North Sea cod stocks 'on road to sustainability'

[xchrom]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22820162

North Sea cod stocks are on the road to sustainability, according to Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) research.

The council, which certifies whether fish are being caught sustainably, says it is too soon to tell exactly when the North Sea fishery will be sustainable.

But a spokesman said on current trends, it will be ready for certification within years rather than decades.

Stocks would still be in recovery then, James Simpson said, but they would have passed an acceptable level.

[xchrom]

1. Cod stocks recover after years of overfishing

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/jun/08/cod-stocks-recover-overfishing-marine


Cod stocks have improved in the North Sea, but are still below sustainable levels. Photograph: Alamy

Cod could be in for a revival at the fish counter as stocks recover after being overfished for decades.

Eating cod has been regarded as close to a crime by environmentalists, and consumers have been urged to opt for alternatives such as gurnard.

But a survey by the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) and other fisheries organisations suggests that effective management means cod is increasing. The standards body, which certifies certain fisheries as sustainable as a guide for consumers, said that on current trends cod would soon qualify for its certification.

Richard Benyon, the fisheries minister, recently confessed to the Guardian that cod – in batter, with mushy peas – was his favourite fish.

[kristopher]

7. It is good news.

Fisheries management isn't rocket science, just basic biology and economics finding proper expression through the political system.

Without organizations like MSC getting the political system to pay attention to the science is a far more difficult task.

[postulater]

2. Good news!

[Omaha Steve]

3. I love cod

K&R!

I remember learning this in grade school.

http://marinelife.about.com/od/conservation/p/historyofcodfishing.htm

Earliest Europeans:

The Vikings and Basques were some of the first Europeans to travel to the coast of North America and harvest and cure cod. Cod was dried until it was hard, or cured using salt, so that it was preserved for a long period of time.

Eventually, explorers such as Columbus and Cabot "discovered" the New World. Descriptions of the fish indicate that cod were as big as men, and some say that fishermen could scoop the fish out of the sea in baskets. Europeans concentrated their cod fishing efforts in Iceland for awhile, but as conflicts grew, they began fishing along the coast of Newfoundland and what is now New England.
Pilgrims and Cod:

In the early 1600's, John Smith charted out New England. When determining where to flee, the Pilgrims studied Smith's map and were intrigued by the label "Cape Cod." They were determined to profit from fishing, although according to Mark Kurlansky, in his book Cod: a Biography of the Fish That Changed the World, "they knew nothing about fishing," (p. 68) and while the Pilgrims were starving in 1621, there were British ships filling their holds with fish off the New England coast.

Believing they would "receive blessings" if they took pity on the Pilgrims and assisted them, the local Native Americans showed them how to catch cod and use the parts not eaten as fertilizer. They also introduced the Pilgrims to quahogs, "steamers," and lobster, which they eventually ate in desperation.

FULL story at link.

[happyslug]

10. People tend to forget the Pilgrims were Upper Middle Class people

Last edited Tue Jun 11, 2013, 11:36 AM - Edit history (1)

The Pilgrims had MONEY, thus could move to Holland to get away from the King and then pay for two ships to America (While they were upper middle class, they were NOT sailors so the ship they planned to keep was in so bad condition it had to turn back, leaving the Mayflower, a ship they had only rented for the trip, as they only way to get to America. The Captain of the Mayflower decided to stay the winter with the Pilgrims even through he had already fulfilled all of his contractual obligations when he dropped the Pilgrims on Cape Code).

Most working class people did NOT join the Pilgrims, Jamestown settlers or the Puritans. In Jamestown they had to bring in Working Class people to do they work, and then found out they had to deal with them on somewhat equal footing (In many ways the introduction of African Americans as Slave was an attempt to reduce the few rights the working class whites had won for themselves between 1610 and 1691). This lack of actual workers lead to the Starvation time for Jamestown and Plymouth. In the case of Jamestown, after John Smith was recalled back to England, his harsh rule that forced men to be farmers broke down and with it the ability to produce food. The greed of the Settlers of Jamestown lead them to steal food from the Native Americans, who then just moved to far away for the Settlers to steal from. Thus the Starving time.

In Plymouth the lack of farmers, fisherman or any other member of the working class lead to a similar situation. This time all it took was the Mayflower to leave. The Captain had stayed to long and needed to make sure his men were paid AND the ship was maintained. Which the Captain did and then went Whaling off Iceland.

For more details as to Jamestown see "History of the White Race".

