Completely insanse waste - Fish Fight

Oh sorry I wasn't shocked enough previously keplerb. Look, I read the Guardian and the New Internationalist, I allocate 2 hours a day to being shocked at things, and there just hasn't been room in my being shocked schedule in the last few months for being shocked at EU fisheries policy. However, i can assure you that i WAS shocked at this, I did know about it previously, and that I had it on my being shocked schedule for possibly 2012. HFW's work has just brought it forward that's all.

Wait till you see Gordon's shark finning episode (Sunday at 9pm). That is absolutely horrific!

"what surprises me is the amount of people who are shocked by shows like this. seriously, do you not know what is going on in the world or how your food is produced until a middle class tv presenter makes a show about it? "

I try to be informed about the food I eat and make informed choices. I know alot about meat production, and how the dairy industry links in with the veal industry for example (so any vegetarians who eat dairy can climb down off that high horse).

I know that cod stocks are low, and that tuna fishing is bad for alot of marine life.

What I didn't know is that whilst our fishermen are fishing for so called sustainable fish such as bass, dover sole, ling etc they are killing and dumping thousands of cod. And by the looks on some of the politicians faces they didn't know either.

fair enough midsummerfae - but given that there are still (on the Vegetarian Society's figures) 57,000,000 non-vegetarians in the UK, what about trying to change things for the better within the industry now?

this sort of stuff is why i have been veggie for years. although i do occassionally eat fish theses days as i don't eggs and need protein i limit it and and am careful about what i choose. the reality is with the stocks how they are there is no such thing as sustainable fish AT ALL. we can start eating less well known fish but that is not going to be enough to improve biodiveristy in our oceans. the truth is with the world population the size it is anything that humans do is unsustainable because of the numbers of people invovled doing it. and it is the next generations who are going to suffer.

what surprises me is the amount of people who are shocked by shows like this. seriously, do you not know what is going on in the world or how your food is produced until a middle class tv presenter makes a show about it? does this information really come as news to you? it has been going on for many years (certainly since i was a child) and not exactly secretly. how did you think they got the fish out of the sea?

The solution's very simple.

Just.don't.eat.fish.at.all

I wouldn't want the agony of being lassooed, dragged under water and drowned by a giant sea monster, so I extend the same courtesy to fish who face the reverse situation (who are likewise sentient and have just as much interest in continuing and enjoying their existence as humans, albeit in their own fishy way). It's just an example of the age old golden rule, one should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself. As it is scientifically proven fish feel pain and suffering, and I seek to avoid my own pain and suffering, therefore I shouldn't inflict it on others (or pay others to do this on my behalf).

It doesn't matter that fish aren't as cute/intelligent as some land animals; it would be morally wrong to suggest that is more acceptable to torture an unattractive human than a cute one, would it not? The only morally relevant criteria here is sentience.

There's no reason to eat fish at all, we can meet all our nutrtional needs with a plant based diet. Protein is abundant as long as you're eating sufficient calories; B12 is found in marmite type spreads, fortified plant milks and supplements; omega 3's are found in walnuts and flax and eating a diet low in refined/ processed fats. It's not nutritionally necessary.

Just because it feels pleasurable to the taste buds doesn't make it right. Torturing kittens may feel awesome to the perpetrator, who invokes the hedonisic argument, "well, it feels good to me, therefore there's nothing wrong with it". Most people would agree that idea holds no weight and is repugnant.

Therefore, if it's not nutritionally necessary to eat fish or land animals, doesn't the same argument hold?

Still wanting to act on this.

I remember a thread about fish fingers a few months ago on here (what exciting lives we lead). What got me was the number of posters who said 'i always look for cod, only the best for my children'. of course they're not wrong to want good food for their families, but somehow, whether through manufacturers' ads for the last few decades or some other way, cod was sold to us as the only pure, good, reliable fish.

i have read about people who won't eat mackerel because it is a carnivore. I have to say that I am not always in the mood for mackerel, but then nobody is always in the mood for anything.

Mmmm - BBQ fish - best when on holiday with lots of sun, cold beer / wine and near a beach....

I'm a fairly rubbish cook, but the great thing about fish is it really benefits from keeping things as simple as possible. The best fish dish I had last year was a barbecued trout (OK not the perfect recipe for this year!) - bought the fish, squeezed some lemon juice over it and wrapped it in foil, put it on a hot barbecue for something like 2 mins each side.

Think lots of people are 'scared' of fish - the bones - head - guts etc. Have you watched some of the Jamie fish suppers? Also HFW did a River Cottage Prog a while back about Fish - was based in Exeter with some Students - DS1 went there and that was interesting too.

Fishmongers - even the supermarket ones should be able to do all the prep for you and make the fillets so you don't have to tackle those to begin with.

The main thing to me is not to overcook and all the supermarket stuff have labels which way overcooks fish.

