Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> it went down by 70-80% IIRC.

Not even close, demand dropped by 29% (source below). And the cause of the drop was the demand itself declining rather than anything China did. Their enforcement was minimal, the soup itself was just becoming less popular. It was sort of like a fad. Kind of like the sushi fad in the late 90s in California. If it was due to China's actions, you wouldn't have these sorts of stories still: "Why Shark Finning Bans Aren't Keeping Sharks Off The Plate (Yet)" (http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/03/03/390449252/why...)



WildAid reports 82% http://wildaid.org/sites/default/files/SharkReport_spread_fi...

I don't have access to the paper referenced in the article, therefore I can't really comment.

The article also uses a lot of words such as 'should', 'may', 'could' so I'll need something a bit stronger than that.


Did you read your link? The numbers "were self-reported by shark fin vendors in the Guangzhou". Hardly scientific and it's only from a single city in China.

I'd trust NPR over that source. NPR claims that while shark fin soup sales dropped slightly, harvest & hunting of sharks is still going strong.

Though, the real point here is that China isn't and won't do much about it. Oh, they'll put laws on the books and make a big show of it as they do with everything, but it's just talk for the most part. Enforcement of those laws is another matter entirely. For example, their pollution and environmental regulations rival that of the U.S. So why doesn't China mirror the U.S when it comes to its environment? Because they don't enforce those laws. And when they do, a small bribe to the inspection team is usually all it takes to get them to turn around and take the day off.


> Did you read your link? The numbers "were self-reported by shark fin vendors in the Guangzhou". Hardly scientific and it's only from a single city in China.

Did you read yours? I prefer a source that clearly states where the data comes from. I don't have access to the paper the NPR article references and I imagine that you don't either so we don't really know where the 29% number comes from even.

Are you arguing against the bans or are you saying that they won't work. If the first, your arguments are kind of unrelated. If the second, sure, they might not work. It's worth giving it a shot.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: