ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ธ.ค. 2024
- There’s no doubt that fish is a great source of protein in one’s diet. But the debate about whether fish farming or commercial fishing is worse for the environment continues and, as you might suspect, there isn’t a straightforward answer.
Hosted by: Hank Green
SciShow is on TikTok! Check us out at / scishow
----------
Support SciShow by becoming a patron on Patreon: / scishow
----------
Huge thanks go to the following Patreon supporters for helping us keep SciShow free for everyone forever:
Alisa Sherbow, Silas Emrys, Chris Peters, Adam Brainard, Dr. Melvin Sanicas, Melida Williams, Jeremy Mysliwiec, charles george, Tom Mosner, Christopher R Boucher, Alex Hackman, Piya Shedden, GrowingViolet, Nazara, Matt Curls, Ash, Eric Jensen, Jason A Saslow, Kevin Bealer, Sam Lutfi, James Knight, Christoph Schwanke, Bryan Cloer, Jeffrey Mckishen
----------
Looking for SciShow elsewhere on the internet?
SciShow Tangents Podcast: www.scishowtang...
Facebook: / scishow
Twitter: / scishow
Instagram: / thescishow
----------
Sources:
www.worldwildl...
www.un.org/dev...
phys.org/news/...
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
sustainablefis...
www.pnas.org/c...
www.fao.org/3/i...
www.washington...
oceana.org/blo...
www.seafoodwat...
www.pnas.org/c...
www.fao.org/3/c...
nmssanctuaries...
www.pnas.org/c...
www.globalseaf...
www.nature.org...
www.seafoodwat...
www.npr.org/se...
www.npr.org/se...
www.npr.org/20...
esajournals.on...
www.scientific...
www.npr.org/se...
www.asc-aqua.org/
Images:
www.istockphot...
www.storyblock...
www.storyblock...
www.shuttersto...
www.storyblock...
www.shuttersto...
commons.wikime...
www.shuttersto...
www.usgs.gov/m...
commons.wikime...
commons.wikime...
www.storyblock...
www.storyblock...
www.storyblock...
www.storyblock...
www.flickr.com...
www.flickr.com...
www.storyblock...
www.storyblock...
There is one topic that Hank forgot. 70% of the garbage plastic patch in our ocean areold fishing implements (nets, buoy etc) so fishing has some really serious consequence for our environment as most of this plastic end up in our food.
AND old fisher nets are a worse problem then any other plastic waste could ever be, when they turn into “ghost nets“
Most ocean trash and toxins come from the rivers and shores of countries like china. In india and indonesia you can literally walk on the rivers as they are more garbage than water
Exactly. Restricting literally all other sources combined by 90%, a crazy goal, wouldn't even reduce it by a third. Fishing just has to change. There's literally no other option at this point.
Tell it to the 3rd world.
arounf 80% of all plastic in the ocean comes from land, 20% comes from maritime sources and only around half of that comes from fishing, the statistic you mention is a missrepresentation that was very popular on media of a paper about the GPGP, that paper found that of the floating megaplastics fishing gear was a huge proportion (which is a problem, don't get me wrong, they are literally designed to trap fauna), but most of the GPGP are not floating megaplastics but macro and microplastics that come from land.
You forgot to mention that one of the biggest reasons wild fish populations are being overfished is to use the fish as fodder. Not only for the salmon, that you mentioned briefly, but for chickens, pigs and other animals. Most fish where I live, Sweden, isn't caught for direct human consumption. We keep overfishing wild populations to eat other food.
the more steps in the food chain, the less energy and resource efficient it is, compare humans eating plants directly vs humans eating cows eating fish eating zooplankton earing algae
edit, I guess if they're feeding them fish for nutrients rather than energy, then that's a different matter
@@1224chrisng cows are herbivores...
@@1224chrisng herbivores/ominovores are efficient to eat if they eat grass or other plants that we can't digest.
@@deecyp64 That doesn't stop humans from feeding them animal products - which they do actually eat, since they can't tell the difference, or really have no choice in the matter.
farmers don't care if they're supposed to be herbivores, they fed cows to cows and that's how mad cow disease started. I have no doubt that if it gave them some economic advantage they'd feed fish to cows as well.
Let's not forget that commercial fishing is also the largest contributor to plastic litter in the ocean. The Great Pacific Garbage Patch is made up of more than 60% fishing gear, almost all of which is from commercial fishing operations.
Which is why I hate all of the ads and charities telling us to "do our part". Sure, we shouldn't pollute....... but the majority of pollution in the world doesn't come from average citizens.
@@Ondrix that bothered me, the fact that the blame always falls on the consumers. It's definitely intentional, because now Canada is asking for volunteers to clean beaches instead of paid jobs!
The REAL PROBLEM is bottom trawlers and mid water trawlers AND their bycatch. STOP TRAWL BYCATCH!!! SAVE THE OCEAN!!! STOP TRAWL BYCATCH!!! STOP THE CORPORATELY OWNED TRAWLERS!!!
The real problem is other countries, such as Asian fishing groups practicing highly unsustainable techniques wiping out many fish populations.
American commercial fishermen do an excellent job at not polluting unlike decades ago!
@@318fishco especially bad given how China's fishermen always likes to go inside of other countries E.E.Z.s, and they usually spout something about "9 dashed lines" or whatever
@@Whatever-mx3bt I reckon we should get prisoners to do community service like this instead, save the environment and decrease incarceration
Why not layer the farms? Mix shellfish and fish in adjacent pens. Shellfish can eat the fish's waste.
that is part of the rationale behind Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture which usually includes fish/crustacean, shellfish, and seaweed/kelp.
@@andrewlucero3631 multi-trophic farming in general needs to get boosted online. It needs to be a household concept people consider doing in their gardens.
@@chrstfer2452 i feel like people who like uncommon pets or plants or even a lot of these homesteading people are already doing similar things like bioactive enclosures, indoor grow rooms, and growing native plants or fungi that help their crops. multi style stuff will be introduced as a trend but once people get into it and theres a bigger number of 'influencers' in that niche people will realize how good it is and we will get a bunch of cool at home examples. i look forward to it
kevan, andrew, chris: very interesting comment and a good jumping off point for thinking/googling. good job everybody this made my night
@Patrick Swan Thanks for confirming my suspicions. We need to advocate for this more strongly, even if there are unknown effects as of now, it can’t be any worse, not even close, to commercial fishing.
The road to hell is paved with marketing terms.
The Patagonian Tooth Fish, Slimehead, and Snake mackerel agree.
I think "less damaging" is more accurate than "better".
less damaging would be a form of better though
This video is a false dichotomy and a strawman argument in itself.
1) it attempts to hide privileged people’s poor choices (keeping on consuming animal products rather than less resources hungry plants) behind poor people’s conditions.
2) we, as privileged people who can choose what we want to eat, could just boycott wild caught and farmed animals.
@@Tonytruand09 yeah... nah man im not vegan and have no issue with meat so why would I want to go vegan? You're preaching some strange stuff considering the topic of the video.
@@Tonytruand09 Yeeaahhhh you're using some big words there ma d00d, and I'm pretty sure they don't mean what you think they mean....
"You see the straw dichotomy privileges the false poor privileged over the true poor privileged inherently circular reasoning the antidisestablishmentarianism. Thus forthwith collapsing the argument intersectionally clearly concluding we should all be vegan."
