[HN Gopher] Hundreds of fishing vessels vanishing along Argentin...
___________________________________________________________________
Hundreds of fishing vessels vanishing along Argentina's waters
Author : belter
Score : 841 points
Date : 2021-06-06 12:28 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (usa.oceana.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (usa.oceana.org)
| mistrial9 wrote:
| great to see this quantified and publicized widely
| anamax wrote:
| A vessel without a working tracker is either non-existent or
| broken.
|
| Broken vessels should be taken to port and kept there until
| repairs AND said repairs are verified. Verification should
| consists of "the tracker was on continuously for a week."
|
| If there's no vessel at a given location, it's clearly safe for
| live-fire targetted at said location.
| sneak wrote:
| Let's be clear here, though: what you're describing is
| premeditated murder.
| eatonphil wrote:
| This isn't Bermuda Triangle kind of vanishing it's about
| predominantly Chinese vessels going offline to avoid being
| tracked.
| yorwba wrote:
| From the article:
|
| > Oceana documented over 800 foreign vessels logging more than
| 900,000 total hours of apparent fishing. The analysis also
| revealed that 69% of this fishing activity was conducted by
| more than 400 Chinese vessels.
|
| ...
|
| > As part of this analysis, Oceana documented more than 6,000
| gap events, instances where AIS transmissions are not detected
| for more than 24 hours, which potentially indicates vessels are
| disabling their public tracking devices. These vessels were
| invisible for more than 600,000 total hours, hiding fishing
| vessel locations and masking potentially illegal behavior, such
| as crossing into Argentina's national waters to fish. The
| Chinese fleet was responsible for 66% of these incidents.
|
| It appears that Chinese vessels are actually slightly less
| likely to disable AIS than others?
|
| Edit: from the actual report at the end of the article, which I
| missed at first:
|
| > While China had the highest total number of gaps, the Spanish
| fleet appeared to have the worst AIS compliance on a per-vessel
| basis. Nine out of the 10 fishing vessels that spent the most
| time with their AIS off were flagged to Spain, despite constant
| AIS operation being mandatory under European Union law.
|
| I wonder whether that means they can be sued, or whether the
| responsible regulatory agency would have to take the
| initiative.
| danparsonson wrote:
| Just over 50% of the vessels were responsible for 66% of the
| gap events - that makes them more likely doesn't it?
| yorwba wrote:
| I was basing it on 69% of fishing time vs. 66% of gaps. Of
| course it could just be that their average gap is longer.
| That statistic is unfortunately missing even from the full
| report, although they must have it if they were able to
| identify the ten vessels with the longest gaps.
| tw04 wrote:
| That's kind of missing the point. There were 400 Chinese
| vessels turning off their AIS to illegally fish. Even if
| they were turning them off less frequently, the sheer
| numbers are far more damaging than 9 Spanish ships.
|
| When you have that many vessels you don't need to turn
| them off as much because you're catching everything that
| moves in a far shorter period of time.
| yorwba wrote:
| The relative prevalence is relevant if you want effective
| regulations. If the EU requirement for constant AIS
| transmissions is ineffective, then it's unlikely that
| political pressure on the Chinese government would result
| in a more effective policy. If, however, the owners of
| those Spanish vessels are fined enough to force them to
| end their illegal fishing, then there's hope that
| introducing similar regulations in China would also
| effectively curb illegal fishing by Chinese vessels.
|
| Aside: There were actually 316 Chinese vessels with gaps
| in AIS transmission, 71 Taiwanese, 36 South Korean, 27
| Spanish, 5 Argentine and 5 unknown ones.
| joegahona wrote:
| I was disappointed to discover that too -- they're not
| "vanishing," they're intentionally going offline. Borderline
| clickbait.
| jiofih wrote:
| As a very light reading of the article will tell.
| shoto_io wrote:
| I remember reading back in 2020 about this tiny satellite
| startup. They are being used by the Galapagos islands to track
| Chinese fishing boats.
|
| https://www.geospatialworld.net/blogs/satellite-data-nails-c...
| wutbrodo wrote:
| Yea, the title is incredibly misleading
| jmartrican wrote:
| So I guess the rest of the world just has to shut up and take
| this behavior from China?
| throwawaybchr wrote:
| At this point the Chinese can do what they want. The own the guy
| in the White House, and they own Mitch McConnell so nobody can
| stop them.
|
| The only person who had the temerity to do anything about their
| bullying was maligned daily because it was fashionable.
| SavantIdiot wrote:
| This is just enraging. And a reminder that all the fiat currency
| in the world won't be able to by a tekka maki when there are no
| more fish.
| cpp_frog wrote:
| This also happened in Chile, although from the article _it seems_
| it was not as prevalent as in our neighboring country. (In
| Spanish) 11 chinese fishing ships spotted in chilean waters, 70
| (!!!) of them made it to the Atlantic through the Magellan Strait
| [0], [1], [2].
|
| [0] https://www.cnnchile.com/pais/11-barcos-pesqueros-chinos-
| zee...
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TY3gjXIdZ2g
|
| [2] https://www.infobae.com/america/2020/12/04/armada-de-
| chile-i...
| voisin wrote:
| Until the rest of the world diversifies its manufacturing to
| lessen the power of China, and then regulates it, they will
| continue to do whatever they want with impunity.
| ed25519FUUU wrote:
| If the last 5 years shows us anything, largely how much we "do"
| depends largely on the people in office.
| sangnoir wrote:
| By "in office" - I assume you mean the C-suite of companies
| whose profits are reliant on Chinese manufacturing?
| one2three4 wrote:
| Your commend reminded me of this presentation
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQccNdwm8Tw
| zanethomas wrote:
| The CCP continues its lawless behaviour.
| diegof79 wrote:
| As an Argentinian, I can add that sadly this has been happening
| for years, and it appears on the news for time to time. The
| vessels are mainly from China, in addition to South Korea, Japan,
| and Spain.
|
| The economic situation of Argentina means that there are not
| enough funds to control de coast. So these ships go in and out at
| the 200 miles that limit the international waters. It's easy to
| see by satellite, but hard to control with a small and under
| equipped coast patrol.
| fnord77 wrote:
| I don't know the details but if private citizens can find these
| fishing boats, surely the AR Navy could. AR has 3 full-size
| destroyers, I imagine sailing one through a fishing fleet and
| even firing a couple shots could chase them off for good?
|
| Unless people are getting paid off to look the other way?
| jb775 wrote:
| Destroyers require a whole crew. Why not get a handful of WW2
| era planes with machine guns to patrol the coast? Would be
| cheap and should be enough firepower to scare off fishing
| boats.
| phobosanomaly wrote:
| You'd need boats in the area anyway to gather up the crew
| when the vessel started taking on water.
| jb775 wrote:
| ...or you don't guarantee the poachers that luxury.
| ridaj wrote:
| It would probably chase a few of them off that day. And then
| they come back the next. There would likely need to be much
| more concrete repercussions (imprisonment, fines, asset
| seizures) for it to actually matter...
| phreack wrote:
| They are. There's also a very high political cost of going
| against China, even illegal Chinese boats, in a country such
| as Argentina with a high dependence on Chinese relationships,
| poor sovereignty enforcement, poor military might, massive
| debt and inflation. There's just not enough of anything to do
| something about it.
| fnord77 wrote:
| yeah, I guess the chinese govt could put a lot of pressure
| on a country like AR.
| rorykoehler wrote:
| I don't understand this perspective. It's getting clearer
| by the day that trying to appease China will come at a far
| greater cost than virtually any other approach.
| swagasaurus-rex wrote:
| "An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile-hoping it will
| eat him last." - Winston Churchill
| fencepost wrote:
| Firing on them could be problematic - at least if you
| actually sink one. I suspect seizing the vessels and keeping
| them (returning after payment of ruinous fines) would be more
| effective.
| layoutIfNeeded wrote:
| Don't they have any more Exocets leftover from the Falklands
| War?
| eric__cartman wrote:
| It's a sad situation not only for us, but for anyone interested
| in preserving marine life. These ships are destroying the
| ecosystems in that whole maritime area and all we can do is
| watch and ask them to stop. If we continue to be powerless to
| stop that (which sadly we are unless some country steps up and
| helps by financing the navy) all wildlife in the ocean will be
| permanently and irreversibly affected.
|
| I sometimes hate humanity as a species. How can a living thing
| be purposefully so destructive towards it's own planet? The
| only one it has and will ever have (at least for now we haven't
| infested any other planet). This is one of the many things that
| makes me angry knowing there is nothing that will realistically
| be done to stop it. We will suffer the consequences and these
| people will then go and fuck up some other sea area until there
| is nothing left anywhere in the world.
| Dumblydorr wrote:
| Every person didn't author themselves. They're all driven by
| innate greed and desire and suffering. The fishermen, the
| Chinese oligarchs, the Chinese communist party - they're all
| the center of their own consciousness, each person trying
| from moment to moment. I pity people, I don't hate them. I
| may dislike the capitalist system that leads to environmental
| destruction, but no individual authored our global society.
|
| So, I do see your viewpoint, but looking at individuals is
| one small slice of the problem, not the whole by any means.
| We can't count on individual goodness, not when greed or
| desire is allowed to motivate our leaders so heavily.
| JackFr wrote:
| It's weird that the Chinese _Communist_ Party manifests the
| destruction you attribute to the _capitalist_ system. Not
| wrong -- just weird.
| developer93 wrote:
| They're more state controlled capitalism than communism
| these days as I understand it. The name is just a name.
| fastball wrote:
| Without humanity there would be nobody to witness the fish.
| The earth doesn't care which species live or die or go
| extinct. No matter how bad humanity is, the world is a more
| beautiful place with us in it, because "beauty" as a concept
| would not exist if we were not here. Mass extinction events
| happen without human contribution. Is it bad when we make it
| happen? Yes. But humans are also the only thing around that
| can help _stop_ extinction events from happening in a
| universe which doesn 't give a shit about any of us.
| r00fus wrote:
| Yeah, the planet will exist without humans but i think
| preserving the planet's beauty for future generations is a
| worthy goal, no?
|
| Or do you prefer the idea of future environmental dystopia?
| mercy_dude wrote:
| > I sometimes hate humanity as a species
|
| All of it? I mean hate towards globalization that helped
| China and other hegemonic dictators with no regards for rule
| of law continue to do what it does is one thing. Blatant hate
| for humanity is another.
| ajmurmann wrote:
| It's not only globalization though. It's mankind's
| inability to both understand and prioritize long term
| consequences and to govern the commons properly. The same
| thing manifests on local levels as well.
| jmartrican wrote:
| Humanity has always lead to other, at possibly every point
| in history.
| Jcowell wrote:
| Yes but all of humanity? All? It's like looking at murder
| rates and hating Humanity because it murders despite the
| majority of the global population having not even touch a
| Gun before.
| eric__cartman wrote:
| Well that statement may have been a little too aggressive
| and come off the wrong way. I was quite pissed when wrote
| that comment. I believe humans can do great things, we
| really do. I wouldn't have chosen to be born as any other
| living thing (not that I had a choice anyways lol). It's
| just the selfishness of some people that results in massive
| damages that ruins it for the rest of us.
|
| That said we have to realize as a whole that our current
| way of living is not sustainable and will result is us
| screwing over future generations that will have to live in
| an incredibly polluted, and ecologically damaged planet. We
| have to use our intellect and capacity of achieving
| anything we put our mind towards and take real, meaningful
| steps to solve this problem. Before it's too late. There
| are also many other important global issues that need our
| attention as a society but that's past the scope of this
| comment.
| kortilla wrote:
| > That said we have to realize as a whole that our
| current way of living is not sustainable and will result
| is us screwing over future generations that will have to
| live in an incredibly polluted, and ecologically damaged
| planet. We have to use our intellect and capacity of
| achieving anything we put our mind towards and take real,
| meaningful steps to solve this problem. Before it's too
| late.
|
| This is what humans have been doing for a long time. The
| problems were just much more acute for the next
| generations. Until very recently, most humans were born
| into scenarios without good shelter, solid water
| supplies, solid food supplies, general safety, or any
| medical protection from trivial things like infection let
| alone anything more complicated.
|
| What's happening here is this poor Chinese fisherman are
| still dealing with the acute issues (feeding existing
| family, etc) so the trade of returning home empty handed
| vs breaking boundaries is too difficult for them to come
| out on the right side of.
| JPKab wrote:
| Do keep in mind that there is no other species on the planet
| that is capable of protecting the ecosystem from the eventual
| and inevitable asteroid impact.
|
| We might not be there yet but we are going to be the first
| species in the history of the planet capable of protecting
| the biosphere from the inevitable assault from the cosmos.
| foobiekr wrote:
| "Someday we might do something meaningful so bear that in
| mind when observing the reckless, sadistic and destructive
| present day behavior" is comic book movie reasoning.
| JPKab wrote:
| And here I was thinking it was just optimistic.
|
| Everyone that talks about how horrific a cancer the human
| race is on the planet is a hypocrite because they are
| still alive themselves. If they really meant it they
| would take action by ending their own lives. They don't
| because what they really mean is everyone else is a
| cancer on the planet except for them. It's a selfish and
| narcissistic attitude.
| kortilla wrote:
| Some of us are doing meaningful things to push towards
| the future. If you feel that there is only reckless,
| sadistic, and destructive behavior going on, that says
| more about what you and the people who surround you are
| doing to help.
| newnamenewface wrote:
| This is nonsensical extrapolation probably hundreds of
| years into an ideal future. We aren't there yet and we
| won't be there for a long time at the current rate of
| things. Diverting an asteroid of any significant mass is
| functionally impossible even given years notice today.
| hnxs wrote:
| Who said anything about diverting it? Or destroying it,
| if that's the next point your mind is going to.
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| Huh? Radiation pressure alone is enough to divert an
| asteroid if you spot it in time. You don't need nukes,
| just a rocket and enough paint to change the albedo on
| one side.
| [deleted]
| koheripbal wrote:
| I don't understand the cost argument. Enforcement is only
| expensive if you offer minimal punishments.
|
| Other countries have in the past literally board and scuttle
| trespassing fishing vessels.
|
| Do that, even only a couple times, and few foreign boats will
| risk the trip. It is cheap to do.
| lostlogin wrote:
| China will retaliate. China sends naval escorts with its
| fishing fleet when it goes to Indonesia and countries fear
| this happening. Chinaa is not shy of threatening economic
| sanctions either.
| ac29 wrote:
| The disputes China is having with its neighbors are
| different. China's official position is that a large part
| of the South China Sea is their territory, a view that
| isn't exactly shared by the other nations of the region or
| most of the international community.
|
| Sending the Chinese Navy into territorial waters off of
| South America to secure theft of Argentinian natural
| resources would be a completely different move, and
| arguably an act of war.
| jrockway wrote:
| Why would China care about starting a war? The UK had no
| problems defending the Falklands from Argentina.
| 1MachineElf wrote:
| >China's official position is that a large part of the
| South China Sea is their territory
|
| Unfortunate that it's literally called The South _China_
| Sea. This dispute will likely never go away.
| tomerico wrote:
| Good thing that India doesn't use this logic (Indian
| Ocean)
| Tams80 wrote:
| You underestimate how utterly corrupt a lot of authorities
| are in Argentina.
|
| Once bribes, 'personal cuts', etc. have been made/taken,
| there's not much left. Not to mention the kind of culture
| that breeds.
| tomerico wrote:
| That's a different argument than cost.
| nicce wrote:
| One perspective is that these authority positions need to
| offer better payment to reduce the need for taking the
| bribe. This will increase costs.
| chaostheory wrote:
| You need a strong military to enforce rules between
| countries. Bodies such as the UN and WTO just aren't strong
| enough to do much if anything beyond a press release. Even if
| those international bodies were strong enough, I do not feel
| that they are immune to corruption.
|
| In reality, Argentina would either need to buy or build a
| respectable navy (too poor), OR publicly ally with the US AND
| petition that the US Navy enforce Argentina's territorial
| rights (the US military and its navy are overstretched
| already).
| eloff wrote:
| I'm sure the Argentine Navy isn't the best by a long
| margin. But it should be more than capable of catching and
| scuttling fishing ships.
| elliekelly wrote:
| Is there a word for these sorts of "why don't they just..."
| type of suggestions?
| noughtme wrote:
| Uninformed.
| burnished wrote:
| yeah, just guarantee that everyone rocks up to a
| conversation already enlightened. problem solved, no more
| questions like that.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| "Oversimplification" and "trivialisation" come to mind.
| JackFr wrote:
| It would be great if there where a way to ask "why don't
| they just...", with an emphasis on the "why" so rather than
| coming off as an uniformed blowhard one could inform
| themselves. I suppose a more circumspect way to ask might
| be "is there a reason they don't ...?"
| regularfry wrote:
| Leaving out the word "just" does just fine.
| andrewprock wrote:
| ObOrwell: "The past was alterable. The past never had been
| altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always
| been at war with Eastasia."
| marsven_422 wrote:
| You have the moral right to use deadly force to protect your
| property.....
| hellbannedguy wrote:
| When are we going to stop other countries from raping our oceans?
|
| I guess we are afraid of China, and don't want to start an
| international incident?
|
| (USA dude. Yes--they are encroaching on our water too.)
| cjlovett wrote:
| And Argentina mysteriously lost a submarine recently too. Hmmm.
| Did China sink it to protect their illegal fishing?
| belter wrote:
| Just before:
| https://usa.oceana.org/sites/default/files/4046/high-res-gap...
| jl6 wrote:
| I always imagined fishing vessels doing fairly short range trips
| to get their catch back to shore maximally fresh. Are there
| really ships long-hauling round the Cape all the way from China?
| guerrilla wrote:
| You should look up videos of how fishing works today. The ships
| deep freeze the fish. Some can them. They are floating
| factories
| sct202 wrote:
| On the press release link (idk why it's like the same page but
| basically longer) there's some more highlights. It seems that
| there are friendly ports:
|
| >Of the vessels with AIS gaps, 31% of them visited the Port of
| Montevideo, Uruguay at the end of their trip. This port has
| allegedly been favored by vessels engaging in illegal activity.
| dalbasal wrote:
| Yes. Fishing is basically fishing the globe, regardless of
| where home port is.
| punnerud wrote:
| Norway just launched the satellite NorSat-3 with the purpose of
| locating boats that turn off AIS. I see that it passes over this
| area in Agentina several times each day.
|
| Information about the satellite:
| https://yaxt25j6l6kcxh7gzsles3njx4-ac5fdsxevxq4s5y-www-romse...
|
| Satellite map where you can see it: https://in-the-
| sky.org/satmap_worldmap.php
| shoto_io wrote:
| Wrote it already elsewhere: There are already satellites
| tracking Fishing fleets
|
| https://www.geospatialworld.net/blogs/satellite-data-nails-c...
| Qworg wrote:
| There are several groups working on IUU fishing - I worked on
| Skylight some at Vulcan: https://vulcan.com/skylight
|
| Lots of opportunity to help! Illegal fishing is the #1
| contributor to slavery worldwide and is in the top 3 financial
| crimes.
| spockz wrote:
| How do you get to work for something like this? Become a
| software dev for the UN? Vulcan itself are based in Seattle
| it appears: https://vulcan.com/Careers.aspx
|
| Any European counterparts?
| notahacker wrote:
| Generally most remote sensing companies work on projects
| like this (often grant funded PoCs that never see
| widespread adoption...), since environmental crime is one
| of the easiest things to identify using satellite imagery
| and tracking data.
|
| EARSC.org would be a good starting point for some European
| companies.
| [deleted]
| codezero wrote:
| This is out of nowhere but how much of a piracy opportunity is
| this for someone wanting to acquire a few dozen fishing vessels?
| It sounds like Argentina wouldn't do anything about it.
| prawn wrote:
| I recently worked as drone photographer on a cruise along remote
| Australian coastline. One of the guest lecturers on board worked
| for decades with/alongside the navy, apprehending or fending off
| illegal fishing boats entering protected waters on AU's NW
| Kimberley coast.
|
| Back in the 1700s, there were Indonesians coming down to collect
| sea cucumbers for the Chinese market:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makassan_contact_with_Australi...
|
| Not sure if it's current policy, but the guest lecturer described
| an assessment process for boats they apprehended. A vintage all-
| wooden boat with no electricity/etc was allowed to continue their
| traditional fishing practices in the area. A modern boat with
| powered outboard, metal/fibreglass hull, etc was seized and
| destroyed. There was a third class I can't recall that was
| somewhere in between.
|
| I can see something like this being a way forward, where you can
| fish smallscale for personal use (yacht crew subsisting on
| whatever they can catch) or small commercial use with a certain
| style of boat and catching method. Any bigger operations would be
| restricted to specific zones, or captured and destroyed with
| little warning.
| helsinkiandrew wrote:
| There was a good backgrounder on illegal fishing and detecting
| vessels that have turned off their AIS a few months ago in the
| economist:
|
| https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2021/03/18/...
|
| archive.org:
| https://web.archive.org/web/20210508222031/https://www.econo...
| mhb wrote:
| Also somewhat relevant:
|
| _We uncovered how one ship helped North Korea get oil despite
| sanctions_
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/22/world/winson-north-korea-...
| holografix wrote:
| They need to start being sunk.
| aeoleonn wrote:
| That's what I think as well.
|
| I don't think there's any negotiating with willfully negligent
| and dishonest Chinese industries & government.
|
| To be honest, I am hoping the entire world soon turns against
| China. Maybe once enough of western industry is extricated from
| China.
| dismalpedigree wrote:
| Covert mines. No attribution. Better yet buy the mines from
| China. Once ships start disappearing they will think twice
| about entering illegal waters.
| magicsmoke wrote:
| Up until those mines end up sinking Argentinian fisherman or
| a unrelated cargo vessel that happens to be passing through.
| rodrigoap wrote:
| A few video footages of the coast guard engaging the Chinese
| ships.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=pesca+ilegal+ch...
| Gustomaximus wrote:
| I don't think violence is a good option. Also consider there
| are likely the working poor on the boats, even systems of slave
| labour.
|
| Far better would be to catch them, fly the crew home and and
| auction the vessels.
|
| In Australia they do similar but burn the boats as these tend
| to be smaller vessels made of wood. The thought that you'll
| lose your boat for a catch if fish is a huge deterrent.
| holografix wrote:
| Violence is never a "good" option but to paraphrase Winston
| Churchill: you don't negotiate with a dragon while your head
| is in its mouth.
|
| Sinking some of these vessels would attract the right amount
| of international attention and force action. Seizing and
| destroying is a worth while risk and a "cost of doing
| business".
|
| You want to play a game of cat and mouse? You're one cat
| they're many many more mice.
| hungryforcodes wrote:
| Until they start coming with armed escorts.
| MrRiddle wrote:
| Let's see anyone firing at US Navy destroyer.
| aoeusnth1 wrote:
| That would justify a significant escalation of force. I
| don't see that happening.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. (Qiang
| Gan Zi Li Mian Chu Zheng Quan )
|
| -- Mao Ze Dong
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_power_grows_out_of_
| t...
| nickthemagicman wrote:
| That was my first instinct as well.
|
| Argentina needs an unmarked police force to protect its oceans.
|
| These ships go unmarked they get sunken by an unmarked military
| force.
| mythrwy wrote:
| How about (if we are going that direction) boarded and
| impounded first?
|
| Make a big show of releasing the perps back to their home
| country and keep the ships.
| albertTJames wrote:
| Cases like this are just proof decentralised/deregulation
| argument would destroy the earth. Governments and international
| agencies need more power to control these behaviors.
| psychlops wrote:
| One U-Boat will solve that problem.
| jvanderbot wrote:
| When we visited South Africa, locals made a point of showing the
| Chinese fishing vessels that had mechanical troubles and were
| forced to dock in Cape Town. The locals refused to service them,
| and the anglers lived on their boats in drydock.
|
| This is well known throughout the world, but my suspicion is that
| governments receive enough Chinese investment (personal or
| otherwise) that they turn the other cheek. SA in particular had
| whole quarters of industrial areas that had only Chinese signage,
| and were wholly owned by China / Chinese businesses.
