A new agreement signed this week is a milestone in the fight to preserve the ecosystems of the oceans
An agreement, which was signed this week by 21 countries in the South Pacific Ocean, limits fishing with the help of the trawl net, fishing designed to capture the sea bottom fish found far from the coast.
In this fishing method, huge nets sweep the bottom of the seas, thus destroying habitats and injuring many animals that are not caught in the net.
Half of the "spoil" caught in the net is thrown back into the water or dumped on the beach because it has no economic value. In many cases, passive fishing causes the extinction of animal species.
According to the data of the World Food Organization, the FAO, the populations of two thirds of the fish species in demand in the world have already been significantly damaged, and these species may become extinct if there is no rapid change in the fishing policy in the world.
Therefore, the agreement, which will enter into force in September, will apply to about a quarter of the world's oceans and will declare certain areas as prohibited and allow fishing in other areas but will limit it and subject it to supervision.
Among the signatories of the agreement are the United States, China, France and Russia. The main weak point of the agreement is that it is not binding but is based on the good will of the signatory countries. Let's hope for the best.
By the middle of the century there will be no fish in the sea
7 תגובות
Even in Israel the situation is on the face.
An article on trawl fishing:
saveourfishingproject.net/heb/24
Father, you are very wrong here:
"Raising animals for meat, milk and eggs also increases the emission of carbon dioxide - the main greenhouse gas - due to the enormous amount of energy required to heat and cool chicken coops, apartments and barns, to transport food and water, to dispose of waste, to slaughter animals, to process them into food products , and store them in a refrigerator. The amount of fossil fuels required to produce one calorie of animal protein is 10 times greater than that required to produce one calorie of plant protein, and therefore also results in the emission of a 10 times greater amount of carbon dioxide. Furthermore, the amount of energy that chicken meat provides to a person The same need constitutes 14% of the electrical energy invested in its production, while corn and soybean crops produce almost seven and six times, respectively, the amount of energy invested in their production.
Raising and processing animals for food wastes not only energy, but also huge amounts of water. In order to produce one kilogram of beef, 20 liters of water are needed - 50 times more than the amount of water used to produce one kilogram of wheat, and producing one kilogram of protein from beef requires 15 times more water than producing the same amount of vegetable protein."
of:
http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasite/spages/823721.html
and also:
"Every year around 25 billion tons of fertile soil are lost in the world, until in recent years the soil in the world has lost about 30% of its effectiveness for agricultural purposes. 850 million people live on land at risk of desertification, and more than 230 million are in immediate danger of starvation with the destruction of the soil Due to desertification. The most damaged areas are cattle grazing areas. The cattle eat the vegetation (about 400 kg per month per animal), consume a lot of water, compress the soil, expose it to wind and water erosion, and destroy organisms that stabilize and enrich it again. 60% of the world's grazing land has been damaged by overgrazing in the last half century...
"Deforestation. To provide pastures for the meat industry, rainforests are cut down in America and the Far East. In the last 25 years, almost half of the tropical forests of Central America have been destroyed, most of them to provide pastures. But the soil of the rainforests is not suitable for grazing. It is often worn out within 3-8 years, and the farmers continue to cut down new pastures. Cutting down the rainforest is so cheap that it is not profitable to restore depleted areas. The trees that are cut down are not sold but set on fire. The ecological cost of this practice is enormous: ten square kilometers of forest Rain contains, approximately, 1,500 species of plants, 750 species of trees, 125 species of mammals, 400 species of birds, 100 species of reptiles, 60 species of amphibians and 150 species of butterflies"
of:
http://www.anonymous.org.il/eco.htm
As you can imagine, vegetarianism and veganism are also ethical on the ecological level.
Maybe you too will devote an article to the ecological benefits of vegetables?
Not true, what about the open spaces you would have to give up to increase plant food production? Plant foods provide much fewer calories per volume than animal foods?
It is possible, in fact anyone can, to simply stop eating fish.
Vegetarianism and veganism, beyond the basic ideology, have a huge contribution to ecology.
If you want to save the world, think about it this way, shall we fly to another planet and try a drop of our blood in a puddle there, and when we return there after a billion years, we will have to explain what will develop, why is it like this, to live with love, not war, will we have a difficult or easy task
Since the 2 world wars it has become clear that the fishing in the oceans is greatly affected by fishing. During the wars there was not so much fishing and the amount of fish was dramatically affected by this. This was contrary to what was accepted at the time because there would always be fish in the sea in an unending amount. It turns out not. In my opinion, one of the things that can be done is to fertilize blue deserts - those oligotrophic areas in the sea. I'm not talking about oligotrophic days like the Gulf of Eilat, where fertilization will destroy the entire ecosystem. I'm talking about blue deserts in places far from the coast, where the amount of algae is very small and therefore also all the other higher tropical levels. Algae will bring shrimp and the shrimp will bring fish. How to fertilize and how much to fertilize and how to do it with as little damage to the ocean floor as possible? This is another question. I think today it is generally accepted that the oceans are poor in available iron. Maybe there is a solution.
How sad that nothing can be done about it