Seafood to run out in about 40 years
I just posted a piece about new oil discoveries pushing prices down today before that oil ever comes on line, as other oil will instead be pumped and consumed. A related point is often made with the same theory of non-renewable resources, and that is that we really won’t run out of oil, it will just start getting so expensive that people slow down their consumption alot, until some better resource comes along.
Well, I noticed today a news story where some scientists are predicting that the world is running out of something far more precious than oil, and that is seafood. At 51, I’ll probably not live to see this prediction come true. Anyway, you can read the story here: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20061103/D8L59FQ00.html. Running out of seafood is a real tragedy. In fact, it is called “the tragedy of the commons.” (See Hardin’s article at URL: http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/TragedyoftheCommons.html)
This is a problem that is repeated over and over again, where people, because of certain social rules that we call property rights (see this article about property rights by Armen Alchian at URL: http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/PropertyRights.html).
Now think about the contrast in the two cases. In one, the resource runs out and in the other, it does not. Why the difference: Most costs are, in both cases, borne by the producer, but in the seafood case, some significant costs are NOT borne by the producers. In these cases, people continuously act irresponsively. They are not really required to bear all costs. When people do not have to bear all of the costs of their actions, such as the costs of catching breeding stock, so that there are fewer fish in the future, they will act irresponsibly. Since people cannot OWN fish until they capture and kill them, they will not bear the marginal user costs mentioned in the previous ANWR blog.
Of course, one fisheries prof begged to differ. Read about his tale at URL:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003340489_seafood03m.html
Economists have been at the forefront of fisheries management, coming up with the idea to manage fisheries with something called an individually tradable quota, or ITQ. YOu might want to look that one up on Wikipedia.
What do you guys think about all of this?
Morris Coats
November 28th, 2006 at 4:18 pm
Economists need to help fishermen save their business. Fishermen may need to take classes in marketing and managing their businesses. They should by all means try to keep seafood businesses open. If the fishermen would close business, several people would be without jobs. The next step is getting the government involved with the situation.
December 7th, 2006 at 11:23 pm
Some type of assistance needs to be given to the commercial fishermen to just let them know what a fragile industry they operate within. The fishing industry particulary in Louisiana needs to be kept alive and thriving. Many residents of the state depend on the waters off the coast of Louisiana to feed their families and pay their bills. Some type of training needs to be implemented to assistance the fishermen in their buisness decision making. Over fishing would need to be monitored along with the illegal use of some gear that captures fish and makes the population decline (gill nets already have been banned). All in all if the commercial industry was monitored more effectively and plans were implemented seafood would always thrive in Louisiana