@@Tonytruand09
Plants are actually pretty resource hungry. Bug farms would be the best way to replace that much needed, high quality protein. It also seemed like, from this video, oyster farming was the least problematic as it cleaned/filtered the water it was in.
So aquaculture that doesn’t actually focus on fish might be best if done well? I know shellfish like mussels and clams are pretty sustainable and you can farm lots other things like seaweed at the same time.
Mussels.
@@liamhillman8486 well we can grow muscles instead of mussels if we get Muscle Hank involved
@ZahnNenDah
edit im dumb it's fresh water
I think it might be good to do it in the open ocean instead of coastally, because if the clams manage to escape, there's nowhere else they can live on for miles around, and hopefully they can't live at the depths involved here
To be honest, farmed Fish are done mosly wrong. There is gigant room to growth and improvment. There is not much of it in fishing. So its kinda obvious which one SHOULD be better, but then greedy humans step in.
What if, like me, the only seafood you can tolerate are salmon (and presumably other fish I'm unaware of that taste like them) and cod (ditto).
I'd love to see a future episode on multilayer aquaculture! I've heard that combining seaweed, fish and crustaceans is much better for the ecosystem
+
one of the huge problems in my country is that the coastal fish farms are making the wild populations sick. hopefully that's not true for other species, but it's killing our salmon (and thus, also our whales) here.
Atlas Pro recently made a video exploring multi-layer aquaculture-as well as locating it in the Deep Ocean where the oceans aren’t as ecologically productive and won’t oversaturate more productive, shallower regions (like near coasts and reefs)
Yes, multi trophic aquaculture, especially those that implement the ideas of biomimicry are great!
Does anybody not see how we are slowly full circling back towards how indigenous tribes were living. Like thats all this has been. A pathetically slow walk back to just letting nature happen, and more of us being involved in that proportionately.
I'm a marine Biology student, seeing his wild fishing analysis I see he misses a lot of stuff. I understand it's a 10 minute video and he doesn't have all day, but he mentions fishing techniques that are extremely bad for the environment. He focuses on the CO2 emissions from the boats, rather than the (arguably more important and pressing issue) actual techniques used for fishing. For instance, he never mentions how fishing nets get lost at sea a lot, and then harm the animal life in that area. My opinion on this whole topic is that mainstream media and pop culture stress cleaning up our oceans and regulating CO2, but then they miss the entire point by focusing on the wrong things. This topic isn't as simple as "if we stop using plastic bottles and straws and stop CO2 emissions the world will be all better"
teh nature of the video was addressing climate change aspects not the long terms sustainable of our food supply
One of the issues which is largely ignoring is throwing the small fishes back and killing/eating the big ones. Due tot this the populations decline because the big ones produce more offspring than the small ones. It also causes the species to become smaller in general, because less big fish means more chance for the small ones to reproduce and pass on their small fish genes.
And the same thing happens with fish in confinement. The gene pool of farmed fish gradually degrades over time and then those fish become a liability to wild fish populations should they ever escape and mate with them. More often than not, the less we intervene, the better off these natural systems are.
Natural selection at it's finest. Really good point!
@@OpticNRG while true, we gotta be humans and muck it up. So our best bet is to have our scientists use their sciences to muck it up the least, or with benefits maybe!
@@TheRexisFern Yup. We're past the point of no return and need to be actively searching for solutions (which thankfully we are, albeit not always with appropriate levels of urgency).
Maine has an interesting response to this. They have a minimum size on their lobsters caught and also have a maximum size. So once the lobsters get big enough they have to be thrown back so they can reproduce as long as they live.
I am from Maldives, and all of these efficient methods are illegal in the name of protecting the biodiversity.
And then they wonder where nature went and why the fish disappeared
I do not know the specifics of the Maledives, but just like you woukd not do industrial farming in a national park you should not do aquafarming in certain regions because of their importance for the ecosphere.
@@hannajung7512 but national parks don't have hundreds of hunters foraging species into endangerment
@@Eltener123 in some parks hunting is allowed under certain circumstances, but yeah... what you discribe sounds a lot like lobby influence: “protecting the workplaces of fisher men“
very interesting.
It's also worth noting that few wildcaught fish get clean deaths, oftentimes they're just left on the boat until the suffocate - which can take hours. Farmed fish usually get electricuted to death or are hit over the heads, and thus die faster. This plus the risk commercial fishing poses to endangered species is why I personally try to avoid eating wildcaught fish whenever possible.
As a commercial fisherman I can tell you trawlers are the absolute worst. The only fisherman who like trawlers are trawlers. The rest of us want them shut down due to their absurd ammount of waste and habitat destruction.
Yes but WHY do they exist? TO FEED THE DEMAND. The root cause of the issue is the desire for animal products in a capitalist system AND the amount of people engaging in the system.
You can pest all you want about trawlers, as long as the demand is there, they will remain.
Since it is complex to make people understand that the amount of people is also a problem, i guess it is better to attack the consumption part of the equation, especially WHAT is consumed.
Animal products, fishes in this case, are far more resources hungry than plants. Hence why we should advocate for a plant-based food system.
Much more achievable in my opinion.
@@Tonytruand09 I heavily hate the idea of making plant based diets a must. And basically shunning people who eat meat.
A thing every person that says plant based is the way seems to ignore the sheer amount of habit destruction for making mega farms in some parts of the world and also that some places just can't grow plants because of the type of soil.
The country I'm from farms is about 70% to 80% livestock because the ground does not grow anything well other than grass.
A fully plant based diet world would be the least sustainable thing ever.
Their is no where near enough land with soil that can farm plants to sustain the world.
What needs to happen is things need to be made more efficient not pretend vegenism or vegetarianism is the answer.
@@Tonytruand09 the fact of 3/4 of plant farming goes towards animal feed is wrong.
It's one of them miss quoted statements that get shared so much it became known as fact.
Only about 35% of the world's plant farming is actually used to make feed.
But about 3/4 of that 35% is wasted because of serious inefficiency in making feed.
So that comes back to my point the way to fix it us to improve efficiency not to cut out animals.
@@Tonytruand09 "have nothing against destroying/modifying habits that are detrimental to innocent animals"
That's s massive red flag issue.
If it's needed to do that to cut out animal products. Then it's a show it's a bad idea.
Also the idea that humans don't need meat to thrive and survive is factually incorrect.
Without the benefits of cooked meats humans would never have evolved into the intelligent apes we are today
Turning unfarmable land into farm able land is a waste of resources.
It wakes way to much energy to do it.
@@TheWeeJet Why is it a “massive red flag issue” or “a show/bad idea”?
What is the “massive red flag issue” or “a show/bad idea”?
Sorry i could not understand your phrasing…
It is your belief that human being NEED animal products to live and thrive that is wrong. Worldwide, nutrition and dietetics official bodies all confirm that a well planned 100% plant-based diet is suitable for all stages of life, including for athletes and during pregnancy. Key words: WELL PLANNED. If you feed yourself only Oreos and vodka (both vegan by the way…) you will run into issues, just like if you have a deficient omnivore diet.
NOBODY is denying the fact that meat and other animal products have played a important role in our development as a species. If you believe that someone is arguing that fact, you are dreaming.
We simply say that, and I repeat: human beings do not physiologically need (especially nowadays in our developed world…) to consume animal products to live and thrive. What we need are nutrients, vitamins and minerals that can be found in a WELL PLANNED 100% plant based diet. And for vitamin B12, no need to get those through the body parts of supplemented livestock, we can DIRECTLY take a pill/injection/spray/supplement processed good…. It is very simple to understand.