Summary of the above book:
http://clogic.eserver.org/1-2/allen.html

Unlike Jamestown and the Pilgrims, the Puritans had the sense to bring with them workers. In fact they sent the workers in FIRST, to make sure homes were built AND food was Planted BEFORE most of the Puritans moved to New England (Salem, the city not the town, was founded in 1626 by Fisherman who wanted to base to fish from, they had earlier found Cape Ann in 1623 for the same reason). In 1628 the first Puritans appeared, as part of the plan to move more Puritans to what is now Boston in 1630. The two groups ended up working together and by 1630 produced enough food so that Boston could be founded without a "Staving Period" as Jamestown and Plymouth had been through.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem,_Massachusetts

Please note, when the Puritans did move into New England, they had a problem with Salem. It was NOT a Puritan stronghold (To many working class stiffs), thus most of the Puritans (Which were more upper middle class) ended up in "Salem Village" since 1757 known as "Danvers" Massachusetts. Salem Village was a independent town from Salem town, as they were still known as late as the early 1800s. It was Salem Village (Now called "Danvers&quot that the Salem Witch Trials took place, NOT Salem Town (Now Salem City).

The real key was getting people who actually knew how to work and farm to get to New England, instead of the Upper Middle Class that wanted to hold onto their money. This was one of the problems of the reformation, it was an Upper Middle Class lead movement that down played the input of working class stiffs.

One of the indications of this is that technically the Puritans banned Christmas as a "Pagan" holiday. Yet Benjamin Franklin in his "Poor Richard's Almanac" had a comment to make sure your workers were NOT to joyous or rambunctious (exact quote escapes me) for the end of December. Such "Rambunctious" celebration had been part of Catholic England's Christmas traditions and seems to have survived among the Working Class. This was true even of New England of the mid 1700s. Thus celebrations tied in with Christmas continued even if such celebrations were looked down upon by Upper Middle Class Puritans (and other Upper Middle Class Americans, for the ban on Christmas extended down into the South, with the notable exceptions of the Germans). Now south of Pennsylvania, Christmas seems to have survived to a very limited degree among the upper class, but it was still illegal to celebrate Christmas in the US till AFTER the America Revolution. Illegal but hard to enforce if you kept the celebration within your family i.e. Christmas dinner and exchange of presents.

I bring this up, for the Upper Middle Class did not celebrate Christmas during the Colonial period (In fact Congress did not take Christmas Day off till 1835). On the other hand we have strong evidence that some Christmas celebrations survived for a very long time after the Reformation (even, as it appears, Christmas itself was NOT "Seen" being celebrated by the Working Class).

Just a comment on history, until it was decided to ship working class people to the New World, colonization failed. It is when they decided to ship in working class people (including African Americans as slaves) did the Colonies survived and boomed. Thus the settlement of Cape Ann in 1623 and Salem in 1626 were more important for the settlement of America then Plymouth in 1620.

Side Note: Polish Glass workers had been imported to Jamestown in 1608, part of the importation of working glass people to Jamestown that eventually made it successful. This importation of working glass stiffs made Jamestown successful (They seemed to have survived the starving time quite well, they had planted crops, harvested them and then made sure they and they family had food). In 1619 Virginia held their first election, and excluded the Poles from voting. The Poles then went on Strike, the first strike in America and it was for POLITICAL reasons, the right to vote, NOT for more wages. The Poles won the right to vote:

More on The Polish Glass workers strike:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1619_Jamestown_Polish_craftsmen_strike

[Champion Jack]

11. Great post Slug!

[happyslug]

12. I added comments as to the other event in 1619 in Jamestown

In most history books, if the year 1619 is mentioned at all, it involves the first importation of slaves into Virginia. Two other events occurred that year, first was the first election in the New World. Second was the first STRIKE in the New World. The Strike was when the Polish Glass Workers, who had been in Jamestown since 1608, were DENIED the right to vote in the election. The Poles won the right to vote.

In many ways, the importation of African Americas in 1619 and the above strike are related. The African Americans were brought in to provide more workers at lower costs, thus driving down the wage of ALL working class people. i.e. When the Poles won the right to vote, the Elites of Virginia brought in Slaves, who did not have the right to vote, to undercut the power of the Working Class in Virginia which had been demonstrated by the Polish Glass Workers Strike.

What the strike had to do with the subsequent wars with Native Americas in Virginia (Starting in 1622) is unclear, but if you read about Bacon's Rebellion of the 1670s you see the working class allying with African America Slaves (And the undermining of this alliance by the Virginia elites using their control over writing, the courts and communications with England to develop and concept of "Race" as a division of society).