| option wrote:
| I hope they charged them A LOT of docking fees
| [deleted]
| quattrofan wrote:
| Time to start sinking these fuckers. I know Argentina is not in
| the best economic shape but surely they could team up with other
| s.american countries to deal with China plundering their
| resources illegally. Otherwise China is literally going to empty
| the oceans, i suspect part of the reason they are traveling so
| far is they've turned their own shores into deadzones.
| bitL wrote:
| Would one random airplane bombing of a ship with turned off AIS
| inside territorial waters with no further comments move the
| problem away?
| Havoc wrote:
| Same off the coast of Africa
| thissuchness wrote:
| In my opinion, Argentina should announce that, after $DATE, they
| will seize such ships and auction them off. Any amount of
| enforcement afterward should be enough to significantly deter
| violation of their waters by these fleets.
| yumraj wrote:
| Serious question, why can't Argentinian navy/coast guard
| capture/sink these boats?
|
| Is there a convention/rule?
| ashneo76 wrote:
| This is tragic and heart breaking
| bserge wrote:
| Thoughts and prayers, eh?
|
| Not blaming you or anyone, I'm powerless, too. Just kinda
| useless to say "oh how tragic".
| ashneo76 wrote:
| I don't think it is useless to say that. I don't think you
| should hold back from saying that.
|
| I think we should recognize it and raise awareness to it as
| much as possible. I don't advocate for veganism, either. I
| advocate that fish and other food that is so hard to
| replenish be used and treated like a delicacy.
|
| Today by luck we caught an octopus and by luck I was at the
| market when the ship came in with the catch. Instead of an
| octopus everyday for every meal. That is not going to
| sustain. Same for other foods.
|
| But the downside of making octopus and other food a delicacy
| is that that is the reason why everybody wants it soo which
| creates the demand causing this.
|
| I am thinking it out loud here.
| dwt204 wrote:
| The only take away that I have is that the Chinese would have a
| serious issue, if any nation was caught in their territorial
| waters, especially on this scale. You have to remember that this
| article is focused on Argentina, but PRC has signficant and large
| global fleets roaming the seven seas causing havoc in many
| maritime zones. Like I said before imagine Japan doing this to
| the PRC. Significant punitive military and diplomatic action
| would have been taken. The PRC has to stop this kind of
| hypocritical behavior.
| onethought wrote:
| Which maritime zones do you mean? From what I've read China is
| only in maritime zones directly around it, with some ships as
| far west as Iran to protect trade routes from pirates.
|
| Are you referring to something specific?
| legohead wrote:
| Thought I forgot my geography for a second.. Argentina is so far
| away from China. I guess they still pull in a profit though?
| joezydeco wrote:
| Enrique Pineyro flew his personal 787-8 (!) over the area and
| uploaded this video:
|
| https://twitter.com/epineyro_ok/status/1378112721628114947
|
| ADS-B track: https://i.imgur.com/1wxAkK2.jpg
|
| "Last night we flew at 5000 feet over the foreign fishing fleet
| that preys on our seas, causing ecological disasters. They
| weren't at mile 201, they were well in our territorial waters."
|
| (courtesy /r/aviation and gTranslate)
| mongol wrote:
| What is their coast guard up to?
| kilroy123 wrote:
| Probably not much. The country has been going through an very
| bad financial crisis.
|
| https://www.reuters.com/article/us-argentina-economy-gdp-
| idU...
| mgarciaisaia wrote:
| > The country has been going through an very bad financial
| crisis.
|
| It doesn't matter when you read this.
| Freestyler_3 wrote:
| looks like an opportunity to make money and create jobs
| raverbashing wrote:
| Don't assume they are able to get out of their own inertia to
| defend themselves on this.
|
| "Oh the ship disappeared? What are you going to do?"
|
| I can't help but be cynical in this situation. If their Coast
| Guard is as efficient as their ATC that's what you can
| expect.
| est wrote:
| The fleet vanishes in International waters outside the EEZ.
| rob74 wrote:
| Yeah, but if a hobby pilot can fly over the area and find
| dozens of ships, the Navy/Coast Guard could do the same -
| send out an airplane to check, and then send a few boats
| over if it finds something?
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| Drones are perfect for this use case, as they have long
| loiter abilities at higher altitudes. Low single digit
| Global Hawk fleets can provide high availability over
| large amounts of geography.
| rdtwo wrote:
| Perfect use cause for automated killer drones
| rafale wrote:
| I wonder if commercial satellite photography can do the
| job during night time.
| touisteur wrote:
| Probably best for the job at night would be SAR? A bit
| more costly than photography though I guess... Coastal
| radar, with range up to 100 Nmi might also do the job.
| But what's the use if you're not sending in the cavalry?
| dolmen wrote:
| It does. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27414962
| hadlock wrote:
| Radar on an oceanic buoy is probably more efficient.
| Ocean buoys are giant metal spheres with some concrete
| ballast to add stability, attached via steel cable to an
| old train freight car used as an anchor. You can throw a
| couple hundred watts of solar and electronics on there no
| problem. There's hundreds of these things scattered about
| in the ocean for oceanic research/weather forecasting,
| not a new technology. Modern, consumer-grade solid state
| radar ($1200, off the shelf at Amazon or West Marine,
| google "4G radar") can pick up seagulls sitting on the
| water at 500 feet, or track a tiny ski 4 person boat at
| 10 miles.
|
| Before you ask, no, there is no such thing as a stealth
| radar fishing boat.
| [deleted]
| potiuper wrote:
| Monroe doctrine implies the US navy has ownership too.
| everybodyknows wrote:
| US navy does not "own" Argentine waters.
|
| Maybe US could help Argentina enforce its fishing rights,
| in return for a lease of port space. The sort of win-win
| arrangement that builds mutual good will.
| adolph wrote:
| Would the benefit of potentially decreased fishing
| outweigh the cost to the current gov't of pissing off the
| CCP?
| ac29 wrote:
| The CCP is not going to publicly get behind illegal
| fishing operations. Perhaps they tolerate it behind
| closed doors, but taking a stance that violating another
| countries sovereign waters is OK would be politically
| insane.
| niij wrote:
| I wouldn't say so. Nearly every country that borders the
| South China Sea is having their sovereignty trampled on
| right now https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_dis
| putes_in_the_...
| notahacker wrote:
| That's China _claiming_ sovereignty over that particular
| sea though. China publicly taking the stance that all
| waters were international would be the opposite of that
| Jeff_Brown wrote:
| Good question. How much leverage does China have over
| Argentina? It seems unlikely that Argentina exports much
| to China. It surely imports a lot but China doesn't seem
| to punish anyone by limiting its own exports.
| huntertwo wrote:
| https://tradingeconomics.com/argentina/exports-by-country
|
| China accounts for 11% of Argentina's exports. I'd
| imagine a lot of it is soy and maybe lithium.
| Jeff_Brown wrote:
| Wow! And most of that is agriculture. And perhaps
| ironically, about 6% of Argentine exports to China are
| "Fish, crustaceans, molluscs, aquatics invertebrates".
|
| The World Bank says[2] that exports make up 14.25% of
| Argentine GDP. Assuming no substitution, if China cut off
| all Argentine exports, it would therefore reduce
| Argentine GDP by 1.56% -- a very big deal. There would of
| course be substitution, so that's a weak upper bound.
|
| And maybe an extremely weak one. According to this[3]
| (apparently Australian news outlet which I admit I've
| never heard of), China's trade sanctions against
| Australia following the latter's suggestion that the
| world look more into the origins of the coronavirus only
| reduced Australian exports to China by 2%.
|
| [1] https://tradingeconomics.com/argentina/exports/china
|
| [2] https://wits.worldbank.org/CountryProfile/en/ARG#:~:t
| ext=Arg....
|
| [3] https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/australian-
| economy/c....
| lostlogin wrote:
| Being scared of the bully is how we got here. This
| behaviour is happing all over the pacific, and due to
| dependence on Chinese money, China gets away with it.
| throwawayboise wrote:
| China seems to get away with whatever they want lately.
| When are "we" going to stop tolerating their wanton
| disregard for global ecological and human rights
| standards?
| bobthechef wrote:
| Honestly, probably nothing. There is no will to do
| anything about increasing Chinese belligerence and I
| suspect a fair amount of perks offered by China to keep
| it that way. Look at the silence about the Uyghurs.
| Nobody cares about them. Why would they care about some
| fish? (Granted, people often care more about fish than
| human beings.)
| dillondoyle wrote:
| Maybe if (when) they get aggressive with Taiwain, TSMC.
|
| Or if lab leak was proven, or lab leak + it was a product
| GOF deliberately created to infect humans it could
| provide enough public support to back it. I think there
| are enough hawks in government. Good or bad, a hot or
| 'warm' war is a huge and devastating step without huge
| public support across many nation coalitions. Don't want
| iraq 2.0 with weapons of mass infection that turn out to
| not be true.
| rtkwe wrote:
| Ah yes the doctrine used to justify things like training
| and arming right wing death squads to put down popular
| uprisings because it might introduce communism into the
| Americas...
| iagovar wrote:
| I've been following the situation in Argentina for some
| years, and it seems that their military is tired of fighting
| with the political class for the appropriate resources. They
| seem to be technically competent, but the resource allocation
| is a joke.
| the_af wrote:
| Pineyro's own documentary, "Fuerza Aerea S.A." ("Air Force
| Inc") showed otherwise: our military is incompetent,
| reckless & corrupt. Their handling of commercial airports,
| until taken from them by the government, was so terrible
| and reckless you _really_ didn 't want to fly in Argentina.
| Any mistake was covered up because that's how our military
| is used to behaving.
|
| Also remember we Argentinians suffered a bloody
| dictatorship in the 70s, complete with illegal detentions,
| torture and executions, and while of course the military
| renews itself with new people, some sectors of it still
| haven't come to terms with their past (some remain who
| actually sympathize with the dictatorship or were involved
| in it).
|
| So no, what you're describing is not the full picture.
| touisteur wrote:
| Was surprised to learn some years ago that in Brazil the
| military was responsible for civilian air traffic
| management. That seemed so wild at the time. Don't know
| if it's still the case...
| devtul wrote:
| Still is, you must join the air force to work as an ATC.
| riffraff wrote:
| My father was in air traffic control in Italy and it was
| a military thing until 1979 or so.
| speeder wrote:
| Still is the case. But here they take that job very
| seriously.
|
| I even saw a higher up personally helping once, I was in
| an open source tech conference, and a colonel was present
| to show the air force work using Ubuntu and Debian, while
| chatting with him he got a phone call about a radar
| issue, he immediately picked up a laptop and started to
| fire up some domestic made tech and started helping the
| operators directly.
|
| If the timing wasn't seemly so random I would think they
| did it on purpose just to show off the cool tech.
| touisteur wrote:
| I don't know how to reconcile the safety culture of
| 'telling the truth no matter what' and not blaming, with
| the chain-of-command, authority and obeying orders sir-
| yes-sir of the military. I probably have a very warped
| view of military leaders, but I know which customers ask
| for the 'safety override' button...
| Nexxxeh wrote:
| A safety override in the military is a safety feature in
| itself.
|
| In battle, overriding a safety feature might be the
| difference between returning fire and saving the ship and
| crew, or losing all hands.
| belter wrote:
| "Fuerza Aerea S.A." ("Air Force Inc") here:
|
| https://youtu.be/0sZycpaEgkU
| coliveira wrote:
| Argentinian military, like in most of south America, is
| completely corrupt and should really stop existing for the
| good of its people. Whenever they have resources they use
| it to fuel military dictatorships.
| is_true wrote:
| I don't know. A lot of the countrys infrastructure was
| built by the military.
| Tams80 wrote:
| What coast guard?
|
| You'd have better luck getting the British to send their OPV
| based in the Falklands over than get any meaningful response
| from what little of the Argentine armed forces or other
| authorities have.
| dghughes wrote:
| Check out the Turbot War when we in Canada sent Navy ships to
| confront Spanish fishing vessesls in international waters
| illegally overfishing. Spain and Germany also sent warships.
| But Ireland and the UK didnt (foreshadowing the biggest gripe
| of Brexit?) Turbot/halibut is a type of fish.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbot_War
| touisteur wrote:
| You mean, Turbot is a delicious type of fish. I'd
| understand sending in the navy. Especially since it is
| (iirc) a fish that stays down near the 'ground' so to fish
| them properly you need some specific kind of equipment or
| you destroy ecosystems?
