Life Without Sharks/ Shark Finning

[video=youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzlqXMateRE[/video]

[video=youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0qkr2cIe5c[/video]

[video=youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZVZ_jOoaWk[/video]

So, I hope these videos are disturbing for you. I really hope they are.

A lot of people don't realize that millions of sharks are killed every year for stupid reasons and purposes. Overfishing and finning are the top reasons for drops in shark populations.

So what do you think should happen? Would do you suppose might be a solution?

Those are pretty disturbing. The finning ones especially since they were not just wasteful, but more or less torturing the sharks with their method of fin removal and then by just dumping them back into the ocean without fins... And I'm no shark expert, but don't a majority of sharks need to constantly move for certain bodily processes to work properly? Regardless, it's disgusting to do that, leaving them unable to balance and swim properly, basically unable to function. Just... no words cruel. But yeah, all three videos disturbed me greatly. My son has recently become interested in sharks, saying they are his favorite sea creature and such. So, this has a bit of an impact even more as a result. There definitely needs to be something done. Whether it's stricter laws or just... something... I don't know as I'm not really sure what's already in place as far as fishing and such goes. But something has to be done that way. And they certainly need to be sure that if there are allowed seasons for certain sorts of fishing that they do NOT waste anything. But then, I've never been a fan of wasting any part of an animal that's hunted, bred, what have you, for food.

I think having a certain time of year/season for hunting - like they do with deer- would probably be the best solution other than having full protection under the law. Thing is, laws from the US don't extend everywhere so it's hard to monitor that kind of thing, which sucks even more.


I think, at least for now, a sort of "hunting season" would be the best. And the finning thing is just cruel. I feel like they should have to have shark breeding areas just for that [As cruel as that sounds] and leave the rest of the sharks alone like how they do with fish farms.

It all just sounds awful to me but I'm also extremely biased. This is what I went to school for so offering any kind of "less kill" idea still makes me squeamish.

The biggest issue is that water extends into everywhere and it's hard to say where boundaries are exactly and which location is which. You'll run into problems with borders much more so than you would on land and even on land you can run into some issues. But I think with water, it's a zillion times harder just given its vastness. But I agree there has to be some sort of season or universally agreed upon law. The cruelty with the finning is just gross. To do that and dump a creature back is just beyond the beyond and so... for lack of a better way of putting it... wasteful. Not a fan of killing sharks in general, but if you're going to use the fins, why not use the rest too? Breed them for their meat and for other purposes so that you are maximizing what you are using. That way at least it's not as horrific. And my god, don't just throw it back..... hence why it should all be used and euthenized afterward. It's the more humane thing to do in such cases as is the breeding rather than catching the sharks wild. And, again, that's if you're going to even go there....

Yeah, I'd rather have them at least kill them first before they fin them. They are still alive when they are pushed back into the ocean. It just makes me think of people cutting the legs off of tigers and dumping them in Siberia.

Oh yeah, most definitely they should be either killed or, at the very least, anesthetized prior to the finning or anything remotely like that. It's just inhumane otherwise. I mean, who wants a limb removed without anesthesia or while alive and conscious. Surely, not I. So, why would a shark?

A global economy/government is likely the only way they could be widely protected.

Probably. And we know how well *that* would work out.

There IS another way they could be protected...

If there was no market for Shark Fins, there'd be no shark finning. To the best of my knowledge that's an ingredient that is all but unique to Chinese cuisine.

Of course, this is the same culture that still buy bits and pieces from tigers, bears and gods know how many other protected species. Hurray for belief-based traditional medicine.

And of course, sharks are one of the most important parts of the oceanic food chain. Take out an apex predator like that and prey species overbreed, eat all THEIR prey species, populations crash up and down the chain... and pretty soon the oceans look...

Pretty much like they do now, actually.

I propose a simpler response. Who remembers the Hoof & Mouth disease solution?

If there are no people, there won't be any shark-finning. Or whaling. Or poaching, even. Not even of eggs.

Yes, folk. It may be controversial, but I suggest we start people-finning instead.

Soylent Green... it's what we deserve.

It's in Japanese Shark Fin Soup, actually. It's not actually necessary to the soup. It doesn't provide any flavor as it is just a thickening agent like gelatin [which there IS a synthetic variant that works JUST AS WELL] but because it's "Hard to come by because of the work put into it" it sells for 140$...A BOWL.

However, they probably also don't realize that Sharks actually contain the highest levels of mercury in their bodies/flesh because....THEY EAT ALL THE FISH.

I hope people die from eating this. <_< Would serve them right.

While the ingredient is in use in restaurants all over the world, you are in fact incorrect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shark_fin_soup
Shark fin is predominately a chinese ingredient. You are, however, absolutely right about the flavour and the thickening effect. It's used purely to add texture (and if you've ever seen the soup, it's a really repulsive looking texture too, though ymmv).

