...Angela Carol👉1980 Charleston Oregon,she was a scalloper with an East Coast crew with Kevin Ganley as skipper,who became a top producer on the 123ft Marco American Beauty in the Bering! glad your gonna haul out,that's why that ol girl still floats,take care of your gear......from Trawiin' Rollins " been on all the big ones"
Crumby ratio (likes vs dislikes) on an honest and informative video. Good quality too. People have been fishing for hundreds-of-thousands of years and will for thousands if not more. Yes, technically that’s a big biomass to pluck out in a single gulp of a trawl net but it’s food. All of it. That’s how fishing works. I am the crunchiest lefty pinko hippie treehugger/fishhugger but I also understand the economics of fishing and what it does for human beings. The benefits of the fishery are vast. To dislike this dude’s video is really strange to me. It’s an excellent video and this team is just doing their jobs. Disliking it is really odd to me.
"Trawling destroys the natural seafloor habitat by essentially rototilling the seabed. All of the bottom-dwelling plants and animals are affected, if not outright destroyed by tearing up root systems or animal burrows. By resuspending bottom sediment, nutrient levels in the ambient water, and the entire chemistry of the water is changed. Resuspended sediment can lower light levels in the water, and reduce photosynthesis in ocean-dwelling plants, the bottom of the food web." Please do not use this method when fishing. By 2070 literally no wildlife will be alive. fishing like this hugely affects the environment negatively and food chain.
😂 Your so full of shit I smell you. It’s obvious you where brainwashed by the best. The trawl does not ‘rototilling’ the bottom, it rolls across the top 😂. You’re either stupid or a fucking lier
they also did a trip before that, then went out again after I went home. I was surprisingly not tired. got good naps between dropping the net and pulling it up.
bottom trawling is not hurting reefs or corals because they dont drag their trawls over them. why dont they ? well if they did their entire trawls would get destroyed thats why they are fishing next to them where they wont run into rocks reefs or anything the fish uses as shelter. bottom trawling have been proved to be good for the sea bed because they whirl up the sediment on the bottom wich left undisturbed would drain all the oxygen in the area and when trawls come across all the sediment starts the production of micro organisms and life starts to flourish. there is a reason these trawlers can fish the exact same spot for over 30 years without any damage to the fish population
All the people talking on here about ripping up the bottom of the ocean don't have a clue what they are talking about. It's just sand. It's not like they are trolling across Reefs. Maybe you people should read before making stupid comments.
We fish nets with big mesh which lets the smaller unsellable fish out. At least 90% of what hits the deck is kept. The other fish have no market value.
We can sell almost everything we catch. The fish we throw over have no market value like; dog fish, rat fish. We recently found a market for dog fish so we may be able to keep them from now on. We only get a few cents a pound for them bet everything helps.
While it might be technically possible to run a trawl at 1000 meters (about 550 fathoms), the boat needed to overcome that much drag would be huge. Next question would be why do it? Most marketable fish live in the 30 - 50 fathom range.
@@denali9449we trawl in 500 to 800 fathoms for deep water species ie orange roughy ,cardinal fish and various dory’s the boat I work on is on 30 meters with four crew
It's free with govt subsidies. Also from conservationists that don't protect anything. Go ahead and contribute to destroying the planet! Good job. When your grandchildren have nothing to eat!
I can never understand all these negative comments about fishermen and the eco systems. Don't you people realise that fishing is probably the most eco friendly method of producing food in the world? Think about it... How many forests have fishermen cleared to produce fish? None How much pesticides do fishermen use to catch fish? None How much fertiliser do fishermen use to produce fish? None. How much fresh water do fishermen use to produce fish? None Is there any food more organic than a wild caught fish from the bottom of the sea? Probably not. 80 million tons of protein comes from the sea in order to feed us. Now lets just say fishing was banned, how do you think were going to find an alternative 80 million tons of protein? Grow more crops? Produce more beef? More chicken? Think about it.... In order to do those things you need land. And not just any land, you cant suddenly start growing wheat in the Sahara desert. You have to grow where there is a plentiful supply of water - and on land that is reasonably fertile. Now where are we going to find this? Probably the only suitable place left are the rain forests. The only problem with that is... in order to produce 80 million tons we would need a land mass the equivilent of 22 times all the rain forests we have left on this planet. Fishermen are not raping the seas bare of fish. Over 90% of all the known fish stocks on this planet ARE being fished sustainably. Give these hard working guys a break. Please.
Trawling destroys marine habitats and catches so much by-catch that just goes to waste as a result. Fishing is essential, absolutely, but it's bottom-trawling that isn't good if you want to keep fishing for many generations to come.
Giovani. I am currently working in marine science and was also a fisherman for many years so I do feel reasonably qualified to answer your comment. Firstly Trawling does not always harm marine habitats. Many marine habitats depend on trawlers turning over the sea bed in exactly the same way a farmer plough's his fields.The turning over of the seabed releases nutrients which start a chain of events ultimately leading up to the feeding of the fish swimming in the area. If the sea bed is left untouched it can become like a desert where very little plant life grows and few fish are found.To give you an example, during the second world war there was very little fishing done. Most fishermen were called up and their fishing vessels requisitioned for the navy to be used in mine sweeping etc. When the war ended and the men went back fishing they expected the sea's to be teaming with fish but exactly the opposite happened.The sea's were almost barren. It took a number of years before stock's started to grow again. It is true that during Trawling you will catch a number of species that will be discarded and thrown back overboard. This fish does not completely go to waste. It feeds the sea birds, other fish and shellfish. It is also no co-incidence that during the years of the EU Cod recovery programme when hundreds of fishing vessels were scrapped that seabird populations were decimated. These boats taken out of the fleet left less boats fishing and the birds starved to death. However, the main culprit in fish being discarded is not the fishermen. it is the Politicians who set fish quota's far too low so fishermen are forced into discarding marketable fish. Would you stand on a street corner and throw away your week's wages? No. Well fishermen do not want to do this either. The only reason they have to discard is because they are forced into it. Now I can hear you say they should fish by other more selective means such as lines. When you fish with line's you normally catch bigger mature fish ie the breeding stock. Take the breeding stock away and what is going to happen?.... Fish stock's will go down. If a boat needs to catch 10 tons a week to stay viable surely its better to take 10 tons of mixed size fish than 10 tons of the breeding stock. A lot of people read in the media and environment websites about fish stocks being decimated by Trawlers. Most of this is completely untrue and only serves to misinform the public. As I said earlier Its time to give these guys a break!