| enriquto wrote:
| on the other hand, it is one of the few species of fish
| that can be farmed effectively inland, and the farmed
| ones are just as delicious
| touisteur wrote:
| Oh, farmed turbot? I'll have to look at that, thanks.
| masklinn wrote:
| International water is a somewhat different situation, this
| is within Argentina's exclusive economic zone.
|
| Also
|
| > But Ireland and the UK didnt
|
| Yes one can only wonder why the UK would side with Canada
| over the EU.
|
| > foreshadowing the biggest gripe of Brexit?
|
| Only the biggest nonense of the brexit nonsenses.
|
| Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_Wars. In fact, the
| UK's hypocritical support of Canada in the conflict led
| Iceland to declare for Spain / the EU.
| [deleted]
| ralgozino wrote:
| I can tell you about one thing that I didn't find mentioned.
| Argentina's Naval Prefecture is using a product called
| Galatea Watcher from Ascentio Technologies (they are the main
| contractor for Argentina's Space Agency and have developed
| the ground segment and done operations for them). This
| product does pretty much the same as in the article: it takes
| satellite imagery from several sources, does image processing
| and detection on them and cross-references it with AIS
| reports from vessels and alerts all the suspicious activity.
| One could see all the ships getting positioned just in the
| international border and then disappear by night. This is a
| well known issue.
|
| Disclaimer: I used to work for Ascentio.
| 7373737373 wrote:
| So do these satellites only have RGB channels? What about
| infrared?
| is_true wrote:
| Argentina has it's own SARs to do the same.
| bo0tzz wrote:
| IIRC, the resolution on infrared satellite imaging is way
| lower
| ralgozino wrote:
| They use several sources an different type of imagery,
| both of public access and private
| geoduck14 wrote:
| > IIRC, the resolution on infrared satellite imaging is
| way lower
|
| I have some buddies that are working on improving this!
| baybal2 wrote:
| I will surprise you, even USA has a problem catching all
| Chinese fishing ships near Hawaii.
|
| There is simply that much of them. Chinese fishing fleet is
| world's biggest, and they have 1 gigaton a year steel output
| to make more.
| rafale wrote:
| At some point, the only option is to sink them and drop
| life jackets in the area.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| The sad thing is the people out there on the boats are in
| all likelihood just trying to scrape a living and the
| people who deserve to be in harm's way are higher up the
| economic ladder. There are a lot of world problems that
| amount to "no one holds China accountable" (and to a
| lesser extent, first world nations don't do enough to
| hold themselves accountable), and I would really like for
| countries to tax and/or sanction China for their negative
| externalities (e.g., pollution, overfishing) it would
| make the world a much better place--either China starts
| to compete fairly or else they lose the wealthiest
| markets to the advantage of the whole world and
| especially countries in Africa, Eastern Europe, Central
| Asia, and South America who would fill the manufacturing
| void.
|
| Mandatory disclaimer for the pro-China accounts: I'm very
| much not interested in deflecting to the West's problems
| --they exist, but they don't excuse China (nor does
| China's bad behavior excuse that of the West's). This
| kind of deflection is just a race to the bottom.
| KirillPanov wrote:
| > The sad thing is the people out there on the boats are
| in all likelihood just trying to scrape a living
|
| Bullshit, somebody on board is _turning off the ship 's
| transponder_. They know that they are doing something
| criminal.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| "Desperate" doesn't imply "legally innocent". In
| particular, China has an abundance of desperate people (I
| won't remark on its political system), so punishing the
| desperate in this case probably won't move the needle.
|
| Further, and I say this as someone who prefers to err on
| the tough-on-crime side, it's unjust to punish the
| desperate when the wealthy are pulling the strings,
| raking in the profit, and bearing none of the risk.
| CalRobert wrote:
| There's a decent chance the crew includes enslaved
| people.
| aww_dang wrote:
| Argentine coast guard opens fire on Chinese fishing boat
| (2019)
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3lkM4t8AaA
|
| Argentina sinks Chinese fishing ship that entered
| restricted area(2016)
|
| >"The offending ship continued to maneuver in an attempt
| to cause a collision" (0:20)
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00rMVee0R4c
|
| >Therefore, the concept of people's war was applied to
| the sea with fishermen and other nautical laborers being
| drafted into a maritime militia.
|
| >Most vessels are issued with navigation and
| communication equipment while some are also _issued_
| _small_ _arms_. The communications systems can be used
| both for communication and espionage. Often fishermen
| supply their own vessels, however, there are also core
| contingents of the maritime militia who operate vessels
| fitted out for militia work instead of fishing; _these_
| _vessels_ _feature_ _reinforced_ _bows_ _for_ _ramming_
| and high powered water cannons. The increasing
| sophistication of militia vessels ' communication
| equipment is a double-edged sword for Chinese
| authorities. New equipment, as well as training in its
| use, has substantially improved command, control, and
| coordination of militia units. However, the vessels'
| resulting professionalism and sophisticated maneuvers
| make them more identifiable as government-sponsored
| actors, dampening their ability to function as a gray-
| zone force.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Armed_Forces_Mar
| iti...
|
| S. Korean Coast Guard fires machine gun in warning to
| illegal Chinese fishing boats
|
| >"They were surrounded and threatened by some 30 other
| fishing boats" (0:17)
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42AWXEzcoFk
|
| You don't need to look very far to find reports like
| this. There are too many incidents to list here.
| belter wrote:
| Taking into account the size of the problem, most persons
| would just assume these were the ones that did not pay
| the bribes...
| [deleted]
| Mountain_Skies wrote:
| The big question is what can a nation do to stop this? The
| normal diplomatic and legal avenues don't seem to do much.
| A ship here and there can be seized but much like fines
| that are slaps on the wrist for large corporations, there's
| too much economic value in violating the rules. A seized
| ship now and then is a small price to pay for access to
| everyone else's fishing areas. There don't seem to be any
| good escalation paths that aren't morally unconscionable.
| rasz wrote:
| this seems to work
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRyCsv7CcnI
| dredmorbius wrote:
| This video claims to show the Russian navy firing on
| Somali pirates.
|
| One narrative concerning piracy off the coast of Somalia
| is that incursion of foreign fishing fleets took away the
| opportunity for lawful livelihoods for those living in
| Somalia. Which in the context of this post is ...
| troublingly ironic.
| narrator wrote:
| If the Somalis were just attacking illegal fishing boats,
| they'd have a lot more moral authority for what they're
| doing.
| chkaloon wrote:
| Awful lot of ammo that misses completely. Not a very
| efficient weapon or just poor targeting it seems.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| > The big question is what can a nation do to stop this?
|
| Really the only nation that can stop this is China.
| tpmx wrote:
| Individual nations can't do much on their own. Groups of
| nations can wage economic warfare.
| nostromo wrote:
| Commandeer the ships and auction them off for scrap at
| home. Arrest and charge the fishermen.
|
| If they flee, sink the ship.
|
| They'll catch on.
| silexia wrote:
| I agree, this is the only effective solution.
| jdasdf wrote:
| >The big question is what can a nation do to stop this?
|
| Thats why navies exist.
|
| You send a handful of frigates and bombers there and
| start sinking ships.
| weatherlight wrote:
| Time to start sinking ships.
| tshaddox wrote:
| There are obvious reasons why killing people with one's
| military isn't the most desirable way to protect one's
| national waters.
| bobthechef wrote:
| Or some kind of tech like microwaves that causes the
| fisherman (or the fish?) to scatter.
| geoduck14 wrote:
| Hire the CRACKEN!!!!
| op00to wrote:
| Start accrediting privateers to protect the waters!
| narrator wrote:
| Letters of Marque and Reprisal.[1] This is how the early
| U.S fought the Barbary pirates in the Barbary Wars[2] in
| the early days of the republic. This power is actually
| authorized explicitly in the U.S Constitution.
|
| [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_of_marque
|
| [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War
| splitstud wrote:
| Our 21st century take: sell the rights to the history
| Channel for a pirates reality series
| Seanambers wrote:
| It is kind of amazing that the Chinese gets away with
| this.
| stanislavb wrote:
| I think it's too late to stop China
| Leader2light wrote:
| Bingo, US is fading out.
| patentatt wrote:
| Didn't know who this was, so I looked him up. Who has a
| personal 787? Turns out he's an Argentine actor and film
| magnate who is an ex-commercial pilot. I guess that's one way
| to come to own your own ~$122m aircraft.
| cosmodisk wrote:
| His Wikipedia entry reads like he's some sort of MacGyver
| meets Batman and goes business.
| belter wrote:
| Also interview during the flight here:
| https://youtu.be/jCCJQjEq4b8 (In Spanish but subtitles will
| work well for English translation)
| elondaits wrote:
| He's also the nephew of Paolo Rocca, CEO of the Techint
| conglomerate (steel, mining, oil and gas, etc.) and worth
| $3.7 billion according to Wikipedia.
| geoduck14 wrote:
| Is he single?
| jb1991 wrote:
| John Travolta also has his own 707, which he flies himself.
| devb wrote:
| That reminds me of the Iron Maiden 747, piloted by their
| singer:
|
| https://simpleflying.com/iron-maiden-747/
| tonyedgecombe wrote:
| And John Travolta with a 707.
| failwhaleshark wrote:
| IIRC, he had it parked right up to his house.
| wp381640 wrote:
| He has donated it to a great aircraft museum in Australia
| - it should be making its way down this year.
|
| They have spent years getting it back to spec to make the
| trans-pacfic flight back home
| Judgmentality wrote:
| The irony of not being able to the transport the thing
| that usually transports the things.
| laurent92 wrote:
| Would have been easier to ship by boat, even without
| dismounting it, since it's the cheapest transportation.
| But it seems I'm wrong, since they didn't do it.
| dolmen wrote:
| Well, if the aim is to make it fly anyway (not just show
| on the ground)...
| failwhaleshark wrote:
| The owners of the now defunct Fry's Electronics also owned
| the Arena Football team the San Jose SaberCats and
| additionally owned/leased/rented/sponsored various aircraft
| including a 747 SP.
|
| 1968 GULFSTREAM G1159B N24YS (still owned by the Fry
| family)
|
| 1976 ROCKWELL NA-265-60 N607CF (now owned by an airshow)
|
| 1955 PIPER PA-23 N3494B (owned by someone else)
|
| 1971 GULFSTREAM G1159B N44YS (still owned by the Fry
| family)
|
| 1976 ROCKWELL NA-265-60 N39CB (now owned by an airshow)
|
| 1977 DEHAVILLAND CANADA DHC-6-300 N814BC (still owned by
| the Fry family)
|
| 1978 BOEING 727-281(A)(RE) N724YS (now registered to a UK
| blind trust)
|
| 1980 BOEING 747SP-27 N747A (now owned by NASA)
|
| 1981 ROCKWELL NA-265-65 N88BF (still owned by the Fry
| family)
|
| 1981 ROCKWELL NA-265-65 N654YS (still owned by the Fry
| family)
|
| 1992 BEECH B300 N4YS (still owned by the Fry family)
|
| 2011 GULFSTREAM G280 N38GL (now owned by a casino
| corporation)
| kart23 wrote:
| Wow this reminded me, I saw the fry's 747 at an airshow.
| I was pretty young at the time, but it was crazy seeing a
| 747 fly so low.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08G4z63PShc
| toyg wrote:
| I'm not a fan of Iron Maiden's music but from all I read
| they sound like absolute top blokes. They also licensed
| "Eddie" to Robinsons Brewery, a smallish company based in
| Stockport, to produce their "Trooper" beer - which is
| actually pretty fine.
| salmo wrote:
| Spent some time in Brimingham. Worked crazy hours, but
| would wander at night.
|
| Local beer was a little rare in the places around our
| hotel (probably because we were near Broad Street), but
| they had "Trooper" at Malt House. It was actually really
| great.
|
| That may also be influenced by the fact that I mostly
| only could get foreign light lagers everywhere else, and
| Malt House was a great place to relax on the canal a
| little away from the Hen Party craziness.
