark-fishing.html This validated my argument. Manta rays raised in population because the manta ray energy wasn't transferred to the sharks, the shellfish get eaten up, and then their isn't that much shellfish. So the the manta rays will go to new areas to eat, and it will just continue, on and on, either the rays will die of starvation, or thier will be food, the population of the shellfish will increase slowly again because nothing will be eating them. I mean, in this case it hurt an industry, but it's just a different ecosystem, the whole area isn't gonna become a wasteland, just a different collection of animals, with possibly more, or possibly less. | ||
|
Pleiades
United States472 Posts
As for shark finning, chinese people don't own the oceans. Everyone basically shares it, and it is very concerning that huge stocks of fish and sharks are depleting faster than it can recover to many people other than chinese. Some sharks are migratory and go into and out of many jusidictional land and international waters. Sorry if this offends people, but what makes your culture so damn special? You've got to realize that you're not the only ones in this world. | ||
|
yandere991
Australia394 Posts
On November 01 2011 05:38 Pleiades wrote: Psss... some people have to realize that they aren't all that special or should receive special treatment. One of the most favorite cultural past times my people love is cockfighting. However here in America, it is considered animal cruelty. Since we came here, we have to abide by the laws, because we aren't the only people living here. If my people want to practice it, then they should go somewhere where it's allowed or legal. They know the consequences of what will happen if they do it here in America. Just because it is something from our culture does not mean we should have an exclusion from the law. As for shark finning, chinese people don't own the oceans. Everyone basically shares it, and it is very concerning that huge stocks of fish and sharks are depleting faster than it can recover to many people other than chinese. Some sharks are migratory and go into and out of many jusidictional land and international waters. Sorry if this offends people, but what makes your culture so damn special? You've got to realize that you're not the only ones in this world. Bluefin tuna and Beluga Sturgeon caviar are endangered yet are supported or allowed by nearly all western nations, both are not sustainable. They don't own the ocean so why are some cultures so damn special. | ||
|
S.O.L.I.D.
United States792 Posts
On October 26 2011 18:41 T.O.P. wrote: It's an example of the majority infringing on the rights of the minority. The law unfairly targets people of Chinese descent by banning one of their cultural traditions. You know what's unfair? Cutting the fins off sharks and throwing them back into the water. If you don't like the law, no one's making you live here. | ||
|
Pleiades
United States472 Posts
On November 01 2011 09:01 yandere991 wrote: Bluefin tuna and Beluga Sturgeon caviar are endangered yet are supported or allowed by nearly all western nations, both are not sustainable. They don't own the ocean so why are some cultures so damn special. Apparently, you don't seem to get the point to what I'm saying. To give you a clue, it's not about sharks or any species being endangered. It's about practicing cultural traditions in another culture, shark finning leading to shark fin soup is just related to it. You think I can legally practice all my ethnic cultural traditions here in America? It's a sacrifice we have to make to live here, and my people don't really bitch about it. We have to improvise what we have here to supplement what we can't do. At one point you have to realize that your culture is among many now if you immigrate to another. Don't expect you can do everything you want to just because your people did it back where they came from. EDIT- By the way, I didn't even want to say much at all about this, but since people used the race card... I went ahead with it. | ||
|
sigma_x
Australia285 Posts
The supposed rationale for the banning of shark fin soup is environmental sustainability. It isn't the ethics of killing sharks, because the instant retort to "oh but battery hens are treated poorly" is "but chickens aren't endangered". The passage of the law does nothing to address environmental sustainability, it doesn't address the root cause, it doesn't call for multinational action, it is wholly unenforceable, it is entirely localised to a single city, there has been no process of consultation with the Chinese community nor the fisheries that supply shark fins in Toronto, and there has been no attempt to show any cultural sensitivity in the matter. Worse still, the law is effected through by-laws from a local council. If this is not the demonstration of a parochial self-righteous horde of crusader-politicians who are in it for nothing but the pragmatic concern of garnering free votes at the expense of a cultural group, i don't know what is. The only sensible people in the whole matter is the mayor of Toronto and his deputy, who voted against the ban on grounds that this is first, a cultural matter which a local council has no right to mess with, and second, that Toronto hardly needs to 'fight the good fight' (/sarcasm) for the whole of North America. The sort of knee-jerk reaction that arises from a short video of Gordon Ramsay posturing as the great bringer of truth and a few hurt sharks, is endemic of poor policy making. While the concerns may be very real, not everything can be solved in the Rambo-esque fashion that some would have us believe. | ||
|
Pleiades
United States472 Posts
First off, is this racism? Nope, not exactly. This is more about culture than racism. The politicians aren't doing this solely because the people who do it are Chinese. Two people can be the same race, yet have different cultures they identify with. Language, cuisine, values, ceremonies, etc, are part of a culture. Race is different from culture, but in this case it just so happen that many people of this race identify with this culture. Racism would be something more like this, "Chinese people can't eat shark fin soup, but everyone else who's not Chinese can eat it." For example, the Sea Sheperd Conservation Society hates whaling, but they don't hate the race of people who allow it. For it to be racism, the intention has to be solely based on race. As for culture, it is very influenced by region. A Chinese culture here in North America is similar but different back in China. Different laws allow and restrict what you can do by your culture. Is your cultural traditions and values higher than the law even if you disagree with it? You still have to abide by them even if you disagree, but know that if you practice your own culture, especially in Canada/US, it is not the only one here. Now for the ban itself on shark fin soup. So far, it's only limited to a few cities in Ontario, but not all of Canada. Even if it was to all of Canada, this is basically the only way they can have any effect to combat shark finning. Most of the shark finning activity is way out of Canada's jurisdiction, usually located in Central America. Most governments are not going to undermine the sovereignty of another, so they can only work on what they can do. The US has banned shark finning with US registered vessels in US waters, and you can't import shark fins without the shark. Sharks are very migratory, and most sharks who are finned prefer warmer waters. As for shark finning, it literally kills the shark. If it doesn't die from suffocation, it will die from bleeding, hunger, or being eaten by other predators. Some sharks can breathe while still, but they breathe best when moving. A shark cannot swim without their fins. As some sharks are apex predators, they control the population of prey. People say another animal will take it's place, while that may be true, it takes time. A large population boom of prey can have disastrous effects. They had to reintroduce wolves to Yellowstone, because the elk population boomed and caused environmental and control problems. I'm not saying hunting endangered animals is wrong or right, I'm just explaining the implications of it. It is up to your laws and regulations on what you can do. Lastly, realize that Canada and the US are based on western cultures. The majority of people there have based their laws on their culture. I'm sorry if your ethnic minority should feel that their culture should be excluded, but there are also other ethnic minorities with their own cultures among the western cultures as well. If you are directly affected by this ban and want to appeal it, then you should go talk to your politicians. While I feel like my culture holds no lesser or greater value than another, it is a numbers game. | ||
| ||
