[js97]

Sharks are not becoming extinct because of Shark finn soup, but are becoming extinct due to of loss of habitat. This realestate/concrete boom in the city is doing more damage than any bowl of soup will. All sides of the political spectrum are equally guilty on this one.

 

[Bogtrotter]

Sharks are a prehistoric species that have been around for millions of years, they have changed very little over that time. They are a critical keystone species which we humans, in a matter of a few generations, have managed to deplete to a small fraction of what they were, some species wiped out to the brink of extinction. Finning is barbaric, but whether finning practices are eliminated or not, sharks need protection and reduced harvesting by all methods of fishing. Any legislation that will improve their chances I will support.

Actually I'm pretty skeptical when it comes to ocean protection, easy to blur stats, hard to enforce, and politicians have generally pandered to their fishing fleets. Only when it's absolutely critical do we ever take action.

 

[AKS]

What do seals have to do with saving sharks?

I'm just saying, they're isolating one species to protect. If they think harvesting shark's fins is barbaric. What about stopping the poor seals from getting clubbed to death?

 

[Urban Shocker]

Well, Beez, there's seal flipper pie ...

( Yikes! Today's the 36th anniversary of the release of Jaws )

 

[TrickyRicky]

That is why I don't support putting these kind of items on the agenda at city hall. It is outside the mandate or purpose of this level of government. If we get all self-help on it we would describe it as outside their circle of influence. The friction or problem many people have with government bodies is their constant desire to over-reach their authorization. We may need to ban shark fin soup but the City of Toronto has no mandate to do so.

Here is where I may shock some people: I think one of the problems with the oceans is that they are not owned. This lack of ownership creates vacuums of responsibility and accountability and will likely lead to terminal exploitation of the resources. If we envision an earth of the future with over 10 billion generally middle-class people the fact is that all living organisms will only exist because they are managed effectively by us. There is no longer any such thing as "the wild".

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

Well, Beez, there's seal flipper pie ...

( Yikes! Today's the 36th anniversary of the release of Jaws )

Wow, 36 years! When I was a kid, Mom, Dad & I went to a movie at the Odeon Fairlawn (I'm sure it was Funny Lady) followed by a "special sneak preview" (back in the days when they didn't tell you or advertise the name of the movie previewing). I remember that my Dad wanted to leave - probably fearing more Streisand, my Mom and I talked him into it. Imagine the surprise of seeing Jaws come up on the screen and seeing it before anyone. Jaws was huge bragging rights to my very jealous friends. Funny Lady, not so much.
Anyway, save the oceans, they are in bad shape.
http://www.cbc.ca/strombo/show-news/plenty-of-fish-in-the-sea-not-quite.html

 

[archanfel]

There's a Chinese saying, "You are not the fish, how do you know it's happy?" Funny how people like to decide for animals what's the more "humane" way to die. What's next? Let's ban sharks from eating raw fish, that can't be good for them. Let's round up all sharks and make sure they eat cooked fish and vegetables!

 

[tkip]

Sharks are a prehistoric species that have been around for millions of years, they have changed very little over that time. They are a critical keystone species which we humans, in a matter of a few generations, have managed to deplete to a small fraction of what they were, some species wiped out to the brink of extinction. Finning is barbaric, but whether finning practices are eliminated or not, sharks need protection and reduced harvesting by all methods of fishing. Any legislation that will improve their chances I will support.

Actually I'm pretty skeptical when it comes to ocean protection, easy to blur stats, hard to enforce, and politicians have generally pandered to their fishing fleets. Only when it's absolutely critical do we ever take action.

I think this really comes down to plain overfishing by the industries. Billions of people eat fish and other exotic creatures like shark fins. Something has to give. This means fish stock across the oceans are starting to collapse. The future of oceans is pretty grim and it's all connected with human activity. We as a species, are simply going to strip most of the resources and then face collapse afterwards.

 

[archanfel]

I think this really comes down to plain overfishing by the industries. Billions of people eat fish and other exotic creatures like shark fins. Something has to give. This means fish stock across the oceans are starting to collapse. The future of oceans is pretty grim and it's all connected with human activity. We as a species, are simply going to strip most of the resources and then face collapse afterwards.