| fnord77 wrote:
| 403 Forbidden :(
| tim333 wrote:
| ha - works ok from here
| thatguy0900 wrote:
| I have to imagine maintenance and storage of a 787 is way
| worse than the purchase price
| akiselev wrote:
| According to [1], it costs United about $15,000 an hour to
| run their 787. Of that, $7,371 finances the plane ("ac
| cost"), $786 for maintenance ("mx"), $5,259 for fuel, and
| $1,335 for crew. I'm assuming industry average utilization
| of roughly ~4000 hours a year of flight time so that works
| out to about $3 million in maintenance and $28 million in
| loan repayments per year.
|
| Thing is, you have to keep the 787 flying - they're not
| designed to be parked for weeks or months at a time.
| Normally that'd be a problem for a business jet since
| they're little more than toys for rich people but the 787
| is up to 20% more fuel efficient than comparable older
| models. As long as its set up for cargo, the owner can just
| rent it out and have someone else cover the majority of the
| maintenance burden. It wouldn't be profitable, but if you
| need (or want) a brand new commercial jet, it's an easy way
| to subsidize that cost.
|
| [1] https://www.planestats.com/bhsw_2014sep
| jimbob45 wrote:
| The question then is whether he owns it and farms it out
| to the airlines or if the airline owns it and rents it to
| him.
| dillondoyle wrote:
| Would reply to child but too nested. Maybe it's this one
| for charter?
|
| https://www.privatefly.com/private-jets/large-airliner-
| hire/...
|
| Looks pretty cool if I was wealthier and wanted a
| destination wedding this would be the way!
| wizzwizz4 wrote:
| There is no "too nested". If it doesn't show a "reply"
| button, click on the timestamp instead.
| hellbannedguy wrote:
| I like John Travolta.
|
| I've wondered lately if he is working so much because of
| his hobbies, or just loves any acting gig?
|
| (I need a life?)
| joezydeco wrote:
| Comlux bought it from Aeromexico in their bankruptcy, but it
| looks like Pineyro might be leasing it from Comlux.
| iJohnDoe wrote:
| Very powerful. Thanks for finding and sharing.
| knowaveragejoe wrote:
| What can Argentina even do about this? Seize or sink some ships
| to make an example?
| rasz wrote:
| If you dont have navy then you dont have territorial waters,
| its that simple.
| water8 wrote:
| Good point. The Navy is by far the most important branch of
| any military.
| unclewalter wrote:
| Uzbekistan and Liechtenstein might disagree.
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| Dammit, and here I am, fresh out of popcorn.
| dillondoyle wrote:
| What is the benefit of fishing in such a tight formation? More
| fish caught? maybe more sense of security as a flotilla?
| geniium wrote:
| This is insane!
| scubakid wrote:
| Exploiting protected fish stocks and ecosystems happens far too
| often with minimal consequences... and the knock-on effects of
| this trend are terrible for everyone. Would love to see someone
| do a full breakdown on courses of action here that might actually
| be effective.. along with pros/cons/costs and analysis of why
| they haven't been pursued already.
| dalbasal wrote:
| Courses of action are plenty. These are foreign fleets
| illegally fishing territorial waters, so there's no real reason
| for authorities to object to enforcement.
|
| In this case, the problem is enforcement, which locals on here
| seem to think is related to coast guard resources and/or
| corruption. I would hazard that its an issue of will and/or
| competency, in this case.
|
| Overharvesting in international waters and overharvesting
| legally within territorial waters is a different issue. The
| actual solution, IMO, is a blanket ban with certain exemptions.
| Fishing is very political thought, and constantly
| underestimated by politicians and MOPs who naively wade in.
| Financially, fishing is not that big an industry. It does
| represent a livelihood for a lot of people. It also has huge
| cultural significance, literally an ancient way of life. For
| everyone else, it has some cultural significance, culinary
| significance... so a touches a lot of people. It's genuinely a
| big ask. I support a ban, but underestimating effects on people
| is a recipe for failure, and bad blood.
|
| Commercial, terrestrial wild harvests at industrial scale
| famously wiped out US bison herds very quickly. One notable
| example of many. Inland fisheries, especially salmon, faired
| similarly. Bans have been far more effective than controlled
| harvests. Two big examples are Cod and whaling. Cod fishing is
| one of the oldest modern regulatory history in fishing... but
| Cod never recovered. Whaling OTOH, most species that were not
| depleted entirely have recovered. The ban worked.
|
| Oceanic fishing is similar to terrestrial harvests and inland
| fisheries , just bigger and with the added difficulty of
| requiring international coordination. We can't harvest wild
| stock sustainably at a commercial scale. Perhaps it's possible
| in theory, but theory has rarely proven out in practice.
| stanislavb wrote:
| Could China be stopped or it seems it's too late?
| qwerty456127 wrote:
| Why not create a specialized pirate fleet which would base in the
| international waters, enter Argentina waters as long as Argentina
| doesn't mind and prey on the "invisible" illegal fishing boats
| nobody would protect?
| prennert wrote:
| 1. The top voted comment links to a video that shows 100s if
| not 1000s of tightly navigating vessels. They will protect
| themselves
|
| 2. What are those pirates going to prey on? Fish fingers?
| [deleted]
| blackearl wrote:
| Seems ripe for pirates, wonder why they aren't making a comeback.
| fblp wrote:
| This is a great example of a non-profit using data to make an
| impact. Let's support them hn fam!
| https://act.oceana.org/page/73742/donate/
| switchstance wrote:
| Agreed. Done!
| wolverine876 wrote:
| Who are they? What do they do? What will my money be used for?
| Being a 'non-profit' doesn't at all make them good actors.
| Someone's description of themselves isn't a reliable source.
| antouank wrote:
| Maybe worth it to watch "Seaspiracy" as well
| https://www.netflix.com/no-en/title/81014008
| gruez wrote:
| It might be watching as entertainment, but it's not really
| worth watching if you're looking for objective analysis. ie.
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26749401 (or the rest of
| the thread)
| knuthsat wrote:
| The comment you link just describes the plot through the
| eyes of someone who didn't like the film. There's no
| refutation of anything that film states.
| lisper wrote:
| Huh??? These ships aren't "vanishing", they are simply turning
| off their transponders. It's quite clear where these ships are
| and why they are switching their transponders off: they are
| fishing in Argentine territorial waters without permission.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| thatsthepoint.jpg
| lisper wrote:
| Strange way of making that point. Usually when people talk
| about ships "vanishing" they're talking about something more
| like the Bermuda Triangle or rogue waves or something like
| that, i.e. ships actually, you know, _vanishing_ , not
| turning off their tracking devices so they can fish
| illegally.
| ggm wrote:
| Vanishing == "turning off the Maritime equivalent of IFF
| transponder"
| [deleted]
| LatteLazy wrote:
| This reminds me of Nelsons famous "I see no ships" quote.
| Everyone in power knows what's happening, everyone in power
| agrees not to prevent it, everyone in power pretends they
| haven't.
| pastullo wrote:
| aaaand again China doing whatever it wants and nobody doing
| anything about it. When will this stop? Personally i'm boycotting
| their product and services as much as possible.
| ianai wrote:
| The reigning choice since Kissinger seems to be "appeasement".
| His reasoning was their population size.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| _> Personally i 'm boycotting their product and services as
| much as possible._
|
| Good luck with that.
|
| Turn over pretty much any item in your house, and you'll see
| _"Made in China."_
|
| Every single one of our nations has its markets dominated by
| corporations that have found the only way to compete, is to
| manufacture in China.
|
| Many nations are now incapable of manufacturing their own
| goods.
|
| Once you're a pickle, you'll never be a cucumber again.
| giantg2 wrote:
| All it takes is a little research. You can find a US
| manufacturer for almost anything if you look hard enough.
| Most people don't want to pay the higher prices that
| sometimes come with many of the products.
|
| https://www.madeinamerica.co/pages/thelist
| SavantIdiot wrote:
| Find me a single electronic device on the planet that isn't
| made with some Chinese parts. AFAIK all passive electronics
| components are made in China.
| giantg2 wrote:
| There's no way the DOD would allow only China to make
| components that their contracts require. I'm sure there
| are domestic producers.
|
| Here's a site from a quick search.
| https://www.tedss.com/LearnMore/American-Made-Capacitors
|
| Here is a site for US built computers with the option to
| specify US only components.
| https://usamadeproducts.biz/electronics-computers.html
| SavantIdiot wrote:
| You misunderstood my point:
|
| Made in USA != all parts made in the USA. Kinda like how
| "Made in the USA" cars/trucks are often 90% made overseas
| then sent to the US for final assembly to earn that
| sticker.
|
| I'll ignore the fact that the very first link in your
| computer URL is Apple, which does not have a 100% made in
| the USA product.
|
| The second computer company in your link is Digital
| Storm. They use MSI boards which are made in Taiwan and
| China.
| giantg2 wrote:
| No, I didn't miss your point. The link I posted has
| computer manufacturers that say they can use US based
| components, including in-house engineered parts. I also
| showed that components are made in the US and that the
| DOD contracts will require that Chinese parts not be
| used.
| iso8859-1 wrote:
| Taiwanese products are also marked as "Made in China". So
| it's not as bad as you think.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| Yes, but this still adds to the atrophy of local
| manufacturing expertise.
|
| This did not start with China. Japan did it after WWII
| (remember "cheap Japanese"?). Korea did it after Japan.
|
| Now, both Korea and Japan are becoming known for high-
| quality, pricey stuff.
|
| Many Korean and Japanese corporations manufacture in China,
| Thailand, and Vietnam.
|
| China is headed that way too, but it may take longer.
| breckenedge wrote:
| Huh, what market are you in? Just yesterday I bought a tool
| that was "Made in Taiwan" over two "Made in China"
| alternatives.
| ridaj wrote:
| There are items made in China by Taiwan-based companies,
| which are marked as such, but stuff actually manufactured
| in Taiwan is marked as made in Taiwan
| steve_adams_86 wrote:
| I've seen a lot of things marked as made in Taiwan. Look at
| bike frames and you'll quickly notice one made there.
| Finnucane wrote:
| I still have things in my house marked 'made in East/West
| Germany'. But I am old.
| ArkanExplorer wrote:
| When military vessels open fire on and sink Chinese Fishing
| Boats located inside territorial waters.
| sneak wrote:
| It was Isaac Asimov who, in the Foundation series, once
| famously said that "Violence is the last refuge of the
| incompetent."
| koheripbal wrote:
| That's true except for the times it isn't.
| Proven wrote:
| it seems there's another level below that, an inability to
| distinguish violence from defence.
| phendrenad2 wrote:
| Obviously you don't just resort to violence. First you
| threaten violence and if THEY are incompetent they won't
| heed the warning, forcing the violence
| dnh44 wrote:
| Would any person in any country argue that their leaders
| aren't incompetent?
| ArkanExplorer wrote:
| The purpose of the military is to maintain the territorial
| sovereignty of the nation, against illegal entry from
| migrants/smugglers or chinese fishermen.
|
| If the military cannot perform this task then why does
| Argentina spend $3billion on them?
|
| The obvious answer is that Argentina is a failed state,
| incapable of defending itself.
| sneak wrote:
| Sovereignty is a slippery abstraction. What we're talking
| about here is doing violence against someone on a boat
| who has directly harmed no one, whose only crime is
| crossing an invisible line and perhaps stealing some
| food.
|
| Now, I'm not going to get down in to the weeds about
| fishing property rights, but it looks like you're trying
| to climb up this abstraction layer ("territorial
| sovereignty") to justify violence against the peaceful.
|
| If indeed they are stealing from someone under the law, I
| don't think violent action via a national military is in
| any way whatsoever a proportionate response. You seem to
| be advocating for collective guilt because there are so
| many, and collective guilt or group punishment is a
| violation of human rights.
| wavefunction wrote:
| The character who expressed it as their maxim also ended up
| engaging in violence to solve the problems facing their
| world.
| bserge wrote:
| And Spain, apparently. And a few others, too.
|
| https://www.nationalfisherman.com/national-international/oce...
|
| [Insert monkey puppet meme.]
|
| Not defending them, but it looks like it's a wider problem than
| just "China bad".
| akudha wrote:
| Unless you're very rich or living like a monk, boycotting
| Chinese made products is not an easy task. Go to any American
| supermarket and look at the labels, I bet a majority of them
| are made in China.
