undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjandrewrogers3y ago0 comments

In the US, you are required to discard bycatch under penalty of law. As a professional fisherman you aren't even allowed to eat it. They don't want to discard it, they are required to.

The regulation nominally exists to disincentivize bycatch but anecdotally it seems to just ensure that bycatch becomes waste.

0 comments

bradleyjg3y ago

It would be better to ban the type of fishing that produces enormous bycatch and also destroy the seabed.

tap-snap-or-nap3y ago

Governments and corporations lack motivation to cease this behavior, as there are continually available markets willing to pay for and meeting consumer demands.

One of those major issues that seems likely to drown with a million other major issues.

wil4213y ago

There’s a big difference between bycatch you can’t keep and being required to throw away all bycatch, I’m presuming that’s what you mean.

NOAA states:

>Fishermen sometimes catch and discard animals they do not want, cannot sell, or are not allowed to keep.

There’s a huge difference in not allowed to keep and we would keep for ourselves. If you’re netting a bunch of undersized fish you have to release them, I catch lots of undersized fish I’d love to eat but I’m not legally allowed to.

https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/insight/understanding-bycatch

pvaldes3y ago

> it seems to just ensure that bycatch becomes waste.

Not exactly. Bycatch becomes energy diverted towards the scavengers part of the trophic chain. They are feeding other animals with it.

XorNot3y ago

If you're allowed to keep bycatch, then the incentive to reduce it is suddenly gone - easier to just find a way to accidentally also make money off it.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse