[TrickyRicky]

Eug, I totally agree regarding this as being an inappropriate issue for council

On the other hand I personally will not eat shark fin soup on principle. That said my contribution will not impact their fate.

I hate to be a determinist on this issue but don't doubt for a second that most shark species will be extinct within our lifetime. I would suspect 90 percent of all living organisms on this planet will be relegated to extinction in all but zoo / aquarium environments in the lifetime of a child born today. That is the hard truth.

 

[Eug]

Indeed. Forget personal pet projects, our Councillors and Mayor should be concerned about more pressing items like getting an NFL Team. Oh wait...

I'm not necessarily a supporter specifically of the NFL idea either (although I wouldn't oppose a sound plan for getting one), but IMO support for sports teams should be concerns of the mayor and councillors, and is part of their mandate. eg. Location and funding for sports venues and tourism, etc. as well as more mundane things such as taxes and traffic control, etc.

Eug, I totally agree regarding this as being an inappropriate issue for council

On the other hand I personally will not eat shark fin soup on principle. That said my contribution will not impact their fate.

I hate to be a determinist on this issue but don't doubt for a second that most shark species will be extinct within our lifetime. I would suspect 90 percent of all living organisms on this planet will be relegated to extinction in all but zoo / aquarium environments in the lifetime of a child born today. That is the hard truth.

I don't agree with you, but your approach is fair enough.

 

[Admiral Beez]

He got rid of coffee and sammiches!

WTF is a sammich? Reminds me of www.engrish.com . Back to Berlitz for you.

If folks harvested and consumed the entire fish then at least it would be not as wasteful, but to cut off a shark's fins and they toss it over the side is barbaric to me. The same goes for bear gal bladders, where to feed the Chinese market for these "traditional" products people kill bears, remove the bladders and leave the bear to rot. I'm not suggesting in anyway that North American or Western culture is better, and we definitely have our own nasty, destructive, immoral and wasteful practices, many of them considered "cultural" like bull fighting for example, but this is a nasty part of Chinese culture I do not like at all.

One thing we must remember is that unless Chinese people themselves stop eating shark fin it won't matter what the law says. Go to Pacific Mall and you'll see merchants and customers totally disregarding Canadian and international copyright and trademark law by selling knock offs and copies of videos, clothing, etc. Go to China and you'll see ivory for sale in the markets, as I did in Hong Kong in 2001 and 2005 (they try to sell it as mammoth not elephant sourced). Unless Chinese people change, the laws will be meaningless.

Looking on as a European Westerner, and thus very much from the outside, I imagine much of the thought from the Chinese community on this shark fin issue is that there isn't a problem, same as in Japan on whaling. But times can change, and I hope we can save sharks.

 

[Eug]

WTF is a sammich? Reminds me of www.engrish.com . Back to Berlitz for you.

sammich

Welcome to the internet.

If folks harvested and consumed the entire fish then at least it would be not as wasteful

They do harvest more than just the fins actually, as for example shark cartilage is a common food supplement in North America and Europe... but the councillors made no mention of wanting to ban that.

but to cut off a shark's fins and they toss it over the side is barbaric to me.

As I found from my short research after I started this thread (which seems to be more research than those councillors did), CITES members also consider such live finning barbaric, but the vast majority of shark fins are not harvested this way. Many countries already ban this practice of live finning, for good reason, but do not ban shark fins collected by conventional means.

BTW, to present a balanced picture... CITES currently lists 3 species of shark which are protected in their Appendix II (not Appendix I). Some think that list should be 8 in Appendix II, but CITES does not agree.

Appendix I includes species threatened with extinction. Trade in specimens of these species is permitted only in exceptional circumstances.

Appendix II includes species not necessarily threatened with extinction, but in which trade must be controlled in order to avoid utilization incompatible with their survival.

 

[TrickyRicky]

Admiral, the chinese do philosophically share a strong sense for environmental protection. It's just that universally we humans don't prioritize this above other pursuits such as the desire for status and dominance. European westerners do seem to be ahead of the curve with respect to organizing last-ditched efforts to perserve what is left of the earth's natural assets; however, they are also the worst by far offenders. Western Europe itself is one of the most biologically and environmentally degraded regions on earth. Viewed in context consider how bizarre it is for say, german or english people who we would consider on the face to be environmentally sensitive, to tramp around the world preaching environmental policy when their own countries have basically zero natural assets and intact ecosystems.

 

[Eug]

The Germans are world leaders in solar tech for example. They are also leaders in wind power. I think the two combined make up for roughly 10% of Germany's power supply.

 

[Admiral Beez]

The Germans are world leaders in solar tech for example.