For turning unfarmable land into farmable land, you do not have to do that… (of course you can if you want to). A much smarter way to tackle this would be to be vegan, and repurpose the already farmable land you were using to grow animal feed, and grow human food instead. And since there are less mouth to feed (remember! We are all vegan, we do not breed livestock into existence…) we end up using less land….
3/4 arable land is dedicated to animal farming. It is not coming from me, it is coming from the FAO… and this is not a vegan organisation… unless you are into conspiracy theories as soon as you encounter a contradictory fact? 😂😂 sorry for the cheekiness please read their official report here: www.fao.org/3/a0701e/a0701e.pdf
Well, I see where the problem is coming from! You did not either read, or understand that I wrote. I said 3/4 of the arable land on Earth is dedicated to animal exploitation…. It can be for feed, for shelter, for waste disposal….. I didn’t said that those all 3/4 were uniquely feed dedicated. Again read the FAO’s report.
And yes, we are not in the Middle Ages where we NEEDED to rely on animals. Now we are smarter, and much more technologically advanced. We CAN do without exploiting animals in most cases.
I never said it would be easy, I said it is possible. It all starts with a paradigm shift: animals are not on Earth FOR us, they are here WITH us.
Nice discussion tough.
Shellfish filtering the water is great so long as they don’t compete with native species. We already have enough trouble here at Lake Erie with zebra mussels hogging all the plankton.
eyyy lake erie gang
I get your point but zebra mussels were an accidental introduction to the great lakes, not an aquaculture introduction. I don't have a reference, but most shellfish fisheries I've seen use local species as they're the easiest to grow any ways. Your point still stands, they better be native.
Seaweed seems to be the most ideal for ocean farming.
All open bodies of water are very much at risk regarding pollutants. Consequently pollution can get into fish, shellfish, and sea salt.
The small farm way appears best when dynamic methods are utilized.
Tilapia-fish are herbivores and can probably get most of their food from plants like Duckweed. The Tilapia fish tank can also help fertilize other food plants or beneficial plants. Duckweed can feed all kinds of herbivores as well as possibly food for people.
On a smaller scale the Duckweed could provide most food needs for rabbits and possibly red worms.
Large scale agriculture is apparently creating risks in a number of ways.
Thank you for sharing helpful and informative videos!
Tilapia do need protein in their diet as well, and cannot be fed only on duckweed. That being said, they are usually more than happy to consume insect larva, and Black Soldier Fly Larva would be an excellent choice, as they very efficiently convert food to protein and have as high a protein content as many commercial fish feeds.
Love seeing attention brought to my field of research! Thanks for giving a balanced portrayal of a controversial topic! 👍🏻
One aspect that was not mentioned is breeding. Fish have been farmed and fished for centuries, however, the research and improvement of aquaculture genetics, of intensive farming and of sustainable practices is receiving more and more attention and resources. Things long known about land farm animals are just now being learned for fish, so judging this subject must be a continuous practice - not an end goal.
What about the fish farm/rice patty combo? Fish give nutrients to the rice. Cleans the water, makes the rice healthier, and no antibiotics needed. That seems like the best of all words. More food all around
This has actually been practiced in many cultures all around the world. The land based version of this is aquaponics, where recirculating aquaculture systems are combined with hydroponic systems that produce fruits and vegetables.
Wow, you know that has been done for centuries. Now we just need to throw some serious science at it and see what sticks.
I would have reversed the emphasis on environmental effects of fishing, with GHG being last. The other effects are so much more damaging.
One other problem with fishing is the loss of fishnets in the environment (accidentally or voluntarily thrown away when damaged). These fishnets are, apparently, the most prominent plastic polluters in the ocean. They can also destroy ecosystems by killing a lot of marine life after being dumped into the environment.
Massive farms are needed which consists of departments
1) huge algae farm
2) algae used as feed for the smaller fish production
3) small fish processed into feed for larger fish such as salmon
4) this larger fish aquaponic is transported to the open sea for limiting waste
5) embedding mussles farming for waste management
6) whole operation powered by renewables
And we need to stop the international trawling industry
Since you did not go into detail on how we could improve wild fishing and how it can be sustainable I would like to add on a couple things to what you said. Love your vids btw. To start off with, different fishing tactics like bottom trawling and net trawling are extremely bad for the environment from the unsustainable amount of fish caught and environmental destruction but also because half of the ocean's plastic is from fishing nets. So if we want more sustainable, realistic, practices we should ban fishing tactics that include netting. We should also make fishing companies responsible for any plastic waste related to fishing (probably through taxation from the % of plastic found in the ocean that year? that may not be the solution but it's something). I also found studies a while back on how marine protected areas (MPA) that are highly protected or fully protected are able to produce 6 to 7 times more biomass in fish, and how that spillover from the protected area was able to improve populations. I would do your own research on MPA since it's extremely interesting on how it works but I don't want to make my post any longer or more boring. Thanks for reading as far as you did :)
@@puppieslovies well there should be regulations for size. This would become easier if people spear fished or used fishing lines instead of large nets. The main problem though is that we are over fishing our oceans. 90% of the population of large fish are gone since 1950. They also say 70% of all fish species are at risk of going extinct bc of overfishing. This is according to FMAP scientists.
Aquaponics is an option for dealing with the fish waste.
Most of these negatives for aquaculture seem to be mostly due to issues with open pen style farming. Wish you had talked about modern indoor Recirculating Aquaculture Systems.
Perhaps they just aren't popular as the opem pen style farming due to how profit or something
I know of one farm like this. It farms salmon. The problem is, it's incredibly expensive. You need food to be affordable.
These systems are good but require huge amounts of resources to control the farm conditions (temperature, O2 supply, water pH, etc) so have much higher greenhouse emission than open pen styles. Of course, if that electricity was being supplied through renewables this would be less of an issue, but we're still getting there.
that as well as aquaculture of some species like abalone, are done by near-coastal farms(land-based outdoor recirculating systems), not in the ocean. if they have the sufficiency to handle their outflow, it's far less damaging than taking up huge swaths of coral and seaweed growing shallows.
Few species have had their life cycle entirely figured out by science in order to allow for fully intensive aqua-farming. It is a subject that is gaining substantial attention right now, and thankfully the research is advancing quickly with todays methods. The one thing I believe this video should have made clearer, is the rate of advancement and the need for continuous attention for the topic.
I suspect the answer is ‘all, but in moderation done as sustainably as possible’
All animal agriculture is killing the oceans and the planet, it's not sustainable at all. We kill 2.7 trillion more fish, every year, than all humans that have ever existed. Until people wake up to the harsh reality of the consequences for the food on thier plate, we are doomed.
@@MistyAir Animal agriculture can be improved though, no reason to throw it all out. We need to do it as sustainable as possible instead because humans are omnivorous predators and supplements don’t actually work very well. I’d rather eat one steak that gives me a large benefit vs a million pills with little benefit.
@@jayce1850 it's not sustainable and can never be, unless the human race is depleted significantly. That will happen anyway because of the propaganda against veganism. Like the myth that you need a ton of supplements to survive as a vegan. The only thing you need to supplement is B12 and that goes for meat eaters too. B12 is produced by bacteria, not animals. 90% of B12 produced is fed to the animals bred for consumption. The only sustainable option is to get our nutrients straight from the source. The longest living humans in recorded history are the Okinawans and the Seventh-Day Adventists, primarily plant based.