Hoops McCann The seabed isn't a field of soil. I've heard of some new trawling methods that are better, but for the most part, there is clear and undeniable evidence of what trawling does; photos of habitats that were once rich in coral and algae, now barren. I have no idea how you think indiscriminately scraping everything on the seafloor can somehow allow for a rich ecosystem. What's worse was that you told me that there was little fishing done during WW2. The demand for food, especially fish due to its convenience, rose. The sardine industry boomed, and the UK admiralty commissioned many trawlers and whalers. The massive by-catch(Because on average, it's 90% of what trawlers catch), if being eaten by birds, would cause a population boom, due to a dramatic increase of food available. That was unnatural to begin with, so of course many of them would die if that food surplus stopped. Lastly, the breeding stock... The whole point is that you're not supposed to take the fish before they have a chance to reproduce. There has never been a case where taking only the mature fish has depleted a population.
How bout all the damage you trawler do to the sea floor. Do you kniw how long it takes fir that habitat to recover? Add to that the fact that your catch is indisciminate, everything gets caught up in your nets. There is so much bi-catch.
There is bycatch in every fishery. Bycatch in simply fish that has no market value, nobody wants to eat it. Making Fertilizer is a possibility but we live in a remote area with now jobs but fishing. Our soil is too rocky to farm with and our reservation is very small. The first settlers attemped to make us into farmers but the crops wouldn't grow well enough so the pitch forks were made into hooks called Chaboots. (look up "Makah Fish Hook").Fishing is what my ancestors have done for thousands of years along with Whaling.
I did as you suggested and took time to look up Makah fish hooks. Even better I learnt a little more about your tribal and cultural practices. I am guilty of passing judgement without first taking time to understand the situation. I respect your right to exercise your cultural and indigenous practices as we do ours. I do maintain that much damage is done via trawling and as a pacific nation we live with those impacts on a daily basis. With respect to you my comment was offensive and I apologize.
And look at the state of the ocean floor because of it. Almost every inshore fishery in the world is at a fraction of its original level because of bottom trawling www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/feb/10/bottom-trawling-how-to-empty-the-seas Stop believing that scientists are lying to you. Denying truths is how you got Trump and look how badly that ended.
Hague1970 cry me a river.thats why they have closed areas these days which open in rotation every few years.we actually see an increase in prawns some years.every year is different.trawling promotes new growth just like when they burn land to promote growth.go and complain about something thats important like isis for example.
what does isis have to do with trawling? 'trawling promotes new growth'. No, it doesn't. when you rip up soft corals that are hundreds of years old they don't spawn new corals, they turn to underwater deserts. Do try and educate yourself.
The areas we fish are on sand and mud, and the net we use has large mesh to allow smaller unsellable fish out. The same areas have been fished for over 50 years, so towing our net on the bottom is not at all like cutting down old growth trees. I do care about the ecosystem its just that this is the most efficient way to catch the small sole fish. Their mouths are too small for hooks.
@@DeepWater5453 When you are catching so many fish that they can't reproduce you are wiping them out... Taking away food and money longterm... some "snowflakes" just use their brain I guess.
@@mitchellhogg4627 When you are catching so many fish and destroying their habitat, they can't reproduce. Doing so will wipe out your food and money source. It's called research. Try it.
If you have fished, or studied fishing you will realize this is very destructive to the ecosystem. Scouring and disturbing the bottom destroys habitat. You have never fished...if you think this is good, do your homework
Fred Taylor They have been fishing like that for a 100 years, professor, long before you got educated. People like you are whats wrong with the world now. And just so you'll know I grew up in a fishing town, a town that's dead now because of educated fuckers like you. Have a nice day Fred.
Yes they have, and read this.wwf.panda.org/about_our_earth/blue_planet/problems/problems_fishing/ www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jan/09/overfishing-pacific-bluefin-tuna www.adn.com/business/article/alaska-salmon-forecast-predicts-summer-harvest-will-be-half-last-years/2016/03/26/ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_of_the_Atlantic_northwest_cod_fishery#Ecological_ignorance www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Sardine-population-collapses-prompts-ban-on-6197380.php
+Joe jack It's important to be able to make a living off of fish for many more generations instead of just a few decades. That involves fishing responsibly, using sustainable methods and being careful of what you fish for how long.
I understand the need for commercial fishing but it seems like there should be a better way your killing everything females immature fish everything God is watching
I did catch a bomb before and it was spraying out some nauseous chemicals. I was pretty nervous pushing it over the side. I should try to find that footage.
The nets we fish have big mesh and they let the smaller fish out so 90% of what hits the deck can be sold. This style of fishing has been done for 100 years and has been very stable. Regulations prevent overfishing and have been set be sustainable. I'm not planning on fishing for the rest of my life but its going to take a couple of years to transition into another job.
