4,149
edits
🐟 Fishing series: A few climate conscious guidelines to buying fish: Difference between revisions
🐟 Fishing series: A few climate conscious guidelines to buying fish (view source)
Revision as of 19:56, 2 March 2020
, 2 March 2020no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
[[File:Fishdiet.png|thumb|Thumbnailed image]|]] | [[File:Fishdiet.png|thumb|Thumbnailed image]|]] | ||
It may not appear as such but fish and seafood actually represents half of human meat consumption. It is estimated<ref>Fish: Numbers given by the FAO in its 2018 report on fishery (click here for report)/Meat: Numbers correspond to the FAO’s 2019 “Meat market review” | It may not appear as such but fish and seafood actually represents half of human meat consumption. It is estimated<ref>Fish: Numbers given by the FAO in its 2018 report on fishery (click here for report)/Meat: Numbers correspond to the FAO’s 2019 “Meat market review” | ||
<u>Fish:</u> 20.2 kg/pp | <u>Fish:</u> 20.2 kg/pp — <u>Meat:</u> 41.3 kg/pp — <u>Bovine meat:</u> 10.1 kg/pp — <u>Mutton meat:</u> 2.1 kg/pp — <u>Pig meat:</u> 15.3 kg/pp — <u>Poultry meat:</u> 13.8 kg/pp</ref> that, on a yearly basis, humans eat about 41kg of land-animal meat per person as well as, surprisingly enough, 20kg of fish. | ||
<u>Meat:</u> 41.3 kg/pp | |||
<u>Bovine meat:</u> 10.1 kg/pp | |||
<u>Mutton meat:</u> 2.1 kg/pp | |||
<u>Pig meat:</u> 15.3 kg/pp | |||
<u>Poultry meat:</u> 13.8 kg/pp</ref> that, on a yearly basis, humans eat about 41kg of land-animal meat per person as well as, surprisingly enough, 20kg of fish. | |||
What do these figures imply? Simply that <u>our consumption of fish has be taken seriously and considered in its entirety</u>. | What do these figures imply? Simply that <u>our consumption of fish has be taken seriously and considered in its entirety</u>. | ||
| Line 84: | Line 79: | ||
No existing “sustainable fishing” label, may it be corporate or linked to public institutions can guaranty that the certified fish is actually “sustainable”. Although there are some international standards related to seafood certification, there is no real external organization able to fact-check abusive certification nor come against companies deciding to qualify their own products as “sustainable fishing”. At best, these companies will be asked to rename their label or stop their advertising campaign, without fearing any fine or penalty. | No existing “sustainable fishing” label, may it be corporate or linked to public institutions can guaranty that the certified fish is actually “sustainable”. Although there are some international standards related to seafood certification, there is no real external organization able to fact-check abusive certification nor come against companies deciding to qualify their own products as “sustainable fishing”. At best, these companies will be asked to rename their label or stop their advertising campaign, without fearing any fine or penalty. | ||
Even public labels such as “Pêche durable” in France, though funded and designed by a public Insitution, defines: | Even public labels such as “Pêche durable” in France, though funded and designed by a public Insitution, defines: “<i>An environmental impact is considered “low” as long as it does not affect the habitat irreversibly.</i>” We can here see the fragility of such a label. So do not trust any, trust your fishmonger! | ||
== Notes == | == Notes == | ||