@@jayce1850 we have to throw it out immediately because it's philosophical underpinnings are by and large completely unjustifiable
@@MistyAir the key words you missed were “in moderation”, if less is being produced and less is being wasted then the impacts go down. If they are done as sustainably as possible then the impacts go down. All animal agriculture AS IT IS now is killing the planet, reducing it and finding better methods or all kinds of food production would be the best solution.
Which is better? Simple, whichever one we put the effort into doing responsibly. Either one can be sustainable and viable.. if harvested in a sustainable way.
The problem is, neither industry is run with long term sustainability in mind. Its more like "get as much as you can, as fast as you can, before we destroy it all".
I think you'd enjoy reading about the tilapia farm in costa rica that has a rive flow through it to carry the nutrients (waste) down river to the farms so those farms dont need fertilizer and use up all of the added nutrients. And a counter point to the feeding of wild fish to farmed fish, the anchovetas are (for the most part) a sustainably farmed natural resource thanks to peru's management and quotas, I've read papers about the FIFO ratios for salmon and how the anchovetas would be wasted if they weren't harvested (globally most fish meal and fish oil come from them) and we would have to find a different source to replace them
I know not everyone will agree with me on this, but I think the best way forward is 3D printed food, like the replicators in Star Trek. Theoretically all you need are a few stem cells of whatever animal or plant you want to turn into a sandwich and a vat of basic proteins and amino acids and just let the machine run.
Short answer: None.
Ding ding ding
A simple tip to try to navigate almost all these complexities is: Try to eat something lower in the food chain. Choose fish like anchovy or sardines, eat more shellfish and seaweed. Avoid higher level predators, like tuna and salmon.
Obviously, always get informed about your choices, because there isn't a simple answer, but it's a good first approach.
If the fish can be farmed inland adjacent to a major population center that might be worthwhile balanced against the cost of long distance refrigerated hauling. Fish waste can also serve as excellent fertilizer for hydroponic plant farming and plants can act as excellent water filters.
The system you are describing is called aquaponics, and they can and do work well when implemented properly, but they do have high initial startup costs. Even so, the practice is spreading. I read an article last week about an aquaponic installation that was included in the community space of a new low income housing development (though I'm not sure how easily I'd be able to find the article again if I looked).
Check out the damage Salmon farming has caused to the Tasmanian estuary environment. Pristine waters destroyed.
8:51 based on the explanation, farming has higher chance of being sustainable.
It's pretty clear at this point that neither is good for the environment.
Exactly!
Its more about scale.
There are 7 billion humans now.
But, based on the explanation, farming is easier to be regulated.
But if people want meat, it seems farms may be the only real alternative if we want to be more environmentally friendly
Right, so plant based diet for the most sustainably. Skip factor farms and eat plants. It's good for you and the planet and the animals.
@@KezanzatheGreat I didn't say farming is bad. My point is plant base is more sustainable so farming plants is just better for the environment.
When I worked at a seafood counter people would often ask me what fish is the “healthiest”. My favorite response was always “the one you like to eat”. After all, if you’re eating fish for its health benefits, but you don’t like how it tastes (maybe it tastes too fishy for you), then you’re less likely to eat it and won’t benefit from it whereas if you prefer the mild fish more and with therefore eat it more often then you’ll get more benefit from eating it.
I gave same response When asked about what wine goes best with the dish (it was an Returned Service Club with $5.00 steak specials not a French resturant who asks teh guy at Maccas for wine selections).
This is exactly what my degree is in! I was honestly hesitant to watch this one, knowing both how complex the situation is & how science communicators HAVE to simplify concepts to some degree for the general public to understand, but you didn't disappoint. 👍🏻
I suggest vegan options for those in cultures where it is practical, allowing the ocean to regenerate as much as it can whilst costal low income or otherwise dependent communities continue to fish small scale as they have.
Also more R&D into sustainable and moreover *regenerative* food options.
Cruelty free would be a plus too.
It's 2021 and we are supposed to be the "best" most 'intelligent' species...right? We can do this.
It's 2021 and you still think we're intelligent.l?
@@chaos2inferno I'm quoting others when I say that
I do believe that we are a highly adaptable species though and because of that I think we could absolutely create a food system with zero cruelty while feeding everyone on the planet with zero malnutrition. The abuse of power, love of money and an unwillingness to change or try something better I think are the only things that really stand in the way.
Our population on the planet complicates things but it doesn't make it impossible.
I went vegetarian 3 years ago due to environmental/sustainability concerns, and I have absolutely no regrets. I don't miss meat at all. If anything, it all seems pretty gross now. I'm pretty close to vegan at this point, I will still have an egg or cheese on rare occasions. But alternative cheeses are pretty great now.
The one problem with it is nutrition. If you go full vegan, getting enough B12 (and vitamin D depending on where you live) can be an issue for people living in less developed countries where things like nutritional yeast or other options aren't available. But in wealthier countries, it's really easy to go vegetarian or vegan.
@@byal9000 good for you Chris, good for all of us.
If we changed the global food supply and dynamics we could get B12 and D3 to those who can't easily get it.
I've been getting into mushroom foraging for the last few years and I have learned that utilizing mushrooms in the diet especially wild mushrooms can address both of these issues.
By no means is it a complete solution for B12, however, bacteria present on mushrooms especially certain species like the hericium family are surprisingly high.
And some mushrooms growing in direct sunlight such as oyster mushrooms actually contain a compound that supplies us with D3 when consumed.
I just wanted to know these things as they are exciting bits of information to me.
If we know that B12 comes from bacteria originally then I'm sure as a species we can figure out how to create a supply for B12.
Thanks again for making your change, it really means something to me.
@@Gwilfawe Just a correction, the mushroom vitamin D is D2, not D3. Other than that I absolutely agree.
Omg I love the intro! I haven’t watched scishow for a little while and this intro is so cool!
I've often wondered why don't they do the breed and release method for the ocean species of fish. Here in Tasmania they do it for trout in the rivers and dams so the populations of fish can be maintained whilst still allowing fishing.
We do.
There are numerous salmon hatcheries here in the U.S.
A lot of fish are extremely difficult to breed in captivity
Aren´t trouts a introduced species in Australia?
Speaking from a Norwegian perspective, aquaculture here is a lot more sustainable here than most other places. With a ton of innovations and science being done to improve the environmental impact. I would argue that farmed fish is way better for the environment long term, but it’s still a pretty new practice, so I does have its problems to get on top of all for sure. But with time it’s an obvious case for farmed fish imo.
Already in Norway, over 90% of fish farms have pretty low impacts on the surrounding environment, with multi layer farms and completely closed nets already starting to make its way in. And speaking of antibiotics, In Norway the fish farms use about 50,000 times less antibiotics for fish than we do for humans! Part of this being because all Norwegian farmed fish has to get vaccinated
1:42 What's with the comparison to nuts? Why not compare it to something actually environmentally friendly like lentils or beans? They are also dirt cheap.
Get outta here with your vegan propaganda. Why should we eat peasant food? 😉
People are always complaining about cow burps, but now you're just shifting the gas around to us.
Fun fact about tilapia : It is suggested to have tilapia farm separated from natural body of water because tilapia can be very invasive.
Fantastic episode of scishow! Clearly really well researched, well structured in terms of pros and cons. Kudos!
Very good comprehensive overview, thank you!
Guys... I'm so disappointed... You left out an entire category. Land Based Aquaponics.
