http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44770000/jpg/_44770989_boatsafp226body.jpg Sustainable fishing is more important than profit, the commission says
The European Commission has announced a full review of the EU's Common Fisheries Policy, saying the current regime fails to protect fish stocks.
The commission says that fishermen who obey the fishing rules are being penalised by the irresponsible behavior of others who flout them.
That "vicious circle" has undermined the ecological balance of the oceans, the commission says.
The EU wants to cut the size of fleets and the time fishermen spend at sea.
Overfishing threat The commission says there are still too many vessels chasing too few fish, and that ecological sustainability must take precedence over economic or social factors. In other words, just because a community has traditionally depended on fishing does not mean it can continue to do so.
The full article is to be found here http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7621618.stm
Nero only fiddled while Rome burnt, our collective governments are guilty of a much greater crime of neglect.
All most all of the worlds energy - and so thanks to photosynthesis - all of the planets potential food comes from the sun. Most of the planet is covered by water and most of this has not been built on so should be ripe for growing phytoplankton, the basis of the marine food chain. And yet this lovely graph from the FAO show how the output from the worlds primary agricultural real estate is fairing.
2763
While the commission has heeded the scientific advice yet again. The EU are unlikely to get the member states to agree to anything that is not so watered down as to fail - yet again - to protect fish stocks. This charade is repeated at the global level with no state willing to give ground that would reduce the income of their beleaguered fishermen. But it really doesn't matter how big a slice of the pie you win if the pie itself is vanishing to a crumb. We elect these people to protect our interests and they are letting the farm burn down while they argue over who owns it.
Personally I have been lucky enough to dive seamounts in both the Atlantic and Pacific where the fish had no idea what a human was but I have also dived in areas of the Mediterranean where the plastic bottles and lumps of congealed tar easily out-numbered the fish.
I think Pierre du Plessis's comments sum up the problem well.
As a frequent participant in international environmental negotiations it seems to me the real problem is that each country first and foremost looks after its own national economic interests. Since decision can only be made by consensus, the outcome is inevitably the lowest common denominator of national priorities, which must then be mediated through all the other sectors of a particular society before some of what has been agreed internationally is finally implemented on the ground at home. A unified UN environmental body with legally binding decision-making powers might help, but such a scenario is extremely unlikely to be accepted by all countries, given current international realpolitik. One possible solution is to take all major international environmental decision to the UN General Assembly, where they can be put to the vote, so that the spoilers and hold-outs can be clearly identified for who and what they are, and all the world can see what they are doing to the global environment.
Pierre du Plessis, Windhoek, Namibia
#If you have any other info about this subject , Please add it free.# |
