Millions of sharks are killed by humans every year from the process of finning. Finning is where the fins are cut of a shark for shark fin soup, which is considered a delicacy, after that, the body is then thrown back into the ocean while the shark is still living. This is not only wasteful but also cruel and inhumane. By the time you finish reading this paper, about 856 sharks are killed from this. That adds up to about 11,417 sharks per hour and 100,012,920 every year.
Provided that sharks have not been fished out of certain areas it is reasonable to assume that their disappearance would be a result of the destruction of a suitable habitat. The fact that shark species are so diverse and inhabit every ocean on the planet makes them key players essential to the ocean environment. Yet despite their importance in the marine food-chain they remain a low conservation priority. For all their evolutionary success and apparent menace, sharks are incredibly fragile, unable to withstand the increased pressures forced on them by the voracious world fishing industries. This is partly due to the fact that sharks are slow growing animals that mature late, live long, and have a low reproduction
Since late 2004, Harpseals.org has been promoting the boycott of Canadian seafood in order to pressure the Canadian fishing industry to stop supporting the massacre of seals. In 2013, Harpseals.org added a boycott of Namibian seafood to end the Cape fur seal slaughter. So the reason that they are Boycotting Canadian Seafood is because most of the Canadian sealers are fishermen. Sealing is an off-season activity for them, just a way to earn a few dollars before the start of the fishing season. Their income from selling pelts is only about 5% of their income.
Native Hawaiian fishermen get fenced off their traditional fishing trails, blocked by massive developments, even criminalized for the food they catch. Quote “We get rights to beach access”(Mandoe 2011). We can be five feet away from the highest waterline. If they [landowners] build one wall, we can go on ‘em.” As Oli Turalde puts(Mandoe 2011). The right to fish and eat turns out to be a hotly contested cultural conflict; it involves 150 years of constitutional law.
Numerous people have attempted to justify the use of such methods by putting down or rather, dismissing the animal as a creature lacking the mental capacities to be considered equals to that of a human being. In their book "Animal Experimentation : The Moral Issue" authors Robert M. Baird and Stuart E. Rosenbaum say, "holders of rights must have the capacity to comprehend rules of duty, governing all including themselves" (104). He then goes on to explain that "animals do not have such moral capacities" (Baird 105). And as a result of this "we can't violate their rights because they have none" (Baird 105). Dismissing the animal as nothing more then an object may not seem like the most reasonable defense against the use of animals for testing
A different approach to research is needed to bring relief to animals and to preserve animal species. People think that animals have no rights, because they are a lower species than humans. Other people think that animals have feelings, thoughts, goals, needs, and desires. Animals have those, because they basically have the same function as humans. If the animals had those feelings, then they should have respect.
In his essay Marine Parks, he puts forth the argument that marine parks should be closed down because observing marine animals is much better in the wild instead of being held captive in the marine parks. He states that the research conducted on these marine animals is not reliable, also that visits from foreign tourists will not decline with the demise of these parks. Moreover, he adds that such parks are unnecessary and cruel to these marine mammals. Bill Daly has a strong viewpoint on the reasons he gives for his argument, however, I do not agree with him. Indeed some of his reasoning does make sense, but according to me his reasons seem very theoretical or rather hypothetical and not applicable in the real world.
Nevertheless, despite their arguments being supported by validated and reliable evidence, both authors are biased towards their viewpoints. Initially, the authors argue that the domestication of animals must be prohibited as it violates the basic rights of animals and raises moral questions. One right that animals must obtain is the right not to be property. When animals are a property they are mistreated and not protected. Despite the laws that governments such as the US and UK established towards animals, they only seem to be effective when a conflict arises between the owner and the animal.
Aquaculture may be the answer to sustainable commercial production of fish by no longer overfishing natural habitats, but it also needs to regulated to prevent negative effects. Instead of protecting the natural fish the senate introduced a bill by Tom Tiffany that removed some regulation on the fishing industry. Among the negative aspects of the cause according to an environmental group: the DNR’s ability to give fish and fish eggs to fisheries, the expansion of fisheries, and no accountability of fish farm to protect surrounding aquatic life (Midwest Environmental Advocates). Policies need to be made to regulate where and how these fish farms run. For example, rather than giving control to the fisheries in determining how they use the land, regulations should determine what practice can be used to protect the ecosystems around aquaculture facilities.
We don’t live in the sea yet we are still affected by marine pollution, why? Because 70% of oxygen we breath is produced by marine plants thus if marine plant are affected by the pollution and there is shortage in oxygen or animals eat those affected plants in the end we will be affected. Japan being one of the biggest consumer of seafood can be affected, their people can be affected as humans seeing as we are on the far end of the food chain thus if a fish living in the contaminated waters of Japan falls ill, is then caught and served as food to the people ultimately they will fall sick too. When this takes places the consumer can face a great deal of problems from hormonal problem, kidney damage, reproductive problems and nervous system