You've mentioned hydroponics before, and aquaponics does make use of those systems, but combines them with aquaculture and nitrifying bacterial filters. While many people think of Tilapia when they think of aquaponics, as they are one of the most commonly utilized species, there are a vast number of aquatic species that could benefit from this type of system. Admittedly, the revenue from the hydroponics usually subsidizes the extra cost the aquaculture portion has over traditional aquaculture practices, but the systems dramatically reduce the waste and disease issues faced in traditional aquaculture.
This is a practice that is growing rapidly all over the world. We do need to do significant research to improve the variety of creatures and photosynthesizers growing in them though, especially with regards to salt-water aquaponics. While humans love to eat salt-water aquatic species, our taste for salt-water vegetative matter is significantly lower, however, with more research being poured into uses for algae, such as making shoes, producing biofuel, and drastically reducing the methane output of cattle, the field is ripe with opportunities to make good use of aquaponics.
the farm fishing where i am is decimating our wild populations, and our whales since they are left with less to eat. I'm all for these companies trying to find a way to do a more land-based operation, so that at least their waste products and antibiotics and things aren't getting mixed out into the ocean populations. farming fish is likely necessary to keep up with demand but also be sustainable, but the current methods are not doing us any good.
YES!
Actually that is a excellent technology I think we should be pursuing, if we can mimic the environment and raise fish in a tank i stead of the disgusting cages farmed fish are currently in, especially if they can be bred in those tanks instead of relying on natural populations for the fish in the tanks.
Then that’s a winner.
The problem with aquaponics is that it's hardly a happy marriage between aquaculture and hydroponics. I believe there currently is no middle ground that involves optimal conditions for both things. Adequate nutrient concentrations required to grow a wide variety of plants healthy and optimally will kill the fish. Moreover hydroponics needs sterility to work best. Fish waste is nasty stuff and breeds bacteria which drop dissolved oxygen making hydroponics pointless and problematic. You might as well just pump the fish waste into a field with normal soil crops and do hydroponics properly in a separate system.
@@alexrossouw7702 Your assumptions are incorrect. Supplementing nutrients for plants will not kill the fish, so long as the nutrients are sourced correctly. Most plant available nutrients are not harmful to the fish. Fish waste is not "nasty stuff" that will lower the dissolved oxygen content of the water. The solids are removed from the system and either used as fertilizer outside the system, or put through an aerobic digester that breaks the solids down into a liquid solution that can be fed back into the aquaponic system. The bacterial filter used to process the ammonia in the water is also aerated, and does not decrease the overall dissolved oxygen levels. You do need to match the species of fish you intend to use with the types of plants you wish to grow, as different fish and plants require different water temperatures, and you have a more narrow pH range, but that has not proven to be an issue to commerical aquaponics growers.
When I was researching hydroponics a while ago to start my own little indoor garden, I stumbled across aquaponics. In aquaponics you have a vat of fish swimming around and then use the waste water from it to fertilize your crops. It makes me wonder whether that can be done on a larger scale to benefit both fishing and farming at the same time.
Yes, it can be done on a larger scale, and there are commercial aquaponics farms all over the world. The US is actually a bit behind when it comes to commercial aquaponics research and implementation. However, a lot of the tech that has been developed for vertical hydroponic and aeroponic farming could also be utilized in an aquaponic system.
Monocultures of any type usually end up being a problem.
It seems to me that multi layred fish farms sited in good locations could do wonders for sustainable food production. Big wasteful carnivores combined somehow with smaller fish, shellfish, kelp and algae production... Rice paddies also grow fish, frogs, ducks, etc that also fertilize the water to grow more rice...
Taste is also so very important too so optimizing for taste is also key too.
Most of the food for salmon has smaller portions of wild-caught fish now than earlier, with more of it being made up by terrestrial food sources. Also the mess (both from eating and pooping) mostly ends up at the bottom, affecting the local benthic marine ecosystem, and not usually affecting oxygen and algal blooms here in Norway.
Yeah, around where I live salmon mostly eat chicken (though I also live inland, so salmon farms anywhere near me are inland ones...)
thanks so much for taking a nuanced view on this
Making the choice to purchase more responsibly grown or sourced food is a great ideal but it is also a topic that reflects privilege and wealth. A poor family is only going to be able to afford what they can afford and sustainability isn't a factor at all
And at the same time the riches few percent are those having the biggest impact. So if only those priviledged few would actually change it would allready change a lot for the environment.
Plant based nutrition is healthy, affordable, and sustainable. Unlike animal aquaculture and agriculture. Rice, beans, potatoes, some of the cheapest foods you can buy.
@@MistyAir Why do vegans always need vitamin supplements then?
@@MistyAir vegan can cause malnutrition. It is not going to work for everyone.
@@WaterZer0 They don't, they get it straight from the source. You need B12 but meat eaters are deficient in that too. Bacteria produces B12, not animals. 90% of B12 produced is fed to the animals you eat. Why not save the animal and the planet by getting it somewhere else? Like fortified cereals, plant milk, nutritional yeast, or just spray it on your tongue.
I personally think that fish hatcheries are a conservation resource not talked about enough.
My state has a program for steelhead called the "broodstock program" that has some pretty awesome effects on the fish returns to the rivers.
Basically, the program pairs with sport anglers to help bring in wild fish to use for breeding a generation of hatchery fish. They then safely release the wild fish back into the same river it was brought from, where it can then finish its trip up the river to spawn naturally, albeit with fewer eggs than normal. But since the hatchery has those "lost" eggs, a much higher percentage of those eggs will hatch and grow into late juvenile stage before being released into the rivers, meaning a much higher percentage of those eggs actually become fish in the river to naturally spawn and for people to catch, instead of food for the other things that live in the river.
Now, hatcheries absolutely have areas to improve in, those baby fish are often raised in man made pools with concrete sides and bottoms and with a lot of other fish sharing the same pool. And I'm sure they use quite a bit of power to pump all the water around and filter it and what not. But we as humans have endangered these fish, and I think we are thus responsible for taking steps to help fix it. Broodstock programs could be that answer, with some improvements.
I can’t escape the feeling that this episode is partially sponsored by the fishing industry, probably those involved in fish farms, especially since I believe the waste and the fish disease issues are much bigger and more serious than explained here.
There is also the option of not eating fish.
Realistically we need to stop eating fish commercially to restore natural populations of fish in the ocean. Fishing also accidentally kills thousands of animals that aren't even intentionally caught. It's probably one of the most ecologically destructive food industries in the world, right alongside ruminant livestock. It has a small carbon footprint but it destroys wildlife. I'd argue it's even more destructive than deforestation. Farmed fishing is only sustainable and doesn't impact wildlife when it's done in a controlled way and not connected to any other bodies of water (man-made reservoirs). And even then it's usually very cruel to the fish as they're confined in very small grow areas with thousands of other fish. IMO the future of sustainable protein will be fungus, insects, and lab-grown meat tissue cultures. I also think seaweed farming will eventually replace aquaculture as it can be done sustainably and it supports biodiversity. Plus seaweed is great! Maybe wakame, gim/nori, laver, and dulse will become more common in the Western diet, and seaweed-derived products like carrageenan and agar will replace gelatin.
I think so too
Quality over quantity
Eat less fish but choose sustainably fished wild, like no drag netting, no commercial fishing, etc
@ZahnNenDah cold turkey! Cut them off. Any fishermen who want a change of career can become crew to clean up the mess that's been made of the ocean.
