Leave the Q & A panel all your hard questions here!
MC: Anna Fung
Q&A Team (+ general areas of specialty; please edit/elaborate if necessary)
International: Alex J, Alex P
MPAs: Claudia
Aquaculture: David
Climate: Isaac, Sean
Social: Sivakami, Alex J, Eva
Education: Alex P, Alex J
Technology: Adam, Denys
Environment/ Coastal: Emily, Todd
Management: Todd, Eva, Adam
Biology/ Fish Dynamics: Todd, Sivakami
Potential questions that people might ask
example: This is my question. (Alex)
Response:
This is my response (the respondent)
How long does it take for cotton threads to biodegrade?
You contend that sustainable business is "in the long run more effective, more profitable, and more competitive." This is a really optimistic notion. In practice, it is the short-term profit that truly motivates mainstream businesses...If one company is "sustainable," then they will just be outcompeted by others. Long-term profitability is immaterial in the light of short-term competitiveness. How do you reconcile the contradiction?
What incentives do countries have to sign?
would countries actually be willing to give up trade rights with other countries that refuse to sign this treaty? Australia, despite its protests against Japan's whaling, refuse to place an economic sanction. It seems like the only people willing to risk taking action are radical environmental groups like Greenpeace.
how are you going to prosecute countries that haven't signed?
how are you going to regulate non-signatories and prevent them from entering MPAs?
Japan just violated a bunch of international regulations and went ahead with their whale hunt, and nobody's stopping them. What keeps signatories from violating our treaty?
Response: The Japanese found a loophole in the international regulations that permitted countries to kill marine animals for research purposes. If we're going to pass this treaty, it would need to be reviewed and expanded by a number of experts, hopefully removing any loopholes that would allow countries to bypass laws and get away with it.
How long will it take to pass this treaty, and how long will it take for it to have an effect? Will it be soon enough to save the fish stocks?
How long will it take to pass an international tax? what if it doesn't work? how long will it take to remove the tax?
But sometimes for certain fisheries, Individual Transfer Quotas DO work. Why does it work in some fisheries and not others? If they're doing some good in certain fisheries, why eliminate them altogether?
"When fisheries in a given locale fail to improve, those funds are reallocated to
others that are improving" - This is a quote from your website. What happens if I
abide by all the so called sustainable fishing practices that you say. What happens if
my entire town does but the fish population continues to decline because of un known
reasons, or a storm, or people from a different area coming in to fish in our area. Are
you just going to leave us and say " you can't do this anymore" and you're just
going to totally decimate the towns economy, potentially the entire area's economy,
which puts more of a toll on the governments social services? What gives you the right
to tell me that I can't do what my family has been doing for generations?
where specifically are your MPA's
Why 10% for MPA's
What specific species or unique ecosystem are you targeting?
Where will island nations get their protein source? You say reduction of fishing will
specifically effect island nations and you say that you will help them with farming, but
that is not an adequate source of protein.
You appear to do a case study of china, but yet have no specific tailoring towards
china, which has the largest population of any one country in the world and is rapidly
industrializing. Why should China ratify your treaty specifically? Will your overall
plan work if key countries like China, Japan and the US do not ratify the treaty? Why
haven't you tailored a portion of your plan to china considering that it has such an
influence on the global ecosystem and economy?
You took a survey of class mates and almost no one said that they would stop eating fish
if they already ate it. And all of you are not so desperate for protein, and fish is a
more expensive and more difficult option while you are here on the MIT campus, most
likely. Why would the vast majority of people in the world know almost nothing about
the extent of the problem which you spent a semester learning about stop eating fish
when even you won't? Do you think the majority of people are better ethically than
you? Do you think they are smarter than you?
The goal of our solution is to show the people the vastness of the problem, and we feel that the international scope of our problem can bring about an outcry like the outcry that was generated for global warming. That being said, our solution does not only rely on education. In the beginning, we are recommending individual transfer quotas, which limit the amount of fish that will be available. Thus, less people will be able to consume fish because the supply of fish will be decreased. Afterwards, when the international tax has come into effect, the disparity in prices will convince people to eat fish which are taxed less heavily, and as these fish are at more sustainable levels than their counterparts, this will be beneficial to stopping the problem of overfishing as well.