Now, the reports of the time period indicate a disagreement of how to deal with Native Americans on the Frontier between the Men on the Frontier and the Colonial government was the cause of the rebellion (The frontiersmen wanted land that the Native Americas held), but when the frontiersmen did revolt they did not only worked with African American Slaves but also Native Americans. Bacon's Rebellion is claimed was a rebellion of all classes against the Governor of Virginia, but if you look at the details it was more of a class war, with lower class Native Americas (they did exist) allying with the Frontiersmen against their own Power elite (Who had married into the Power Elite of Virginia, For example the Rudolphs of Virginia all claim to be descendant from Pocahontas, even while they were one of the richest family of Colonial and Post Colonial Virginia). Thus the refusal of the Governor of Virginia to move against Native Americas seems to have been the cause that set off the rebellion. The reason for this refusal was the elites of both had become the same, while their lower classes had stayed separated (but only in organization i.e. the Natives still saw themselves as members of their tribe, while the Frontiersmen saw themselves as members of their parish).

Thus while the underlying pressure on the working class of whites, blacks and Native Americans were the real reason the the rebellion took place, that fact that poor whites and Native Americas organized themselves differently prevented them from joining forces. At the same time Whites and African Americas had joined the same Parishes and thus were use to working together and thus did join forces. Some attacks on Native Americas did occurred during the Rebellion but the main thrust of the Rebellion was against the ruling elite on the coast NOT Native Americas. The Rebellion was suppressed, but afterward a deliberate effort was made to keep all three races separate (Except on the elite level) so that the poor/working class would never combined together in a rebellion.

More on the Virginian Native American Wars of the 1600s:
http://www.virginiaplaces.org/nativeamerican/anglopowhatan.html

More on Bacon's Rebellion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacon's_Rebellion

[wtmusic]

4. Kick for a glimmer of good news. nt

[NickB79]

5. The MSC's research has come under scrutiny in recent years

Some environmentalists accuse it of being nothing more than an industry front for Walmart, McDonalds, etc as a form of greenwashing:

http://www.npr.org/2013/02/11/171376509/is-sustainable-labeled-seafood-really-sustainable

So, I'll take this with a grain of salt.

[kristopher]

6. "some environmentalists"?

And one piece by NPR?

There is always room to criticize and find fault with any effort of the kind performed by MSC. And in fact, there are HUGE incentives for dark forces to generate doubt and mistrust of an organization (like MSC) that is, in fact, doing a good job with their policing and costing those dark forces money. We see it all the time here with nuclear power pushers trying to undermine groups like Greenpeace with the same sort of unfounded assertions.

(Given that you buy hook, line and sinker into the propaganda of the nuclear industry and consider that technology to be an example of good environmentalism) perhaps you could produce some actual science that shows where the determinations made by the MSC are tainted in deference to commercial interests.

MARINE STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL (MSC)

After years of seemingly failed government attempts to halt the world fisheries crisis, in 1996 WWF together with Unilever, one of the world's biggest buyers of frozen fish, successfully established the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) to change the way fish are caught, marketed and bought.

Now an independent, non-profit organization, the MSC works with fisheries, retailers, and other stakeholders to identify, certify, and promote responsible, environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable fishing practices around the world.

New standards
To fulfill this ambitious task, the MSC developed a standard for assessing and certifying fisheries. This standard - known as the MSC Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Fishing - is the only internationally recognized set of environmental principles to assess whether a fishery is well managed and sustainable. It is based on the best scientific data and the latest knowledge about the marine environment, and was developed in conjunction with relevant stakeholders in a two-year global consultation process.

Eco-label
Only products from fisheries assessed by independent certifiers as meeting the standard are able to use the MSC logo on their products. For the first time, this gives consumers a way to identify - and the choice to purchase - fish and other seafood from well-managed sources.

A good idea is now becoming reality
The MSC is witnessing increasing support from retailers, governments, non-governmental organizations, conservationists and the fishing industry. Over 100 fisheries around the world are now certified, representing over 7% of global wild fisheries production for human consumption.

Over 100 major seafood buyers have pledged to purchase MSC-certified seafood products, including large supermarket chains in France, the Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, the UK and the US.
Today, more than 10,000 MSC-certified fish products on sale in 40 countries - ranging from fresh, frozen, smoked, and canned fish to fish oil dietary supplements.

http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/how_we_work/conservation/marine/sustainable_fishing/sustainable_seafood/


World Wildlife Fund study whacks ASMI label, praises MSC
http://www.alaskajournal.com/Alaska-Journal-of-Commerce/October-Issue-3-2012/World-Wildlife-Fund-study-whacks-ASMI-label-praises-MSC/

[NickB79]

8. I see you didn't read the link

And clearly have no interest in doing so.

If you don't want to have a discussion about the issues raised by the NPR report (which BTW didn't say the MSC was a total failure but rather suggested ways it need to improve itself) and rather want to do your usual deflect-and-personal-smear dance, we have nothing to discuss. Have a good day

[kristopher]

9. Yes I did.

I also took the time to read MSC's response to to the story.