Mercury is a bioaccumulative toxin. Up here in Canuckistan we've had several fishery bans on different species over the years after mercury was found in samples. But I do not imagine that the fins of the shark will contain much mercury. That is more likely to build up in the liver and soft tissues over time. I am, however, not an expert on mercury poisoning. I just know that it's a very slow toxin with some nasty knock-on effects. Birth defects and the like. No fun.

The good news: everyone who eats shark fin soup will die.

The bad news: so will everyone else no matter how nice and environmentally friendly they are. Yay mortality.

So I'm wrong about "who makes it" I'm not gonna really care too much since the Japanese are considered responsible for the most shark finning if I recall correctly. Mercury builds upin the animal. What do you think comprises of soft tissues? Regardless of what is used, sharks contain large amounts of mercury in their bodies. And everyone knows that mercury is toxic or should. Why do you think they banned certain thermometers? Also, all fish contain levels of mercury, just depends on how much, which is why expectant mothers are told not to really eat fish.

I just didn't want one culture with horrible fishing/cuisine practices being tarred for another culture with horrible fishing/cuisine practices brush.

Mercury does concentrate in the predators, you're entirely correct. By soft tissues I meant the meat and organs (liver especially). I do not believe that Shark Fin is a serious threat for mercury poisoning (though some quick googling suggests that it's still not a good idea) but I will grant you this point.

I also wouldn't recommend eating the stuff because it's both cruel and more than a little disgusting.

Then again, so is cheese when you know how it's made. But a shortage of cows would actually be good for the environment, while a shortage of sharks is likely to speed the death of everything in the oceans.

I know for a fact that Swordfish and shark steaks (and often enough in the past tuna) have been found to contain dangerous levels of mercury whereas numerous fish lower down in the foodchain have only minute amounts of mercury or methylmercury.

Also, I apologize if I came off as a dickhead. It wasn't my intent. Reading back, my original reply looks way more dickish than I meant to be and I am sorry if I offended or annoyed you.

Mea maxima culpa.

I know that mercury does. I went to school for Marine Biology and sharks were my focus. <_<

I can get pretty heated about sharks and eh, I got a little miffed, but it's not like I'm a teenager who can't handle a little dickish behavior on the interwebs. It is what it is and I didn't really consider it in the "Wow, he's a total douche!" category.

Thing is, Asia is notorious for it's fishing activities, but Japan is the leading cause and then China. China just uses more of the ingredients while Japan exports it.

Also - Shark Fin Soup was banned in California. YAY!

Shark Fin soup has recently been banned in a number of Ontario municipalities too, including our biggest city.

I will gladly bow to your expertise on the subject, and you're right that Japan is notorious for illegal and unsustainable fishing. We've had enough problems with that on our coastlines. Still... if the Chinese weren't willing to pay a mint for something of dubious medicinal value (gods, it's like the homeopathy thing all over again) then there'd be no market for the assclowns murdering the sharks.

Let's just agree that when it comes to fishing, Asia has a crap record.

And I do try not to be a total asshole. Not always successfully, I'll grant, but we do what we can.

I can be an asshole, too, so it's no big, really.

Asia has interesting art and culture - SUCKS AT BEING HUMANE.

There.

Oh come now, let's not be too quick to cast stones... humans as a whole and as pretty much any individual group pretty much fail at the humane thing. A few examples: Spanish Inquisition (fun fact, Pope Ratzinger was head of the agency that the Inquisition morphed into when they renamed it), British Empire: invented the concentration camp, Canada (aren't we supposed to be the nice guys?) apparently conducted medical experiments involving malnutrition and vitamin supplements on non-consenting First Nations children.

As a general rule, people suck. The great folks we all meet and hang out with day to day? Those are the exceptions that prove the rule.

Has anyone suggested scalping fishermen who get caught finning sharks yet? Or would it be closer to just lop off hands and feet? At what point does poetic justice and "letting the punishment fit the crime" become wanton cruelty?

And... just because I was reading that Larry Niven story earlier... why don't cruel and unusual crimes warrant cruel and unusual punishments?

Iiiiiii may be ever so slightly off topic at this point. Don't let me threadjack.

..You really miss sarcasm sometimes, huh? <_<

Thing is, general populations of humans do suck but the whole "If there were no people-" argument is pretty void and overused. People are going to exist until some plague worse than the Black Plague kills everyone forever.

And that's enough morbidity besides what this thread is already about.

THREADJACKER. -points-

*Pulls out missile launch codes* Lets see... Program them for Taiwanese boats... And three... Two... One...

Normally, I wouldn't care, but... We need them for the ecosystem. The ocean is like... What, 70% or more of the planet's surface? That's 70% or more of our potential farming industry that those twits are completely screwing up? Even ignoring the moral or emotional aspect of it, this is just... Absurd, and needs to end. Now.