You say the public should be educated in a manner similar to the film an inconvenient
truth? Do you have a figurehead in mind as prominent as Al Gore to back your case,
because you would need one? Do you know of the effectiveness of an inconvenient truth
the majority of Americans? To the majority of Europeans? To the majority of the world?
What percentage of people actually buys fair trade food? What percentage of people
actually buys organic food? What percentage of the average person's diet is organic or
free trade food?
Your solution doesn't actually say anything new, and people have been trying to make
fishing sustainable for obvious reasons for many years? Is it going to work this time
just because you designed it? Why will your solution work when an equivalent one
doesn't work now?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Most farmed marine fish and shrimp species are carnivorous and are fed fishmeal and
fish oil derived from fish caught from the wild. It is estimated that up to 22kg of
wild-caught fish is needed to produce just 1kg of farmed tuna and 4kg of wild-caught
fish is needed to produce 1kg of farmed salmon and up to 2kg of wild-caught fish is
needed to produce 1kg of farmed marine shrimp. Since one-third of the world's fish
catch is used to produce fishmeal and fish oil, the aquaculture industry uses most of
the world's fish oil fishmeal, with salmon farming alone using over half the global
production of fish oil. How does aquaculture relieve pressure on the marine environment
when in fact it can be argued that it is actually contributing to overfishing?
Could you please describe the effort that NOAA office of sustainable Fisheries is
undertaking?
What is the Sustainable Fisheries Act, and how does it compare to your plan?
Are you familiar with the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) and their approval of
sustainable fisheries? How does that compare to your plan?
1. The fish populations clearly aren't in danger. Fish have babies and make
more fish. Whenever I go out fishing, there are always plenty of fish. I
could never catch enough fish to wipe them all out. Why are you putting so
many regulations on me? I have a family that I can't feed with all of your
restrictions. There is no problem; you just want to put me out of the job.
I've been fishing all of my life, and I am not going to stop now.
2. I noticed that your MPA's will only cover 10% of the ocean. How are you
going to regulate this? Is 10% even enough? It seems like a low figure.
How are you breaking them up? Who is responsible for managing these
locations and dictating where they will go? Many countries won't be willing block off
part of their fishing water. What are you going to do about it?
3. If it is bad for aquaculture fish to get into the wild because they are
genetically modified, why should we eat these fish? I don't eat GM
vegetables, there is no way that I am going to eat GM fish.
You talk a lot about size and weight quotas. How exactly will these change if the fish
populations adapt and generally become smaller in size?
Given the state of the world today with all the limitations on resources. Lots of fear
of wars over valuable resources like oil and terrorism to disrupt order in the civilized
world. How will your international organization to govern fishing resolve disputes
between nations over fishing rights and practices?
1. So...it seems to me that everything you've mentioned in your solution has already
been tried before. These are all standard regulations and suggestions from various
organizations from around the world. Which parts of the solution are origina? Where are
you new ideas?
2. Part of your plan involves getting fishermen to quit their jobs and to get retrained
for other jobs, such as helping scientists on their boats. How would you feel if someone
told you you had to change jobs? Helping count fish isn't the same as owning your own
fishing boat and fishing for profit--how can your plan ever be welcomed by such
fishermen?
3. You are aiming for the minimum in designing your MPAs. Why? Why not start out with a
larger number than 10%, to give you bargaining room? Choosing 10% is risky. Why not
start with something safer?
4. Where can I see a map of your MPAs? HOw are you taking existing marine protected
zones into account?
5. Your plan seems very optimistic. You expect that everyone will abide by the rules.
Unfortunately the real world isn't like that. How do you plan to deal with corruption?
You can't catch everyone who breaks your rules...but they will all have an impact on the
outcome of your plans.
