Keith Davis was protecting the oceans, then he disappeared
bbc.com
bbc.com
Definitely worth a read if this interests you:
https://www.theoutlawocean.com/the-outlaw-ocean-by-ian-urbin...
And that keeps happening...
I'd propose in any subsequent event of a missing observer captain does time, ship seized, company closed and that's done even before police starting asking questions. I bet there wouldn't be any missing observer after that.
Just lock random people up without due process! That’ll teach them!
Also, unless I'm very rusty with the legal system, if you're the captain, by definition you're responsible for anyone on board. Coming back to port with anyone missing should be a HUGE problem for you. I don't get that impression here.
After proving ( in the court of law) that it was because captain's neglect. If sailor A kills sailor B just for the fuck of it (and this happens or the true reason might be unknown) do you propose preventively punish a captain before establishing causation and guilt?
And most of injustice happens because our laws are constructed in fucked up ways and almost never punish politicians that are the ultimate reasons for such system. The example - asymmetric laws when it is easy to declare person dead by mistake with all the consequences and then it takes years for a person to get their rights back. And many other laws are like this. You want justice - go after politicians first. Here is the idea - if any person is harmed as the result of such asymmetric laws every politician immediately gets 10% salary cut until the law is fixed. Suddenly you'll find politicians busy doing nothing but fixing law system. This of course will be a problem on its own.
I have better idea. Imprison POTUS or whomever else goes for a similar role in other countries. After all they're the ones ultimately responsible. And do it for any injustice that has lead to a death/s or anything stronger then mere inconvenience.
Maybe add some picture booklets for the crew explaining how fucked they are if they try anything, and include a copy of Captain Phillips for good measure.
Of course, such a scheme would just increase the need for observers to have their own tamper-proof food and water rations as well. At that point, industrial "accidents" are about the only thing remaining.
unmanned submarine vehicle?
It's kind of amazing how many people have the option to do that and find something new out, but will instead make up shit.
It takes a long time to bring back those lines and to load up the catch.
> The AP story prompted the Indonesian government to initiate a rescue. It also traced fish tainted by forced labor back to the supply chains of many major U.S. companies and pet food brands, including Wal-Mart, Sysco, Kroger, Fancy Feast and Iams.
> Once, after coming ashore, Prasert asked his captain for more money. As punishment, he says he was tossed into a tiny, muggy cell with about 20 other men.
> Myint’s freshly shaved head reveals two large scars he received during his years in Indonesia. One is from a motorbike helmet, the other from an iron rod — both blows from angry fishing captains.
> The memories are still raw of Myint collapsing into his wailing mother’s arms on the same dusty road just feet away from where they sit now in southern Myanmar. That day was tinged with both joy and sorrow for all the time lost — ending 22 years of separation after Myint was taken to Indonesia and nearly beaten to death by a captain who refused to let him go home.
I wish this was TIL, unfortunately I already did.
The world is a much more brutal place than many in the developed world realize.
That said, you are 100% right that the palm oil industry specifically is ripe with abuse including chattel slavery. :( Please avoid palm oil if you can.
https://www.humanrightsfirst.org/blog/slavery-palm-oil-indus...
Thank to this, he was able to ask a question that was uneasy to ask, and get the answer about international waters, making it an interesting addition to the whole thread.
Here's [1] an example from a few years ago, article in Romanian but that photo of the "accommodation" provided should be enough. Eight kids were also caught up in it all.
[1] https://click.ro/actualitate/national/ei-tineau-opt-copii-ca...
Buying produced food from sources that have rule of law is more direct, but harder.
In Cambodia it's well known that people from neighboring countries (especially Vietnam and Philippines) are lured in with promises of good jobs and then have their passports taken and aren't allowed to leave. It's like a combination of slavery and ransom. Or worse up to and including organ harvesting.
It's unsustainable, and even if quotas could make it sustainable, they are all but unenforceable.
Obviously control has to be on the demand and not the supply side. Banning the sale of fish, or punitively taxing it, would be two options to make commercial fishing economically unattractive.
Compare with having to board a random sample of boats (and there'd be a lot, because a lot of them would be legitimate), check documents, check catch totals etc.
Not so much about the poor saps that crew it.
I'm not sure how credible that is for marine species, but I'm sure it's possible for some, and we don't have to completely cut fish from our diets.
In the meantime, I agree, we should be banning the sale/import of some species of fish.
The above is the combo I think would be the path to support such a raceway system. One of many crazy dreams I have is to start a trout farm based on that.
I can't seem to find any source with data past 2015.