|
| Voting with wallet only works when there are options. I bet the
| devices that you and I used to write these very comments are
| highly likely made in China too, at least partly
| rizpanjwani wrote:
| Maybe we can take baby steps. You just boycott what you can
| and make your voice heard. I'm sure the market would fill the
| need sooner or later. Best place to start would be the
| Chinese brands like Huawei.
| giantg2 wrote:
| Walmart has made an effort to stock mostly American products.
| Clothes and shoes are main exceptions at any store, although
| options do exist.
| nkozyra wrote:
| > Go to any American supermarket and look at the labels, I
| bet a majority of them are made in China.
|
| A great deal of our overall consumer products are, but most
| of our consumables come from the US or Central/South America.
| nend wrote:
| I mean you can say this same thing about several countries.
| USA, Russia, China all come to mind. Turns out countries with
| power often act similarly as people with power, unethically in
| order to advance their own interests. It's not just a "someone
| needs to stop china" problem, it's more systemic. Stopping
| china from doing this one thing is just treating symptoms, not
| the underlying cause.
| newacct583 wrote:
| Fishery regulation cheating is pervasive _everywhere_ , almost
| none of these rules have working teeth. Every ocean species for
| which there is a market anywhere is being catastrophically
| overexploited, regardless of what regulations say.
|
| That said, I guess... I'm actually OK with jingoist anti-China
| hatred in this particular case if it helps drive attention to a
| genuine ecological catastrophe? The woke hippies welcome you
| aboard, mate.
| hmmokidk wrote:
| US ships trawl and overfish as well. The Anti-China sentiment
| is uncalled for.
| GordonS wrote:
| I was going to make a similar point - this is a persistent
| problem _anywhere_ there are profitable fish stocks, and
| absolutely _not_ just by the Chinese - the French, Spanish,
| whoever, there are plenty of people at it.
| teachingassist wrote:
| Nobody has yet mentioned the UK, but: reduced regulation on
| fishing was a big motivator for Brexit, where the campaign
| had its roots deep in coastal towns.
| GordonS wrote:
| Well, British fishermen thought we'd be "taking back
| control of our waters", and wouldn't be in the situation
| where they have smaller quotas that the large Spanish and
| French vessels that fish British waters do.
|
| Of course, it didn't work out like that.
| newacct583 wrote:
| Which is deeply self-defeating, because those jobs are
| going away when the fish disappear anyway. The only
| question is who gets to eat the last ones.
| booleandilemma wrote:
| Is it even possible to boycott China at this point?
| seangp wrote:
| Probably not, but governments need to start weaning
| themselves from China's teat. It won't be easy and it will
| take a while, but it can be done.
| baron_harkonnen wrote:
| The US has overthrown multiple democratic governments to get
| what it wants. I personally prefer China's blatant disregard
| for the rules over the United State's efforts to forcibly
| rewrite the rules in their favor.
| oblak wrote:
| Looks like you are being downvoted for no good reason.
| Comments like this always seem to go down after the sun rises
| across the Atlantic
|
| "I have more respect for a man who lets me know where he
| stands, even if he's wrong, than the one who comes up like an
| angel and is nothing but a devil."
|
| I remember this quote from an old Ice Cube btw
| nyolfen wrote:
| how does argentina fit into this equation
| magicsmoke wrote:
| Rules are a way for whichever party is more powerful at the
| time of rule writing to lock in advantages in their favor.
| Take a look at any US election cycle, each parties tries to
| create laws that it knows will be difficult to overturn even
| if they get voted out in 4 years.
|
| Is it any wonder a rising power chafes at rules that it
| didn't get same amount of influence over at the time of
| writing because it was weaker? Our entire structure of
| international law is based on decisions made in those first
| few years after WW2. It's been 70+ years since then and the
| world has changed dramatically. I'm quite concerned that if
| the current international structure isn't flexible enough to
| bend and accommodate the pressure those changes, its going to
| break like an earthquake fault and we could very well have a
| WW3 scenario on our hands.
| mint2 wrote:
| That's like people who preferred Donald trump. Indications
| from other areas showed he was going to be worse, but he
| hadn't already had an actual history in office so many former
| supporters were unable to extrapolate.
|
| Xinjiang, Tibet, and events in Hong Hong don't bode well.
| Trends in the South China Sea show that China doesn't respect
| its neighboring countries claims either. So the external
| events that do exist are not promising that China will be
| better.
|
| And in internal politics and equality, we haven't yet forced
| academics and professionals into labor camps but it may be
| trending that way.
|
| Edit: I'm by no means downplaying the terribleness the USA
| did in South America, the Middle East or elsewhere nor our
| own internal discriminations and worse, I'm pointing out that
| given the limited information we have, it does not give any
| confidence that China will be an improvement. My own feel
| given my fairly limited understanding is that overall it will
| be worse for the environment and justice globally and at the
| very best essentially the same but with a new face.
| beebeepka wrote:
| You can tell it's an American website when stating the
| obvious is routinely downvoted or flagged without
| explanation.
| pelasaco wrote:
| It is not just an Argentinas problem:
|
| Peru: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMhQ5zmm-pI
|
| North Korean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PZzxF4hwVI
|
| West Africa: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUClXFF2PKs
|
| U.S. Navy Arrest and Sink 300 Chinese Fishing Ships Off South
| America Coast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9vTjgIDUQo
| Roboprog wrote:
| "China Uncensored" on YouTube has covered this sort of behavior
| towards countries neighboring the China Sea frequently.
|
| China stripping unguarded Atlantic coasts was news to me,
| though.
| lettergram wrote:
| My 2020 prediction that there will be no more wild caught fish in
| markets by 2030 seems ever closer...
|
| The truth is, Argentina knows what's happened but is likely
| powerless to stop it. If they acted to curb the issue, China
| would stop bribes to the Argentina leadership and likely impose
| sanctions of some kinda.
| paulcole wrote:
| > My 2020 prediction that there will be no more wild caught
| fish in markets by 2030 seems ever closer...
|
| Are you talking worldwide freshwater and saltwater fish?
| nixass wrote:
| Well, napalm carpet bombing and the fleet from the video is
| gone, and likely won't come back, ever
| toyg wrote:
| _> China would stop bribes to the Argentina leadership_
|
| No need to inject unsubstantiable allegations in an otherwise
| sensible comment.
|
| The power imbalance between a small country with long-standing
| financial issues and a history of inability in enforcing its
| complex borders, and a rising global superpower, is quite
| evident.
| oefrha wrote:
| https://www.nationalfisherman.com/national-
| international/oce...
|
| > South Korean, Spanish, and Taiwanese vessels conducted 26
| percent of estimated fishing activity in the study with
| nearly 200 vessels. Almost "90 percent of the Spanish vessels
| that fished along Argentina's national waters appeared to
| turn off their public tracking devices at least once, and
| Spanish vessels spent nearly twice as much time with AIS
| devices off as they did visibly fishing," according to the
| report.
|
| If power imbalance is the main issue here, surely something
| can be done about the other 1/3 at least?
| ethbr0 wrote:
| > _a history of inability in enforcing its complex borders,
| and a rising global superpower, is quite evident_
|
| Can't tell if this was a Falkland Islands / Great Britain
| reference or not.
| waheoo wrote:
| What do you mean unsubstantiable?
|
| https://theglobalamericans.org/2021/02/new-directions-in-
| the...
| toyg wrote:
| In a quick read, I don't see anything in there that could
| be qualified as "bribe to the leadership". The Chinese
| finance a lot of countries to ingratiate themselves, but
| outright bribes to this or that person is another thing. It
| might well be happening, but stating it with certainty when
| there is no proof just comes off as a conspiracy theory.
| snthd wrote:
| https://chinadialogue.net/en/business/6270-illegal-
| fishing-b... (2013)
|
| >Corruption fuelling illegal fishing
|
| >[Argentine journalist Roberto Maturana] says that in
| Argentina, these arrangements are facilitated by corrupt
| officials at the government sub-department of fishing,
| responsible for granting fishing licenses. 'Often
| officials will issue an Argentine license to two
| different Chinese boats. So whilst one is in port, the
| other will be out fishing'.
|
| Given Argentina's corruption problem
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_Argentina),
| and China's fishing agenda
| (https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/11/30/china-beijing-
| fishing-a... ), it would be a surprise if corruption was
| not happening.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| jakobdabo wrote:
| What do you mean a "small country"? Argentina is 8-th largest
| country in the world.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependen.
| ..
| toyg wrote:
| In a world of continent-sized superpowers, any country with
| less than 100m people is objectively small; and Argentina
| definitely does not compensate for that with high per-
| capita GDP (they are not even in the top 50).
| retrac wrote:
| There's probably only three large countries in the world
| by your definition then: the USA, China, and Japan.
| (India, Brazil and Russia's economies are probably too
| small to meet your standard, all being smaller than the
| UK's or Germany's.)
| eliseumds wrote:
| Shanghai alone has a larger GDP than Argentina, and that's
| pre-pandemic data.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_prefecture-
| l...
| u8mybrownies wrote:
| Probably referring more to GDP
| BurningFrog wrote:
| We farm instead of hunt & gather on land since a long time.
|
| The same has to happen in the oceans.
| kristopolous wrote:
| Fishing is really barbaric. It's fairly bloodless since we
| suffocate all the creatures but it's like going to Yosemite
| and just cutting the throats open of the animals you find,
| tossing then in a bag and taking them off to sell on the
| market.
|
| I mean what on earth year are we in again?
| ptaipale wrote:
| No, at least I don't suffocate fish that I catch. I stun
| and kill.
| kristopolous wrote:
| Also awful. It's not about an individual fish, many
| people don't understand this.
|
| It's about disruption of an ecosystem that material
| reality demonstrates we still very poorly understand.
|
| There's exactly zero evidence that anyone other than very
| specific tribes of indigenous peoples who sustained
| thousands of years, that humans writ large know how to
| maintain ecosystems.
|
| All evidence points to our current practices having
| massive deleterious consequences and that we are already
| a few decades into a mass extinction event.
|
| If that's not enough evidence to harbor every ship (or at
| least 95%) until we figure out what the fuck we're doing,
| there's no hope.
|
| That's the truly repulsive aspects of barbarism, it's
| about the combination of ignorance and indifference as to
| the consequences of our actions
| pibechorro wrote:
| Ya, no. Nothing wrong with hunting straight from nature. The
| key word is sustainable.
|
| If you live on the ocean, you have every human right to fish
| fo nourishment. The issue here is militarized mass scale
| industrial fishing, illegally raping reassures to feed
| foreign people, mostly landlocked people sushi rolls and fish
| fillet.
|
| What we need is a culture that eats local. Its a consumption
| issue. Farmed fish are most of the time also destructive to
| the environment, they are fed less than ideal and sustainable
| feeds, are not as healthy to eat, and most importantly are
| not healthy and happy fish, they are slaves in horrible life
| cycles.
| lupire wrote:
| > Ya, no.
|
| Please don't do this.
|
| > are not healthy and happy fish
|
| Citation needed that wild fish are "happy".
|
| And it's dishonesty to assume unsustainable farming and
| sustainable wild catch in your argument.
|
| Do you have any evidence that sufficient wild catch exists
| to feed the population?
| BurningFrog wrote:
| > _What we need is a culture that eats local_
|
| This hostility to transporting goods you see occasionally
| is hard for me to understand.
|
| I mean, I know I disagree with it, but what's weird is I
| don't even understand the underlying reasoning.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| > Nothing wrong with hunting straight from nature.
|
| Wild animals are likely to have parasites. Farmed animals
| can be controlled for that.
| Swenrekcah wrote:
| Farms are often crowded and prime locations for
| parasites. Fish farms are notorious:
| https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/supermarket-salmon-
| riddle...
| gjhh244 wrote:
| Parasites are no problem as long as you cook the food
| properly.
| tharkun__ wrote:
| Farmed animals have a tendency to be a mono culture that
| is housed on way too little space which is a breeding
| ground for problems that then need to be controlled by
| heavy use of pharmaceuticals which is detrimental to
| human survival.
|
| Think anti biotic use in chickens for example. And the
| resistances that come with it. And fish tanks that do
| exist already have some of these issues already as well.
| How expanding that even more is a good thing is nebolous
| to me.
| hungryforcodes wrote:
| Also the animals may not like it.