6. Recently, a spokesman from the IPCC just said that even if carbon emissions were to
stop completely, we will still see significant global warming and faster rates of arctic
ice melt than expected. How will such extreme situations change your solution? How will
it impact the relationship between countries as fish habitat changes?
h5 Where exactly will you place the marine protected areas, and why?
h5 Fish migrate over long distances. Fishermen are going to be waiting right outside to
catch them all. What are you going to do about it?
h5 You mention protecting fish species that are used for food as well as those that are not
used for food. Where will your priority be?
h5 How do you choose which fish to protect and which not to protect?
h5 Global warming will change many environments in which fish live. How do you plan to deal
with this?
h5 More specifically: Fish migrate because of global warming: will your marine reserves
reflect this?
h5 How will the gene pool of fish change when using aquaculture? How is this going to
affect the global ecosystem?
h5 How will you sustainably feed the fish you use for aquaculture?
h5 Will you have separate policies for domestic and international fishing fleets? Will the
countries own fishermen have an advantage in where they are allowed to fish?
h5 How do you plan to maintain the "fisherman's culture"? Is it important? How are you going to dispose of all the fishing equipment and boats that will be taken
out of circulation thanks to your plan?
h5 What is the effect of the depletion of stocks on the population genetics of fish? What's going to happen when the population rebounds?
h5 Are there any new ideas in your solution? How do you expect your solution to work if
these ideas are already being tried?
h5 What Is your proposed plan going to do to protect the ecosystem as a whole?
h5 You propose using antibiotics for aquaculture. What are you going to do about antibiotic
resistance in fish? What about superbugs? Widespread use of antibiotics leads to the
formation of antibiotic- resistant bacteria. what would you do to get rid of those? What
if they escape into the wild? You are going to kill the entire fish population!
h5 The issues surrounding exploitation of the Menhaden in Chesapeake Bay are typical of
many fisheries. Menhaden are regarded as inedible, are low in the food chain yet fill
an important nice at low tropic levels. What is your opinion of the way this fishery is
being handled?
h5 Do you have a proposed solution to the invasive species you talk about in your website?
h5 If you are protecting only a few species, like you are, you are not protecting the
ecosystem. You'll end up having too many members of a few species and destroy the
balance of the ecosystem and the food chain. How are you going to deal with this?
h5 You are only talking about how to implement your plan in china. Why china? Why not
Bangladesh? Or Chile? Or Spain? Your plan only seems to work in countries with money.
How would you implement your solution in third world country? In small countries in
Africa?
h5 How are you going to enforce your solution? You have no real proposal.
h5 What are you going to do about factory ships? What about illegal factory ships? Illegal
shark fishing, illegal whale fishing?
h5 What are you going to do about cultures that say that they should be allowed to fish
certain species for cultural reasons? How does this affect your implementation? Is it
fair to allow them?
h5 In Nova Scotia, there is a black market for cod, which is not allowed to be fished
there. Are you going to deal with that?
h5 Non-member countries are affected by the tax because they are banned from trading with
the member countries. But is that really enough incentive to join? They can just trade
with other non-member countries. Or not trade at all, and take all the fish for
themselves.
h5 What about other cultural fishing practices?
h5 You advocate installing aerated tank on fishing boats to put bycatch in. How feasible is
this actually? How much would that cost? Won't that still harm the fish?
h5 "Establishing MPA's: There are other alternatives to national legislation. For instance,
note that the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands National Monument was established by an
executive order of the president. This example hints at a more efficient method for
establishing marine sanctuaries." - from the website. Yes, it may be more efficient,
but it sort of hints at dictatorship
h5 You are advocating marine reserves of a small size. Will small patchy marine reserves
really work to boost the health of the ecosystem as a whole?
h5 There are mathematical methods of determining the best size and shape for ecosystem
protected areas. Did you look at this? Do you have a proposed shape?
h5 How far away are your MPAs going to be from the shore? What are the problems of having
them very close to shore?
h5 You propose tourism in MPAs. What negative effects could tourists have in protected
areas? Is it worth it?