Although, considering the price of fish would skyrocket I'm sure they'd be happy for the change.
As for those who everyone worries will starve, let the vegans deal with it
Smart People I know say Tilapia, a genus of Cichlid from Africa, will be the first animal raised for food on Mars. Tilapia can thrive on a vegetarian diet and in brackish water, and are delicious.
The first animal raised for food on mars will be the first settler on mars that didn't run fast enough. Same too the last animal raised for food on mars.
Thanks for bringing up the point about wild fish being used to feed farmed fish! It's something super important that's often overlooked, especially since to produce the high-quality carnivorous species we like to eat (salmon, tuna, barramundi, etc) we feed three wild fishes for every one farmed fish.
This is why I think production of Black Soldier Fly Larva needs more research. They are extremely efficient at converting their food into proteins, and usually have similar protein content to most commercially available fish foods.
@@familywilliams4058 Yeah for sure! One of the professors at my university is currently doing some sort of study into using insects as a protein source for fish and it's definitely worthwhile work. That said, I think even with insects as a food source aquaculture will still need to use some degree of fish oil/meal to provide omega fatty acids (but that's still a step in the right direction!)
@@awkward.anonymous This is one of the things I want to research when I'm done with college... in about 6 years at the rate I'm going (but that's ADHD for you). I also want to do a LOT more research into fruiting plants in vertical aquaponics systems and saltwater aquaponics.
@@familywilliams4058 I think that's a fantastic field to get into! Good luck with your studies!
You need to take Sea lice on wild salmon spread by farmed Alantic salmon in the coastal waters. Here in BC the number of lice per young fish is overwhelming with a decrease in wild salmon as a result. Areas are being closed to farming to protect wild salmon runs.
Yes, I was surprised the sea lice issue wasn't mentioned in the video!
That's probably because there isn't good data behind it. Farmed fish in BC do not have much seas live, and there is a low threshold before they are treated and the live removed. It's activist propaganda that is spread, they don't care about the truth only attention
2:45 - try towing a line behind your boat - it absolutely creates drag, and quite a lot. But yes, a lot less than a net. Line fishing results in quite a lot of by catch of seabirds btw.
Line fishing can prevent bird catch with mitigation devices like bird lines and ensuring hooks have weights so they don't float. But the industry is too large to implement this on all boats
Plant based protein is way more sustainable and better for the environment
That also has labor, energy, and water costs though. I don't think you can compare them so strictly when it's more complex than that.
Not when it produces more co2 to harvest and process nuts than it does to catch fish for the same amount of protein ( I may not have said this properly), as mentioned early in the video.
Vegan doesn't work for everyone
@@babecat2000 and a lot of vegan food is heavily processed
@@morbly Have you ever heard of beans? Nuts aren't the best source for protein anyways. They are more luxury.
Also nuts can be produced CO2 negative as they grow on trees. Fish certainly can't
A fish pen can host hydroponic ("aquaponic') gardens, plant roots set in mesh above feasting on the CO2 fish breathe out. Water is pumped (circulated) and filtered, not allowed to stagnate or breed toxin. And the setup can be covered by solar panels, shading the garden. A fish pen dug into the ground several feet will stay near the earth's 52-55 degree fahrenheit temperature (11-12 celsius), good for the fish and garden and cooling the panels above, which are more efficient at moderate temps. Arrangements like this can help grow vegetables in hot, sun-blasted places, even gradually enrich the water table. A case where different green techs can be symbiotic, complementary.
The plants do far more than just take up CO2. They also use up the nitrogen in the water, preventing the fish from becoming poisoned by their own urea, but you do need to provide a home for nitrifying bacteria to do their work of converting the ammonia in the excreted urea into plant available nitrogen (it's actually a two step process on the part of the bacteria).
People that care about the environment and also myself, often forget that while we might not want any of this because of environmental damage, we still need an alternative to beef as it is unlikely people will accept no meat at all, and it seems that if fishing farms are done right it could be very CO2 efficient and probably prevent a lot of environmental damage from wild fishing and also prevent the ocean being littered with discarded plastic fishing nets. We need to remember a bad alternative practice is still better than a devastating practice
it seems that the drawbacks of farmed fish are merely unsolved engineering problems, not inherent features of the practice. for example, preventing the fish from escaping the pods can be easily mitigated by enhanced nets with multiple layers. as for the waste products of the fish, they could probably be liquidated by having shell fish farms right next to fish pods so that all the waste would be quickly filtered.
I would like to see a video on aquaculture in China. It is, after all, the world's largest aquaculture producer, so it would be interesting to see what works and what doesn't and whether the things that do work could be replicated elsewhere. Of course, one major difference is that China aquaculture focuses a lot more on river fish, which are less preferred in the West because of fish bones, but there must surely be some interesting insights (good and bad) to be seen?
I'm half-Chinese and when living in China, my favorite fish was actually grass carp (which are Perfect in a Chinese spicy roast fish, lots of bones but the tender flesh just soaks up the sauce). As a bonus, that fish is a herbivore, so you don't need to feed it wild-caught fish. OTOH, I hear that instead of agricultural leftovers, many are now being fed imported soybeans, which isn't ideal either. Many years ago I went to see a fish farm where a company used fermented feed to make them more easily digested by the fish while improving the fish's immune system, and shrimps were raised at the bottom of the ponds to eat the leftovers. Good idea? Bad idea in practice? I had no way to judge, so I'd be very interested to see more videos on the topic. (in the meantime, alas, it seems grass carps aren't sold here in Europe. I once found it online only to be shocked by the price tag, until I realized that it was being sold not for consumption but for weed control, alas)
The Chinese also farm a ridiculous amount of crawfish. How does that stack up to shrimps in terms of sustainability? Another question mark.
As an experienced aquarist, too many fish in too small of an area produce stress hormones which aren't healthy to eat and also reduce size/growth. The best solution would be to move to a heavier vegetable diet. If you must have fish or other animal protein, do so in limited quantities. Agriculture, particularly meat agriculture, is incredibly intense in greenhouse gas emissions.
screw how stressed they get their fish. not mammals.
Gene mod out the hormone production
Stress hormones= proof that fish do suffer. Then why do we not leave them alone?
The only thing I know for sure is that there is a visual difference between farmed and wild Salmon, and they also taste differently. Wild salmon has a better taste in my opinion.
That being said, perhaps a mixture of both is best. Especially if farmers also help supply roe or minnows to bolster wild populations that might need the help.
Oyster farming will forever have my full support. The only reason the. Natural oyster, and razor clam populations exist in the waters I've grown up next to is due to engineered oysters being able to clean the water but not being able to take over. Also the farmed ones I swear are sweeter.
Or we *could* give up on our sushi and crab cakes 🤷
…or at least drastically reduce it
If you really want crab cakes, Good Catch makes delicious vegan crab cakes! ☺ Also, sushi with tofu and veggies are just as delicious as those with raw fish--without the heavy metals, microplastics, and saturated fat!
Me and my boyfriend make our own vegan sushi and everyone who has tried it says it's the bomb! You don't have to give up sushi, or even crab cakes, by abstaining from meat.
10/10 thread
@@garden.of.thistles please put your recipes on TH-cam. I know I am a sceptic when it comes to vegan diet as it seems to me that the ingredients are difficult to find, expensive and processed.
@@DrBear-rk4qb Yea, a crab cake is really mostly bread crumbs and butter.