| pibechorro wrote:
| *reasources
| giantg2 wrote:
| So what are the city people going to eat if it has to be
| local?
|
| My perspective is that there are simply too many people and
| they are leading an increasingly modern (high consumption)
| lifestyle.
| rab-the-goat wrote:
| If they have such a high population and low production
| that they have to steal other peoples food sources,
| they're an existential threat to everyone else. What they
| will eat has been determined, and it's not likely to make
| the transition to local. So other people's starvation and
| the mass destruction of habitat will continue to be their
| externalities.
| giantg2 wrote:
| Much of the fish in the US is imported from China. So
| it's not just what "they" are eating.
| adventured wrote:
| Do me a favor and post the latest figures on US domestic
| fish vs imports, where the imports break out to on a
| country-by-country basis, along with separating out US
| domestic fish that are exported to and then imported from
| China in a processing loop (used for cheaper processing,
| not actually caught or farmed by China).
|
| That way we can better analyze the context of what "much"
| actually means.
| giantg2 wrote:
| You can do that if you'd like. It's supposed to be 30% of
| seafood is actual Chinese imports.
| tharkun__ wrote:
| I would tend to agree. Cities breed lots of problems.
| Social, economic, environmental, every kind you can
| imagine. And it creates very very small communities
| outside those cities which comes with its own problems
| too (think small town sheriff's tyranny type stuff - yes
| there's racial profiling etc in big cities as well,
| didn't say it was a unique problem). Bigger numbers do
| have an advantage but there is definitely a number that
| is too large.
|
| I would advocate for lots of intermediate size cities but
| that doesn't seem to be what anyone in power wants.
|
| Also, are you advocating for Thanos like mercy here? ;)
| TheGigaChad wrote:
| I would advocate for you to hang yourself.
| giantg2 wrote:
| Not just that the settlement size is not right, but that
| the planet can only support so many people. Sure, they
| estimate it can support up to 11 billion. But that
| assumes increases in technology and commercial
| agricultural as well as consumer changes (like little
| meat). This also doesn't take into account it being
| sustainable or not.
|
| We need a shrinking population and less consumerism. We
| are not currently sustainable (and unlikely to become so
| anytime soon).
| spockz wrote:
| We already have ponds for growing non saltwater fish. Farming
| cattle fish in the ocean would be interesting!
| prawn wrote:
| There are already many aquaculture pens in the ocean near
| Port Lincoln, South Australia, often for tuna. You see them
| from the air when flying over. Here's a photo of what they
| look like:
|
| https://www.cleanseas.com.au/custom/files/media/our-
| farm-2.j...
| mastax wrote:
| The issue is that many of the desirable farmed fish like
| tuna and salmon are carnivores. Farming them still
| requires catching mass quantities of less-commercially-
| useful fish along with the issues that has.
|
| Edit: I should say part of the issue. There are other
| ecological concerns with farmed fish.
| throwtheacctawy wrote:
| That and the flesh eating parasites eating the farmed
| fish alive.
|
| So the inputs are unsustainable. The output yields are
| unreliable, and not able to meet demand. It isn't clear
| how much better fish farms are for the environment.
| rmah wrote:
| Nations in the far east already have have vast fish farms
| in the ocean (along the coasts). They are huge and produce
| huge quantities of fish -- a substantial percentage of fish
| consumed. But there are species that people like to eat
| that cannot be farmed economically or at all. So they are
| caught in the wild.
| throwtheacctawy wrote:
| Worth noting, fish farms have flaws that have not been
| addressed yet. E.g. - there is a parasite that attacks
| the flesh of farm raised fish. The fish literally get
| slowly eaten alive.
|
| Scientists still trying to find a good solution that
| scales. Currently, the yields in commercial fish farms
| won't meet consumption demand.
|
| IMO, it is probably better to eat meat than fish. We at
| least have a better understanding of how to more
| sustainably raise cattle. I'm probably not entirely
| accurate here, but cattle do not have the same level of
| ecological importance as fish do.
| ta988 wrote:
| They exist already.
| https://oceantoday.noaa.gov/fishonafarm/
| booleandilemma wrote:
| Interesting perspective, I hadn't thought of it that way
| before.
| soheil wrote:
| > China would stop bribes
|
| What are these bribes you talk of? Can you provide sources?
| mastax wrote:
| On average, fish sticks are increasing in much of the world:
|
| https://www.pnas.org/content/117/4/2218
|
| https://sustainablefisheries-uw.org/science-of-seaspiracy/
|
| > Among the assessed stocks in the database, the average
| fishing pressure increased and the biomass declined on average
| until 1995, when fishing pressure began to decrease. By 2005,
| average biomass had started to increase (Fig. 1B). Averaged
| across all stocks in the database, biomass in 2016 was higher
| than BMSY, and fishing pressure was lower than UMSY. However,
| improvement is still needed for 24% of stocks, accounting for
| 19% of potential catch, which still have low biomass and high
| fishing pressure compared with MSY-based targets
|
| > Since the mid-1990s, catch has generally declined in
| proportion to decreases in fishing pressure and was, in 2016,
| at 54% of where it was in 1989 for assessed stocks (Fig. 1B).
| This pattern is also observed at the regional level, where the
| correlation between exploitation rate and catch is generally
| >0.8 (Fig. 2). Global catch as reported by the FAO also
| declined during that period, but less so than for the assessed
| stocks reported here, likely because fishing effort in the
| parts of the world without assessment has not declined (18).
|
| > Regions that have average biomass near or above BMSY are
| Australia, Atlantic Ocean tunas, Canada West Coast, European
| Union non-Mediterranean, Indian Ocean tunas,
| Norway/Iceland/Faroes, New Zealand, Pacific Ocean tunas,
| Alaska, the US Southeast and Gulf, and the US West Coast.
| Although these regions have not avoided the overfishing of all
| stocks, conservative management has kept most stocks at high
| biomass. Many areas where biomass was below BMSY in 2000 have
| seen reductions in fishing pressure and stock increases,
| including the Atlantic Ocean tunas; the East, Southeast, and
| Gulf coasts of the United States; the Canada East Coast; and
| the Northwest Pacific Ocean (Japan and Russia). Tuna stocks in
| the Pacific and Indian Oceans, which were well above BMSY in
| 1970, were near BMSY in 2016.
|
| > Stocks in the Mediterranean-Black Sea have low biomass and
| continue to decline, whereas stocks in South America have
| declined considerably in the last 20 y and were below target
| levels in 2016. Fishing pressure in South America has been
| dropping since the early 2000s. Only 4 of 36 stocks in NW
| Africa have MSY-based reference points for biomass estimated,
| all of which are large-volume, small-pelagic fisheries and are
| therefore unrepresentative of the many demersal fisheries in
| the region. The stock abundance for those small-pelagic stocks
| is above MSY targets, but exploitation rates were high (2.5
| times UMSY) for the 6 NW African stocks for which exploitation
| rate reference points exist. Regional assessments (19)
| estimated that most demersal stocks were overexploited by 2008
| and recommended reductions in fishing pressure.
|
| It is of course difficult to create and enforce a regulatory
| regime to prevent overfishing, but there tends to be buy-in
| among fisherman once their fisheries collapse.
| ashtonkem wrote:
| The fascinating question is what happens if China tries to back
| this up with force. The US would probably feel the need to
| intervene, but I'm sure most of South America would be more
| than a bit wary having American war ships in the area given
| what we've done down there. On the other hand, better than
| Chinese warships perhaps?
| [deleted]
| pvaldes wrote:
| > what happens if China tries to back this up with force.
|
| Nobody in Argentina would buy Chinese products again,
| probably.
|
| I predict that if they search a little, would find exactly
| the same pattern in Ethiopian waters.
| ashtonkem wrote:
| > Nobody in Argentina would buy Chinese products again,
| probably.
|
| Sure, but would that really affect Chinese decision making?
| I imagine that a partial US boycott would have a much
| larger impact than a full boycott in Argentina. Their GDP
| is 32nd in the world according to Wikipedia.
| hatchnyc wrote:
| Argentina is a signatory of the Rio Treaty, as such any
| attack against Argentina would we considered an attack
| against the United States and most of the rest of South
| America.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-
| American_Treaty_of_Recip...
| galangalalgol wrote:
| So mostly safe from violent retaliation. How important is
| their trade with China? If they impound Chinese fishing
| vessels (assuming they have a coast guard capaple of
| keeping up with this many intruders?) a loss of trade mught
| occur.
| toyg wrote:
| That treaty is not worth much of anything these days, too
| much history has happened since then.
|
| It's true that the US consider South America "their own
| backyard", but there is a web of complex relationships
| which makes it unlikely they would blindly help this or
| that country retaliate against actions from superpowers -
| short of somebody establishing permanent strategic bases
| that are direct threats to the US mainland.
| Tams80 wrote:
| I doubt the US would turn down an opportunity to legally
| and likely popularly trim down the PLAN.
| hatchnyc wrote:
| I'm pretty sure if China went to war with Argentina it
| would find new teeth.
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| Ever heard of RIMPAC?
|
| https://youtu.be/ygLwuhQsybw
|
| It's a yearly naval exercise conducted by many countries in
| the Pacific. In the event of a naval war with China, they
| would have to fight not only the US but Australia, Canada,
| Japan, Philippines, and countless other countries.
|
| It would not go well for them, I assure you.
| ashtonkem wrote:
| I was never questioning who would win a shooting war, I was
| questioning how the Argentinians would feel about it.
|
| But if China did decide to project power, the question is
| not "would the US and its allies win a shooting war", the
| question is "will the US push back at all?"
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| Does this answer the question?
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-
| American_Treaty_of_Recip...
| stefanfisk wrote:
| Does China even posses the ability to project power that far
| in any major sense?
| [deleted]
| ForHackernews wrote:
| Not really, no. China does not (yet) have a blue water
| navy. They have one, non-nuclear, carrier:
| https://thediplomat.com/2020/01/with-its-new-aircraft-
| carrie...
| abeppu wrote:
| Isn't it pretty unlikely for them to try to use force to back
| up fishing boats secretly popping into Argentina's waters?
| That would be making a big noise to continue doing something
| that the fishing fleet was trying to do quietly, basically
| calling attention to their shady behavior. And wouldn't using
| force there be close to an invasion over one source of
| cheaper fish? That would be a really aggressive escalation,
| might alienate many countries, etc.
|
| Surely China has bigger fish to fry ( _rimshot_ ) with its
| foreign relations.
| ashtonkem wrote:
| > Isn't it pretty unlikely for them to try to use force to
| back up fishing boats secretly popping into Argentina's
| waters?
|
| Yeah, probably. That's why I said _if_. It 's an
| interesting scenario to think through, even if it's
| unlikely.
| baron_harkonnen wrote:
| I'm genuinely curious when all of this will catch up to us. I
| spend a relatively large amount of my spare time keeping up
| with myriad of ways we are destroying our environment, the fact
| that our ecosystem is in deep danger is without question.
|
| At the same time, while I am anecdotally aware we are
| experiencing a range of shortages right now, it never seems to
| quite show up in our economic data.
|
| Take for example the FRED data on global fish prices [0]. When
| you look at that chart you see nothing particularly
| interesting. You can pore over all of the commodities charts
| and if that was all the data you had you would soon come to the
| conclusion that nothing obvious is wrong with our environment
| (at least from an economic standpoint).
|
| To be absolutely clear, I'm not questioning that something is
| wrong, I think we're in major trouble. But I am still genuinely
| surprised that this peril doesn't present itself in any
| economic data I can find. Any insights into when we will feel
| this our how/when this environmental destruction will become
| visible in our economic data would be appreciated.
|
| [0] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PSALMUSDQ
| mason55 wrote:
| I'd guess given technology advances you'd expect prices to go
| down, so the fact that they stay flat is actually indicating
| that fish are becoming harder to find. Similar to how if the
| price of something stays the same then it's becoming cheaper
| because of inflation.
|
| Also, fish are not a long term investment. The price only
| depends on how hard they are to find combined with demand to
| eat them sometime soon. If you could buy a fish now with the
| expectation of selling it later when stocks dry up then I
| think you'd see a lot more upward pressure.