Aquaculture is already cheaper than wild caught. In stores (judging by labels) wild caught is already becoming marketed as a "premium" product, with prices to match, which will reduce demand.
Many documentaries and stories about it.
In singapore my daughter LOVED salmon so we only bought NZ King Salmon.
I'm not going to pretend that farmed fish isn't without its problems, especially for the environment, but dangerous to eat, no.
It isn't 1 guys claim.
Not only that there's a noticble taste difference between NZ King Salmon and Norwegian Farmed Salmon.
I can only comment on the sources that you actually provide. The last time this guy was in the news was because he attacked mobile senders with an axe because of some idea about electromagnetic radiation was causing all kinds of health issues.
Ocean fishing requires very little energy input, but provides huge amounts of ready to eat food output. You can't replace that in many parts of the world. Not every place has good farm land for one, or the technological infrastructure, or even political stability.
Give you and example. Egypt went from a population of 8 million to 80 million in the last century. Do you think they can grow all that food in the desert? or do they rely on fishing and on global imports of food items...like grain from Ukraine. How will the poor do when you take out one of their sources of food. While simultaneously the price of energy is sky rocketing and global trade is under threat do to conflict and as countries begin to hoard fertilizer and food for their own populations, in anticipation of the the coming winter.
So all of those studies pointing out that most ocean fishing only happens because of subsidized fuel are wrong?
When someone can't even acknowledge reality there's really no point in engaging.
Just as I reject that our only options are to either screw over fishing communities or do nothing, I reject that our only alternatives are violence or doing nothing. I don't believe there is a single solution which can be applied in all situations that would resolve this, it would need to be worked out on a case by case basis and in cooperation with those communities. But just because it is complex and difficult does not mean it doesn't exist, and the alternative is an ecological collapse which we are unlikely to survive.
The problem is that all and I mean all of these idealogical driven agendas require tyranny because I for one do not agree with your world view.
For that reason, it doesn't seem there's a productive way for me to engage with you.
You seem unfamiliar with the mathematics of game theory or multi-agent coordination problems. The only way to avoid these traps (overfishing is literally a textbook example) is to grant regulatory authority to some overarching entity, like a government. That's not the same as tyranny.
I am tired of being robbed blind of my free will and wealth by these huge central planning bureaucracies. None of us are smart enough to have that much control.
There's always someone who disagrees with someone else's world view, that doesn't make it tyranny.
I'm surprised that there's any contention at all around the science that shows ocean degradation (historical and on-going), or indeed about the (likely) impending collapse.
In 2014, the living planet report[0] included this dire little snippet:
"Population sizes of vertebrate species—mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish—have declined by 52 percent over the last 40 years."
Fishery exhaustion around the globe is tremendously well documented, with only a tiny handful of isolated success stories where strict regulation has been able to be enforced, and localised recovery has started to occur (New Zealand, f.e.).
I'm wondering how you claim hyperbole in the people studying and reporting these things.
[0] http://assets.worldwildlife.org/publications/723/files/origi...
Consider it a metanym of for the technology that best meets the needs a given local community, using the resources which are available in that environment, while doing the least harm to the environment which is possible given the constraints. I'm not an absolutist, and my goal is to argue against a false dichotomy rather than to advocate for any particular technology.
Sustainability necessarily means taking into account the resources available in a given local environment, so the question of whether a given technology is useful or sustainable only has meaning if we flesh out that context.
We wouldn't need such dramatic changes to combat global warming if the population didn't continually exponentially expand.
Displacing fish meal is a major priority and motivation for this startup.
Comments welcome:
That wasn't real text. Just holding some space here. Real text is going to be awesome.
"but"? That's a non-sequitur. If we run out of fish there's no fish to eat.
Crab fishermen would meet First Nations people halfway to sell them the crabs that were over quota at a cheaper price since they don't have a quota, and they would sell it bootleg at the reserves.
We used to go down and buy 12 lobsters for $40 when I was a kid (20 years ago). It was the best deal ever.
When I left town, the fishermen started attacking First Nations boat because they realized they(FN) could just do it themselves and just cry colonizer oppression if they got caught. Crab supply got extremely scarce and the gov started cutting down licenses and lowering quotas. Many fishermen lost their 1-2M/y for 3 month of work businesses. There's still violence to this day, some FNs and some fishermen get killed every once in a while, and boats get burned.
Does all of Canada use that terminology now?
I think that term only bleeds over across the border into the US in the Pacific Northwest, since some tribes there overlap borders and have a special cross border ID that allows employment (some cross border tribes in New England but theyre just split in two)