I watched last night and tried to sign up but the website must have been too busy.
I have always really wanted to know how to handle and cook fish properly. It may sound silly but I would like to know how to eat fish properly.
Finding it shocking, interesting, educating and inspiring.

Bump over 1/4 million now - wonder if our local Chinese Chippy will do the mackeral?

More than 240,000 people have now signed up to the campaign. I guess once it gets to a million they won't be able to ignore it. Sign up here

"Half of all fish caught in the north sea are thrown back overboard dead."

Early morning bump

This is insane- To think that people starve to death in parts of the world, and in others they throw food away... This is so unethical and immoral, it's shocking it's legal. And the thing is, it's by no means the first time EU's food production regulations encourages waste (as in the so-called butter mountains in the 90's).

You can just imagine these smug suited politicians in Brussels making this sort of decisions over a cappuccino and a croissant, whilst having NO idea what they are talking about...

that's really interesting Hogsback.

I suppose an advantage of 2 is that the less fish is around, the less will be caught, and the more is around the more will be caught, so the quantity caught will relate directly to recovery/continued decline of stocks.

A system where crews might be tempted to break the law by dumping is still nothing like as bad as a system where crews are forced to dump....

There are several alternatives to the current system, all better (although that isn't hard):

1. Allow an open market on quotas between crews - a cap and trade system. Say you end up over-quota on cod, you simply buy the right amount of quota from another crew that is under-quota. The price that you pay for the quota is determined by whatever the quota market sets.

1. Scrap quotas all together and simply limit days at sea.

1. Allow landing of over quota fish, but not allowed to sell it - it is bought for a nominal sum by an agency that then sells it on the open market and ploughs the profits back into marine conversation.

The problem with 2 and 3 is that it may still cause dumping on multi-day trips as crews may be tempted to free up hold space for species that they can turn a profit on.

I don't think quotas per se are the problem anyway. You can have quotas without bycatch being thrown away.

Mackereltaitai - it is so hard to get the right stuff isn't it? I had been buying Princes tuna because of what it said on the tin....

OK, so a replacement CFP is planned for 2012. Not sure if consultation is still going on.

I see that the CFP as it stands now sets quotas for countries, that's how it works (hence the comment from Nigel Farage's office). In 2009, the EU Fisheries minister called for replacement of catch quotas by effort quotas (days at sea). I wonder if that had any effect?

Hmm, response received from Nigel Farage's office (and very speedy). I won't quote it all here as it was a communication to me and not for general publication (though it was fairly general) but the person who wrote it said 'you can't have the CFP without quotas'.

Why would that be? Surely the policy can be what the EU decides it can be?

I suppose I need to read the CFP now [boggles].

No nothing is going to happen overnight. But this has been an issue for a long time - buying seafood has become incredibly tricky. I basically buy tinned mackerel (which is dodgy because IIRC there's only one area of the channel where mackerel can be guaranteed to be sustainably fished, and I'm sure the tinned stuff isn't from there), anchovies (which IIRC is dodgy because they're getting fished out too) non-cod fish fingers (which are presumably almost as dodgy but at least they can put any useable white fish into them) and Waitrose Allegedly Responsible Farmed Salmon bits (dodgy because farmed). No prawns any more (occasional shrimps if they are British), no tuna, etc etc.

It feels hopeless to do all this, when I love fish and would eat more of it if I could, when there is no overall wave of interest. But now, thanks to HFW and the beeb, there's a wave of interest and it's worth giving the authorities a shove.

I really support the idea of an EU wide approach to fishing. up to us to try and make it a positive one.

thank you for this Sparkle, it's really interesting.
what about farmed cod? (not that we often see it).

Nothing is going to change overnight as its linked to the EU and whilst I broadly agree with it self interest just makes a mess of it all.

Surely if the fisherman fish they will catch some cod no matter what - isn't that one of the issues highlighted - you can't sleact a net that only catches one type of fish at a time.

Really need to understand at leats what is the actual total catch. One problem I agree is how do you determine whats left!

Consumers need to do more and actually ask for different types - some actually taste better and are often cheaper. Wondering sometimes why people still pay more and more for something that can relatively easily be replaced? Just a habit, poor knowledge, ???

It will certainly add to the general weight of opinion, but the road to reform is a long one, and campaigns like this do not, cannot, change things alone. It's part of an ongoing process. What it might do is raise the heat within Defra for a few months, putting increased pressure on ministers (and hence the policy and analytical branches) to produce papers, eveidence, reports, etc., but it won't result in the reform of the CFP by this time next year, no.

As for stocks, my personal opinion is that cod stocks in particular are probably fucked anyway, so as long as any cod take at all is allowed then you should look to your own consience as to whether to eat it or not. I certainly wouldn't judge anyone who did, and we do buy cod and haddock here once a month or so.

so what is your view of this campaign Sparkle? Do you think it is going to do any good? Or is it not going to make any difference whether Hugh gets 100 000 signatures or 1 million because everyone from this country already wants to change it and the rest of Europe doesn't?