| HappyDreamer wrote:
| Another thing cold be if costs for transportation and
| preparing the fish, storing it etc, grocery store salaries,
| as of now outweighs the cost of fishing it up from the
| ocean? (But if so, maybe not much longer.) (I don't know,
| just wondering.)
| justnotworthit wrote:
| It reminds me of the national debt/fiscal gap discussion.
| Everyone will agree you can't owe a million times GDP, but no
| one can describe the "limit". Every year and decade you have
| people crying out that it's unsustainable and will result in
| collapse, and you have people saying "nah, more". You have
| examples of countries imploding, and you have the USA with
| doubles down every X years.
|
| Surely you can't parlay indefinitely, but there hasn't been
| an implosion yet... until there is... but then everyone who
| enjoyed the political and financial benefits of parlaying is
| long dead, their inheritors heavily insulated... or there
| isn't a financial implosion... or there's some other disaster
| rendering this disaster moot... or something else (free
| energy? Second Coming?) appears and fixes it, allowing the
| reckless to get away with it... if we ever agree on who the
| reckless were...
|
| We could just follow Taleb's warnings (the precautionary
| principle, antifragility, black swan events), but we can't
| even agree on basic reality, and the people who are greatly
| benefiting off their version of reality will never budge, and
| the people who might suffer aren't yet born (probably).
| lettergram wrote:
| > To be absolutely clear, I'm not questioning that something
| is wrong, I think we're in major trouble. But I am still
| genuinely surprised that this peril doesn't present itself in
| any economic data I can find. Any insights into when we will
| feel this our how/when this environmental destruction will
| become visible in our economic data would be appreciated.
|
| Simply put, The environmental destruction isn't what you
| think. For instance, Based on my experience climate modeling
| and working with environmental papers - I don't believe
| carbon emissions has a meaningful impact on global warming.
|
| Further, and in way of example: the warming should lead to
| increased food production (they often say as much in their
| papers). What will happen is greater soil erosion, so we have
| to protect against that (or we will long-term) have crop
| problems.
|
| The general point, is the system is more complex than we
| realize. There are no one-off answers because the system will
| always be adjusting to try to keep an equilibrium AND so will
| humans. Farm Fishing is on the rise, protection zones are
| being setup, global fishing rules have been ignored, but
| local ones have not, etc etc
| eloff wrote:
| Funny that's contrary to the experience of > 95% of climate
| scientists. I would trust that over an unsupported
| reference to your experience, whatever that is.
| mixologic wrote:
| "Based on my experience climate modeling and working with
| environmental papers" And what experience is that, exactly?
| lettergram wrote:
| I worked with several academics and corporations as a
| contractor building their simulations. I've also read a
| lot of papers as well, etc.
|
| Like most simulations, they pretty much only can match
| reality so closely. for instance, we don't have many long
| term measurements, so we make (educated-ish) guesses.
| Academics also repeatedly run their models, tweaking
| parameters to get the results they want. Frankly, I don't
| trust any research using simulations, after being paid to
| work on environmental, biological systems, simulations
| for drones and machines (trucks, construction, etc).
| (Drones and other machines at least had a way to quickly
| test).
| lupire wrote:
| Animal species almost always grow to consume more unless they
| are destroyed by predators or exhaust their environment.
| elliekelly wrote:
| I'm fairly certain I've commented about this on HN before but
| when I went to Antarctica (via ship from Argentina) in 2018 we
| saw tons of these vessels because the ships fishing for squid
| use huge bright lights to attract them at night. They looked
| like UFOs on the horizon. It was a really strange sight.
|
| It was definitely well-known amongst the scientists on the ship
| that the operations were illegal. I know they made an effort to
| report as many as they could but my impression was that
| officials were overwhelmed by complaints and the illegal ships
| would work together to avoid detection/quickly move to
| international water so, since it was a losing battle, the
| government didn't put forth too much effort.
|
| Whether that's the _real_ reason nothing is done or just the
| good reason used to justify their inaction is anyone's guess. I
| will say there were a shocking number of ships that I could see
| and I wouldn't be surprised if they outnumbered the Argentinian
| navy.
| galangalalgol wrote:
| It seems they outnumber the Argentinian fishing fleet 4 to 1,
| just counting the Chinese vessels which make up only 66% of
| the total intruders. So probably they outnumber the navy by
| quite a bit more. Impounding all these vessels would probably
| not make economic sense. They cant utilize that many vehicles
| and the people that might buy them would be the people they
| took them from. They would have to escort each one back to
| harbor and what do they do with the sailors? Feed and house
| them for free? Sinking these vessels with all hands with no
| warning would be the most effective way to handle it, no time
| wasted escorting and the impact psychologically would be
| outsized to the vessels sunk. Of course, that would gain them
| a great deal of negative publicity.
| yumraj wrote:
| > Of course, that would gain them a great deal of negative
| publicity.
|
| Negative publicity where? I'm sure within Argentina this
| would be very popular and if China protests it'll have to
| own up that these illegal boats are coming from there,
| which it may not want to do.
| galangalalgol wrote:
| That is a good point. The EU and the US likely would
| condemn it on humanitarian grounds, but Argentina may not
| have enough trade with them to care.
| Tams80 wrote:
| Sinking a few and then maintaining that threat is likely
| the only way (as in, if they come back, sink a few more).
|
| Obviously the crews should be taken off first, then
| returned to land and then deported as soon as possible.
| There's not much point in punishing them any further.
| galangalalgol wrote:
| If you are only doing a few, might as well take the boats
| and use them. There are so many I was thinking you'd need
| to sink a couple hundred. In which case saving the
| fishermen is prohibitively expensive.
| nonesuchluck wrote:
| Not without warning, no. You wouldn't have to learn much
| Chinese to announce "we're scuttling this ship in 2
| minutes. If you wish to live, you may board this freely
| provided inflatable."
|
| Their other boats will take them home. Probably have to
| toss over some of their illegal catch to make room, though.
| HappyDreamer wrote:
| I wonder, isn't it 1) obvious for the CCP what this amount of
| overfishing will do?
|
| And, 2)
|
| > These distant-water fleets mainly fish for shortfin squid,
| which are vital to Argentina's economy
|
| 1 and 2 combined make me wonder if destroying the ocean
| ecosystem, and damaging Argentina's economy could be a goal in
| itself, somehow.
|
| Maybe to (now I'm guessing), in the future, get to lend out
| money to the government in Argentina, if they're in a bad
| economic situation -- and make the country depend on the CCP or
| something like that?
|
| I'm just guessing and wondering. However it'd be weird to me if
| the CCP hadn't thought about what'll happen, because of the
| overfishing, and they said that, yes this is good for us; it's
| something we want (the party, probably not the people).
| Quarrelsome wrote:
| It might be an error to attribute this to centralised
| planning. While that is eminently possible (and much easier
| for the CCP than other governments) this also could just be
| someone min/maxing their little slice of the pie or anything
| in between.
|
| Agents of the imperial European powers used to act in the
| "interests of the empire" abroad without significant
| oversight ~200 years ago so this situation could be similar
| with the Chinese fleet being paid with incentives that
| encourage bending of the rules.
| fencepost wrote:
| _isn 't it 1) obvious for the CCP what this amount of
| overfishing will do?_
|
| It's not in their territory, they likely don't give a rat's
| ass. Ecosystem damage in the western hemisphere might
| actually be a good aspect for some of those who might crack
| down on this.
|
| I suspect we're all well aware that vessels and crews of any
| nation pulling this in China's territorial waters would not
| be treated kindly.
| istorical wrote:
| I read a lot of Chinese fantasy fiction (xianxia and wuxia)
| online and its extremely common for the heroes of the stories
| to use potions or herbs or magical ingredients to increase
| their powers and abilities. Something unique about them
| though is it seems super widespread in these stories for the
| main character, neutral factions, and enemies / evil factions
| alike to exhaust discovered resources to extinction, with the
| main ethical / moral crisis being whether to distribute them
| according to power or according to fairness. Fights over how
| big one's share of the pie is are common, and 'evil'
| characters are often those that express greed by demanding an
| unfair share. But the question of whether it's a good idea or
| a moral choice to harvest an entire field of 1000 year old
| ginseng or stealing all of some rare previously thought to be
| extinct Phoenix's eggs vs tending to the field and harvesting
| only a small crop or only taking the resources of older birds
| rarely comes up.
|
| There are plenty of other cultural differences in these
| stories but overall I'm always left wondering whether some of
| these reflect broader cultural attitudes or if this is like
| if someone tried to get a deep understanding of western
| culture by reading Spiderman comics and that's it.
| Wameaw wrote:
| I'd think the culture of games and MMORPG had more
| influence.
|
| I've seen multiple spins on the scenario you've described,
| in which some scenarios the exhaustive approach is
| justified (the half-D world is on the verge of collapse, or
| about to fall to a corrupting force which will decay the
| resources, etc.);
|
| is reasoned (if the protag leave the sustainable portion,
| their opponent or enemy will plunder the rest, basically
| 0-sum game);
|
| is sustained (instead of harvesting everything, they
| transfer the resource to their own half-D, or if it's non-
| competitive, they do leave sustainable parts).
|
| Then other genres of the wuxia and xianxia type where the
| protag is the leader of a faction, and have the faction
| resources (garden, mines, etc.).
|
| I think you are thinking too deep into this. Reading a
| popular novel doesn't mean the readers agree with every
| action or idea the protag or the author take/presents,
| popular novel are more like fast food, maybe this fry is a
| bit too salty, maybe that fry is not salty enough, maybe
| the cola is lacking ice, etc.
| istorical wrote:
| Yeah it's true they don't always fully exhaust resources,
| but I wonder if the fact that such a large percentage of
| these worlds (comparatively to western fantasy worlds)
| are seen as 'well this is all gonna be gone soon anyway
| whether through natural effects or the actions of another
| bad actor so we may as well just abuse these resources
| anyway' doesn't reveal a slight bias compared to western
| attitudes.
|
| One could perhaps look at the behaviors of Chinese
| tourists at buffets as another example:
| https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/976211.shtml
|
| But it's just a curiosity since as you say, it's not a
| representative sample and it's just a genre of fiction,
| not some real psychological / sociological study.
|
| I've also heard the explanation that this particular
| behavior could be a reaction to recent history - in
| particular the famines that China went through in the
| 20th century. People still have through direct experience
| or through their recent parents of grandparents that
| experience of literally starving.
|
| half-d? = half dimension / pocket dimension? don't know
| what half-d is.
| pimlottc wrote:
| Sorry, what does "half-D" mean?
| lupire wrote:
| Is Game of Thrones an accurate model of USA culture?
| justinclift wrote:
| Maybe Scottish history (give or take a few dragons)? ;)
| supp wrote:
| Yes, actually it is in a lot of ways.
| mlindner wrote:
| Game of Thrones is set in Europe and is heavily inspired
| by real european history (Hadrian's wall, the war of the
| roses, etc).
| ptaipale wrote:
| Game of Thrones is set on fictional continents (though
| yes, inspired by some actual European history).
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_of_A_Song_of_Ice_and_
| Fir...
| vmladenov wrote:
| The White Walkers were a direct criticism of the US
| public and government's inaction on global warming.
| ericmay wrote:
| No it's not. And it would be an unfair and silly
| comparison anyway.
| [deleted]
| Gustomaximus wrote:
| Some areas are getting destroyed but other countries are very
| good at managing their fisheries, England, Norway, Australia,
| Canada and more will be producing wild fish ongoing I would
| expect.
|
| There definitely seems the need for some international waters
| rules to be agreed on, but given today's politics it seems
| unlikely the major powers would approach that with goodwill.
| Tams80 wrote:
| The thing with all those areas is that those countries have
| the resources to police their waters and would absolutely
| seize vessels that were in breach of their or international
| laws.
|
| And if an illegal fishing armada turned up would very likely
| sink a few vessels to send a message.
| rorykoehler wrote:
| Argentina should lease their waters to a country with the
| means to defend them.
| adventured wrote:
| It's long past time for the US to put the Monroe Doctrine to some
| actual good use and put an end to the illegal Chinese fishing -
| plundering, theft - going on in Latin American waters. We can
| trivially put a stop to it, and quick. It'd be simultaneously in
| our own self-interest to stand up to China on this matter, and be
| a positive favor to Latin America.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-06-06 23:00 UTC)