One of the worst things with all of these is waste. how much of a catch cannot or never is sold and thrown away. Could atleast use the waste as some type of food for livestock or fertilzer for plants. Also farmed fish is often factory farming where they have to put them full of not only antibiotics, but plenty of other chemicals to control undesirables like pesticides, etc. Also farmed fish dont get the same feed as wild caught so not has healthy.
Very interesting. I stopped eating fish because of mercury and lead, then I expanded my vegetarianism to include seafood. Also, I saw how tilapia were raised and it was disgusting and changed my mind about them. I think fish actually do feel pain.
Of course they feel pain, they are sentient beings with a brain and a nervous system. The science is out there, FISH FEEL PAIN!
Imagine I put a dog treat at the and of a fishing pole, snagged a dog, dragged it into the water to suffocate, chopped it up; just so I can eat it's flesh. That's literally what we're doing to fish. What's the moral difference between killing a dog and a fish? They both experience pain in a similar way.
Also, fish is meat. You can't be vegetarian and eat "see food", lol.
Mercury and lead are a problem only in species towards the top of the food chain or very long life span species , like shark or tuna.
@@Marine_Veteran_Vegan_Gamer Sure. I get it. There are different types of vegetarianism though like pescatarianism. First, I became an organic food eater in 2013, but quickly afterwards I became a vegetarian. I did this partly out of necessity and primarily for good health, but also realized it was better for the environment. I continued eating dairy regularly for probiotics and seafood a couple of times a year for fish oil for several years. When I realized prebiotics from organic apple cider vinegar were better than a few cow probiotics I gave up dairy. Also, a couple of years ago I gave up seafood on the spot because I came to realize it was being polluted by contaminated sea water, I could get the nutrients in other foods and fish feel pain. My organic vegetarian diet now is great and guilt-free.
@@zeuso.1947 Good to know. Plastic is the other reason why I stopped eating fish. At the end of my fish eating days I was buying canned safe catch tuna. I suppose that’s an issue too; overcatch not to mention overfishing.
@@JasonGastrich do you still spend money on dairy?
I've used the Seafood Watch ap. Highly suggest seeing the aquarium too!
Cellular agriculture is the best alternative. We may not have the texture yet, but the flavour and nutrients are the same.
We don't know enough about the human body's requirements, or what might be different in the lab grown meat, to even remotely make that claim.
It could be, AND it could end up like vegetable oil and trans fats. Absolutely horrible for us.
Oh, and several natural meats contain natural trans fats, and they're not only not bad for us, studies hint that they're actually good for us......
@@lordgarion514 so first you write that trans fats are horible for us, then you write they are good for us.
Which is it now?
@@MisterK9739
Pay attention.
You're talking about lab grown meat being just as healthy as natural, as if that's a fact.
I said we didn't know enough about the body or what could be missing from said lab grown meat.
I then have you the vegetable oil/trans fat example.
But no, I absolutely did not say they were both good and bad.
I said the natural trans fats are healthy.
I'm guessing you didn't even know that the trans fats in vegetable oil were man-made......
In other words, not natural. And for about 5 decades it was thought they were MUCH better than animal fats like lard and tallow.
Oops...... Only killed a few million extra people worldwide getting that simple thing wrong.
And now, people like you want to play Russian roulette with out health, but with the most important nutrient protein
We killed millions getting a single fat wrong. And you want to try the same thing with literally ALL the proteins we need, not just one.
Sounds like a dumbass idea at our current technology level TBH.
We can't even figure out how Tylenol does what it does.
@@lordgarion514 majority of protein in your diet comes from plant sources, not animals.
Never in history has there been such a thing as "protein deficiency". Ya´ll don´t even know wtf protein is, but "you need it for dem gains!" am i right? Protein is in literally every single thing you eat. it´s the basis of life. As long as you eat enough calories you will also eat enough protein. Unless you´re like super into bodybuilding but that´s not the case for 99% of people
I never talked about or promoted lab grown meat. Just eat LESS meat. Once a week instead of thrice a day
@@MisterK9739
I didn't say a damn thing about any nutrient deficiencies.
We didn't have a fat deficiency when we killed millions with vegetable oil, now did we?
And man-made trans fats are estimated to kill around 500,000 worldwide every year.
We damn sure don't have any fat deficiencies at this time, but still it's killing people.
You're not very good at jumping to conclusions.
And what if we switch to lab grown meat, and after we get rid of all our regular animal farming, we find out something isn't quite right (just like we did with trans fat) and it's killing a LOT of people?
A brief summary: Trawlers are the worst (2:59) and buy localy if possible.
Wouldn't fish farm waste be the most amazing fertilizer you could imagine? Wouldn't you try to capture that?
There are systems for that, land based aquaponics.
They are wokring on it :-) Many research groups are researching the safety of using the aquaculture waste as feed, but it is a long process getting that approved by the government.
I've been meaning to research this to know what kinds of seafood is better for the environment. So thanks for getting me started 😊
Or just watch Seaspiracy to learn that ALL fish should stay in the sea for environmental reasons.
@@suicune2001 I mean, I watched the documentary, and I don´t eat fish any more... but it is HEAVILY one-sided. Which is ok, because it´s a personal documentary, but just saying
@@MisterK9739 Of course it's one-sided. The side that literally saves the planet from disaster. What counterpoint could there be? The ocean dies - we all die. We need to leave the ocean alone. Period.
@@suicune2001 i never disagreed with you. Just saying that it is highly polarizing
@@MisterK9739 Not for people with some sense. But I know there's plenty of people out there without any.
Everyone should watch the documentary seaspiracy. I've avoided any seafood that myself or someone I know hasn't caught since.
Only eating self-caught fish won't help. Imagine everybody doing it: suddenly we have the same problems (if not worse) as now. It simply isn't sustainable in large scales!
Better to simply abstain...
I highly recommend looking into what marine scientists are saying about Seaspiracy. They are consistently using old data and untrustworthy data.
That documentary is just vegan propaganda imo. It uses a lot of older data, and conveniently leaves out relevant data. Complete garbage documentary
Seaspiracy is not a good documentary, their data is outdated and some of the people they interview have little to no qualification to be speaking as professionals. They earnestly made a mockumnetary without meaning to.
There is a startup company in Iceland that is planning to build a minimum impact fish farms on land next to the sea, pros include that all the waste that is basically stuck inside fjords and wreak havoc on the ecosystem can be easily filtered out and used as fertilizer on land, same goes with parasites and wild salmon population, not a possibility since the sea is essentially strained going in and filtered going out.
So minimal impact, food source will also be made locally from algea and seaweed so no need to import soy beans from south america, also the by products can be used for food supplements and beauty products.
Some of these inland fish farms are prone to disease, geodesic sea dome technology might help with this. They're enclosed and can also make artificial reefs for other creatures like she'll fish and crabs. Those cleaners come naturally! If fish farming, while placed far out, was limited to working with farming native fish species, would there be less risks? You'd think that technically the local predators would be great at controlling the escaped fish population. I'm hoping for advancements in this field of research, water cleaning should be advancing with our worries about usable water.
Another important question is which fish is better for us, nutritionally.
I think salmon or tuna .
They dye farmed salmon. Farmed fish is full of chemicals and not healthy. Tuna is high in mercury
@mike I'm not sure about the definition in English, but I think what in Italy is referred to as "pesce azzurro". Fish in the family of sardines, herrings, macquerels, they are very nutritious, they usually are very cheap (especially the least known and used kinds) and they are usually pretty healthy and pollution free, being pretty low on the feeding chain
@@beniaminorocchi If it is not high in mercury then it’s okay. I live on the ocean, there are many varieties of fish here. I will only eat the salmon because the others are high in mercury.
