FRIHOST ē FORUMS ē SEARCH ē FAQ ē TOS ē BLOGS ē COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Is aquaculture the future of the fish we eat?





zaxacongrejo
Is aquaculture the future of the fish we eat?

Did you knew that almost all the fish we eat nowadays I provided by aquaculture explorations in land or sea or rivers, dams etc?
Guess what? Is true most of the fish we eat now is artificially grew in big fish farms, they can be planted over the sea, but those create a lot of environmental problems because of the contamination in the waters where they are, there has been cases were all the fauna and flora around died over the years, because of water contamination.
There are fish farms in buildings inside tanks this ones are the more environmental friendly because they have to control all the waste the produce waters, dead fish etc
There are even tanks in open spaces in land this oneís do not pollute the sea water and they are subject to the same regulations of those inside buildings.
But I believe that the big question here is why is this happening?
Because seas canít produce enough fish for the actual demand not because they really canít but because our development is destroying them.
Ankhanu
zaxacongrejo wrote:
Is aquaculture the future of the fish we eat?

Did you knew that almost all the fish we eat nowadays I provided by aquaculture explorations in land or sea or rivers, dams etc?
Guess what? Is true most of the fish we eat now is artificially grew in big fish farms...



zaxacongrejo wrote:
... they can be planted over the sea, but those create a lot of environmental problems because of the contamination in the waters where they are, there has been cases were all the fauna and flora around died over the years, because of water contamination.
There are fish farms in buildings inside tanks this ones are the more environmental friendly because they have to control all the waste the produce waters, dead fish etc
There are even tanks in open spaces in land this oneís do not pollute the sea water and they are subject to the same regulations of those inside buildings.

You're right that, often, fish farms (and the like) do have strong impacts upon the bodies of water in which they're located; fish waste, excess food waste, dead fish, fish population density and (to a lesser extent) alterations to water currents caused by the farming infrastructure all have impacts upon the environment. Fish farm waste can contaminate the water and generate excess nutrients, causing anoxic zones and/or alter what species thrive in the area. Farms of filter feeders can also deplete the water of nutrients, depriving the habitats natural residents of resources as well as adding their own waste to the system. individuals of the farmed species may also escape and enter the wild ecosystem; if they're a non-native species, or a native species from a different genetic pool, there can be significant impacts on the native species.

Your indoor and land-locked farms are better environmentally (though they're more energy intensive). Where they fail is that they're quite expensive to build and operate and require more maintenance. With this in mind, farmed fish from these sorts of farms must be more expensive than fish acquired from cheaper means.

I'm not going to touch the part on the impacts of the various ways of acquiring fish/bivalves/etc. to be farmed Wink

zaxacongrejo wrote:
But I believe that the big question here is why is this happening?
Because seas canít produce enough fish for the actual demand not because they really canít but because our development is destroying them.

I'm not really sure how to interpret your conclusion to the question... can you state it more clearly?
Are you suggesting that the natural ecosystem can handle our demand for fish harvesting, but the natural system is compromised by our development (habitat changes, pollution, etc)?

Aquaculture is of interest to meet the market demand for fish due to the impacts that traditional forms of acquisition/harvesting has had on fish stocks around the world. Many species have been overfished, and our methods of catching them can be very destructive to the environment, and are generally too general or non-selective, catching everything, not just the target species, and those species die for no reason as they're thrown back. As planned it should be cheaper (primary) and less destructive (secondary) to raise the species we wish to consume. Basic idea "We want X, so we'll raise X, and the wild stocks can be left alone"; unfortunately, there are complications in the equation.
fouadCh
zaxacongrejo wrote:
Did you knew that almost all the fish we eat nowadays I provided by aquaculture explorations in land or sea or rivers, dams etc?
Well, not the one I eat, and I'm 100% sure about that... :-)
zaxacongrejo wrote:

But I believe that the big question here is why is this happening?
Because seas canít produce enough fish for the actual demand not because they really canít but because our development is destroying them.
It's simply because there is a profit that can be made out of it.. given the current demand/supply status...
Related topics
Do fish eat caterpillars?
Brain Or MIND?
McDonald's - The end of fast food chains?
Can humans further evolution?
worms
A games for chrildren
My coloured fishes are dieing, Help
Vatican and Anglican Church embrace evolution?
Do You Think That All Viruses will be Eliminated?
Anyone here make money from your hobby?
Is the food we eat safe?
Do you like to eat fish?
Anyone able to help: Hydroponics Garden in A Storage Unit?
A Car that drives like a Fish.
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Science -> Earth

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.