I don't think this really comes down to that at all. There are plenty of products that are made from sharks and other fishes. Why ban shark fins? Simple, because people object to the way fins are collected (whether it's a widespread practice is up for debate), not because sharks are killed. If the sharks were killed "humanely", we wouldn't have this conversation. Banning shark fins is not about protecting sharks, it's about protecting somebody's moral high horse. The very same people who don't eat shark fin anyway and will continue to consume animal products made from sharks.

 

[cdr108]

I think this really comes down to plain overfishing by the industries. Billions of people eat fish and other exotic creatures like shark fins. Something has to give. This means fish stock across the oceans are starting to collapse. The future of oceans is pretty grim and it's all connected with human activity. We as a species, are simply going to strip most of the resources and then face collapse afterwards.

i would add environmental damage caused by pollution, oil spills, toxic waste,etc have had their toll on the ocean and species

 

[jje1000]

There's a Chinese saying, "You are not the fish, how do you know it's happy?" Funny how people like to decide for animals what's the more "humane" way to die. What's next? Let's ban sharks from eating raw fish, that can't be good for them. Let's round up all sharks and make sure they eat cooked fish and vegetables!

Humane is killing the shark after cutting off its fins. Humane is not allowing the shark, finless, to sink to the bottom of the ocean being eaten alive. Believe it or not, some ways of dying are better than others!

 

[archanfel]

Humane is killing the shark after cutting off its fins. Humane is not allowing the shark, finless, to sink to the bottom of the ocean being eaten alive. Believe it or not, some ways of dying are better than others!

Are you a shark? How would you know which way to die is better for sharks? I would think being eating alive is probably a lot more nature for sharks than however the fishermen kills them while they grasp for air. And how is "killing the shark after cutting off its fins" humane? If I were a shark, I'd say letting me bite off your leg is a lot more humane than letting you cut off my fin.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

I don't think this really comes down to that at all. There are plenty of products that are made from sharks and other fishes. Why ban shark fins? Simple, because people object to the way fins are collected (whether it's a widespread practice is up for debate), not because sharks are killed. If the sharks were killed "humanely", we wouldn't have this conversation. Banning shark fins is not about protecting sharks, it's about protecting somebody's moral high horse. The very same people who don't eat shark fin anyway and will continue to consume animal products made from sharks.

Because the shark population is collapsing. No sharks, no us.

i would add environmental damage caused by pollution, oil spills, toxic waste,etc have had their toll on the ocean and species

And climate change.

 

[archanfel]

Because the shark population is collapsing. No sharks, no us.

No us, both sharks and earth will recover. Isn't that the ultimate goal?

As I said, banning shark fins would do nothing to prevent the slaughter of sharks. Sharks will continue to be killed. How would that make somebody sleep better is beyond me. If we really want to help sharks, then we should study how to raise them in cages and harvest their fins as well as other products (like liver). As long as we can make it more profitable than catching wild sharks, we will be able to save the shark population. Unfortunate, I doubt the dear councillors would accept a new and more efficient way to harvest shark fins. Because it's never about the shark population, is it?

Of course, nuke China might also work.

 

[tkip]

i would add environmental damage caused by pollution, oil spills, toxic waste,etc have had their toll on the ocean and species

True. Thus all this really comes down to is human population and human activity combined. 7 billion people hurtling towards 9 billion isn't sustainable.

There's no way around this. Too many people stripping resources everywhere and a quiet desperation to maintain the unsustainable with reality staring us in the face. We're already seeing the writing on the walls with attempts to discredit the evidence. Because if the public knew what was waiting just around the corner, there'd be panic.

Policticians can't tell the public the cold, hard facts and remain in power. People want fantasy. Not reality.

So our future looks like this: Environmental damage/collapse of eco-systems, increasing famine spreading throughout the world, increasing food costs, topsoil erosion, disappearing of fresh water, peak oil and climate change. Some are optimistic. I'm not. There is going to be the mother of "corrections" in the coming decades and it's going to be ugly.

A little off topic I know. Back to the shark fin crisis of 11'....