I don't follow. For example of what?

 

[gristle]

My argument is that Toronto City Hall is bloated enough already as it is. I don't think it's the right practice to encourage pet projects of specific individuals when they really aren't part of the mandate of the city.

I encourage those councillors to pursue this... on their own time with the appropriate authorities. I'd rather see the Canadian Food Inspection Agency handle this, and if they deem a ban as appropriate, then I would support it.

Ban dihydrogen monoxide!

I'm not exactly sure how you draw a relationship between an effort to ban a product and your personal perception of whether city hall is "bloated." That's not an argument.

That being said, it is impossible for council to effectively "ban" an item like this. They can make a political statement by condemning the practices in which fins are acquired and consumed, but that is pretty much it. Not everyone has to agree.

 

[gristle]

The Germans are world leaders in solar tech for example. They are also leaders in wind power. I think the two combined make up for roughly 10% of Germany's power supply.

Only good during daylight and when the wind blows. Otherwise, Germans consume energy from imported natural gas from Russia, a whole bunch of new coal-fired power plants and imported nuclear energy from France.

 

[TrickyRicky]

"The Germans are world leaders in solar tech for example. They are also leaders in wind power."

But that's kind of my point Eug. Germans are considered, and rightfully so, leaders in environmental technology and policy. But the reality is they aren't the least bit environmentally sustainable. Our concept of environmentalism is a human contruct primarily concerned with the same old currencies of status and dominance. Amazonian tribesman are environmentally sustainable, German environmentalists are using the currency of environmental concern to establish themselves as high status and dominant.

So while the consumption of shark fin may seem barbaric to some, the chinese are not really any more or less environmentally barbaric as ourselves. Eating shark fins is just human. That is why we have already wiped out 90% of the oceans shark population and we won't stop until a given species is pushed to the brink of extinction. At that point we will realize we can't get what we don't have and it will prompt us to save the last remaining population, but just barely.

Again I hate to sound pessimistic but any honest critical examination of human behaviour makes me absolutely 100 percent certain that 90 percent of the worlds fish, bird, mammal, amphibian and reptile populations will be rendered functionally (if not absolutely) extinct in the wild in the lifetime of a child born today.

 

[EnviroTO]

Again I hate to sound pessimistic but any honest critical examination of human behaviour makes me absolutely 100 percent certain that 90 percent of the worlds fish, bird, mammal, amphibian and reptile populations will be rendered functionally (if not absolutely) extinct in the wild in the lifetime of a child born today.

I'll one up you. The animals and plants that remain will be patented and if seeds from a plan land on your property and grow you will be sent a bill from Agricorp, and if you go recreational fishing you will be sent a bill from Agricorp.

 

[GenerationW]

Again I hate to sound pessimistic but any honest critical examination of human behaviour makes me absolutely 100 percent certain that 90 percent of the worlds fish, bird, mammal, amphibian and reptile populations will be rendered functionally (if not absolutely) extinct in the wild in the lifetime of a child born today.

I thought large numbers of species continually becoming extinct throughout history is just a fact of nature regardless of human behaviour. Any biology experts here?

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

Documentaries on environmental issues are often very one-sided, so I wouldn't necessarily just believe that one point of view. That's like suggesting only Michael Moore's documentaries are what we should watch to get a good picture of all the topics he likes to talk about. I like some of Michael Moore's documentaries, but I definitely watch them with a huge grain of salt. I will also watch Sharkwater with a big grain of salt... or chicken stock as it were.

That's why I also mentioned Shark Week on Discovery Channel, they play lots of shows about sharks including supporting "Shark Water's" claims. Or just hit the 'net.

That's a really dumb argument, quite frankly. The point of shark fin is the texture.

Right. Texture that has a gelatinous bulk which could surely be replicated by using other ingredients.

I thought large numbers of species continually becoming extinct throughout history is just a fact of nature regardless of human behaviour. Any biology experts here?

I am not a biologist but we're talking about sharks here, top of the food chain in the oceans - top-level predators. Sharks have been roaming the seas for nearly half a billion years. Removing sharks from the ocean ecosystem could be compared to removing the foundation from a building. Total collapse. Over the next several years some species of shark could become extinct, many populations have fallen by over 90% in the past decade as demand for shark fin has risen so dramatically, and sharks aren't fast breeders.

 

[AKS]

If they are so worried about Shark being killed. Why aren't they fighting against Seal Clubbing in Canada as well? Isn't that just as worse? Or are Seals less important than Sharks?

 

[Admiral Beez]

If they are so worried about Shark being killed. Why aren't they fighting against Seal Clubbing in Canada as well?

What do seals have to do with saving sharks?