> Already the oceans are being overfished. One
> fishery after
> another is collapsing due to the floating factories,
> driftnetting, and
> other destructive practices.  We now see fish in the
> markets that are
> lower and lower on the food chain, meaning that the
> fish stocks humans
> used to eat are unlikely to recover (because we are
> eating their prey).

Are they actually being overfished, or is it that the
fish populations are being mis-managed? Being a native
of Idaho I am well aware of the problems the Pacific
salmon population faces. I don't necessarily believe
they are being overfished - rather, the spawning areas
in the Pacific Northwest have been pretty much
eliminated. I see that as mis-management of a natural
resource.

> Oceanic fish farming, using coastal areas, is
> eliminating much of the
> breeding ground for ocean-going fish.  Thus the wild
> stocks are
> even more depleted, besides being stressed by
> pollutants, agricultural
> runoff, and oil spills.  I don't think we can turn
> to fish to feed the
> exponentially increasing human population.

I don't disagree that there is a problem with
polution, et al. However, it seems unlikely we could
feed a large population with land animals only. (They
just take way too long to mature). Unless we resort to
genocide or world war, the poplulation of the world is
not going to decrease in the near future. It only
seems logical that we would *have* to turn to the
oceans as an option.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com