@@believeinpeace mercury gets more concentrated the more you go up the feeding chain, because being a heavy metal there is no easy way to process it out of your system, so it gets up the chain whenever a fish gets eaten
Love the examination of several factors, love Complexly!
Unpopular opinion: fish farms are better for the overall planet than wild caught fish. Namely for one reason: fish farm problems are potentially much more manageable than wild caught fish problems.
how is polluting rivers with waste and antibiotics more maneagable than not using dep sea drag nets to avoid bycatch?
Not to mention, the problem of having to feed the fish and maintain their farms, creating even more waste
@@MisterK9739 keyword:potentially
@@MisterK9739 Aquaponics has great potential to address many of the issues you raise.
2:19:00 - Does starting and stopping between traps produce more emission, though? What about all these newish cars with auto start/stop "features"?
way different dude, i understand most are boats are Diesel, start stop those engines and its life expectnacy is reduced by like 80%. also they have to be salt tollerant so way different components which might be why most a diesel. those cars are also frequently hyrbids boats sink batteries sinking are probably worse than the fuel leaking (for the same sunken ship).
some fishing industries are very close to the bone on profitablity so they have to use the cheap option or not at all.
Me who doesn't eat seafood: you have no power here!
Aquaculture is our best bet, once we all get on board with proper management.
No thanks. I'll give up all fish.
Thank you
Pretty good range of info. I would have liked to see a comparison of the plastic waste of each, because I've heard that fishing nets and lines being lost is a big source of ocean plastic. Maybe a part 2?
Easy. -- just choose veggies. Let the fish live.
Sure, that sort of works. As long as you are willing to go above and beyond to plan your diet, and you buy from modern agriculture, instead of the more carbon intensive and worse for the environment "organic" farming.
Love your videos. Aquaculture for me is far better than depleting wild fish populations. Just better regulations and waste management is all it needs.
Eh seems pretty straightforward. Like most technologies, fish farming has to be done right for it for work
Problem is to figuring out, what the right way is…
There has been some pretty great advancements in the world of aquaculture. A lot of the issues with farmed fish are all but negated with modern indoor Recirculating Aquaculture Systems.
They're expensive to set up and do come with some of their own issues, but it really does seem to be the future of agriculture.
@@SuperBryant they are no doubt better than what came before. But what problems arise from them and if the made improvements are enough or will ever be enough remains to be seen.
Or you could just not eat fish
@@jojomojo508 doesn't really help on a larger scale but excellent input thank you
Also worth noting that Beef production only causes 2% of greenhouse gas in the US. Transportation and power take up 52%. EPA numbers. Agg takes 11% and beef is the 2% part of that.
Neither: We've destroyed the ocean and pretending that we can just go on the way we are doing things is going to make sure we destroy our species too
No, you just need to make informed decisions at the grocery store to combat worsening conditions!
@@WaterZer0 try to tell that to 7 billion people
We didn't destroy the oceans, we just destroyed the part of the oceans we like. Just because we kill ourselves off, the world will keep spinning. We've only been here for a couple hundred thousand years, it won't even notice us missing.
@@-._.-._--._.-._--._.-._--._.-. It was a joke.
@@WaterZer0 damn you got me lol
The thing about wild-caught fish is that even with it being the most efficient it can be, it can't be made more efficient than the ships used to catch them. So there is the fuel used to catch them, then return them to a port, then to get them to consumers. Not to mention the points brought up about fish and other species being caught up in nets. And a few other commentors bring up how a lot of nets are simply cast off into the ocean anyway, or sometimes lost for other reasons.
Fish farms can be improved a lot, and can be done much closer to population centers, as well as having species that arent typically available in a certain region. They are not as subject to luck as regular fishing either, even if you do have the normal concerns that farming has with lost animals and natural disasters, so they can be kept more stably to boost local economies.
And, as mentioned in the video, fish farms can compete with other species, and with other fishers, but most of our agriculture is done by a lot smaller percent of the population than it used to be. Letting unsustainable practices continue because some people will have to change jobs is not a good reason to delay making improvements.
Thanks scishow for the thoughtful video!
This was a very short-sighted discussion and not worthy of the SciShow standards. Most of the pollutants in wild fish are induced by human activity, so to then conclude that farmed fish have an advantage due to fewer pollutants is like slapping a band-aid on a missing limb. Furthermore fish farming is contributing to a total ecosystem collapse; humans just can't organize the ecology in the same complex, constructive way that nature can, and to make the attempt is futile.
Also, why should CO2 emissions be the standard of whether an ecological practice is successful? The environmental crisis is FAR more than just the problem with greenhouse gases, and we have to stop talking about carbon emissions like they're the benchmark for sustainability.
Disagree. These videos are an attempt to communicate often subtle ideas, your criticism misses the 'it's complicated' clause in the script. Just saying.
Wild capture creates so much more ecological damage than farming, underneath a salmon pen ain't pretty but it's a damned sight better than miles and miles of obliterated seabed from fishing trawlers.
This is completely unrelated to the topic of the video, but 6:15 made me realize that Hank has the pin/pen vowel merge, which is a totally southern thing
Sounds like sustainability goes down as profits are maximized
Mixing filter feeders, kelp, and fish might be the answer.
We rotate crops, and some cultures mixed farms like some Native Americans with corn beans and squash together.
Especially in times of pandemics and climate change, it’s really amazing how few people ever even try to go vegetarian (or vegan) for a day, let alone a week, or let alone trying it enough to be able to compare for themselves any noticeable benefits they might have. For something so important for our health, as well as for empathy and for the environment, it’s just amazing...
Plant-based foods are the #RocketFuelOfFood. Three great reasons to #SwitchToVegan / Vegetarian:
1) Health
2) Empathy
3) Environment
Reasons against:
1) Habit / tradition?
2) Apathy?
Reasons against also include financial issues, availability and b12 deficiency.
Let’s face it, for lost the reason against it is taste.
Also while it is true, that vegetarian and vegan dishes are often better for the environment, the same does not have to apply to products that try to imitate meat.
I find it weird when people act like agriculture also isn't a major contributor to pollution/ major drivers of inequality ie qinoa, avacado etc
I cant get all my needed resources from plants, so im gonna continue to eat meat, meaning a few times a month.
@@oxybrightdark8765 a vegetarian diet is way cheaper than eating meat everyay, that is the worst argument.
Vegetables and fruits are available to everyone, that has access to cheap meat.
B12 deficiency is only an issue for strict vegans, and then you simply take supplements that cost like 10 bucks for 60-100 pills.
So, there is actually very little reason to not try a vegetarian diet. I mean, in european states and the US, there is one month of fasting either way, that´s the perfect time to do it
Making "informed decisions without making big categorical judgments" is something that should be applied to more than just seafood choices.
How about not eating the fishes at all and leaving them alone?
Some people need to eat them.
There are other aquaculture solitions that are catching on, although for now on a limited scale. I came across a trout farm some time ago which fed its livestock on the larvae of flies, which they raised on various food waste from local ago-industries, There's also is aquaponics, where fish such as tilapia are raised and their nutrient-laden waste water feed hydroponic crops often leafy greens or herbs.
Informed decision that comes to me after watching this video is that they're both bad and I would rather not eat fish.
The thumbnail is awesome btw!