Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Privatizing Animals?

  1. Apr 19, 2010 #1
    http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj1n2-1.html [Broken]

     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 19, 2010 #2

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Is there some point to this? Because as is, it's going to get deleted real quick.
     
  4. Apr 19, 2010 #3
    Perhaps animals should be private property instead of common property in order to prevent extinction. The article is extensive.
     
  5. Apr 19, 2010 #4

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    You do know that when salmon swim upstream to spawn that it's a one way trip? They die.

    http://www.fish.washington.edu/hatchery/education.html [Broken]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  6. Apr 19, 2010 #5
    Yup, but they also reproduce. It's just like farming.
     
  7. Apr 19, 2010 #6
    What is the difference between private land and public land? You still don't own the stream.
     
  8. Apr 19, 2010 #7

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    So, what's your point?
     
  9. Apr 19, 2010 #8

    DaveC426913

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Uh, are we comparing apples to apples?

    "Outside the United States we find a strikingly different situation. In Iceland and in some northern European countries..."

    I'll bet the ratio of mouths-to-feed divided by miles-of-coastline is probably different by several orders of magnitude.

    [EDIT: Indeed, the U.S. has 250 times more people-per-mile-of-coastline than Iceland]

    Point-being: it's not like the U.S. has the options that Iceland (and some northern European countries) have.
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2010
  10. Apr 19, 2010 #9

    CRGreathouse

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I imagine the point is one possible solution to the Tragedy of the Commons.
     
  11. Apr 19, 2010 #10

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    That's just it. He's posted a link and has not bothered to form the basis for a discussion, at all.
     
  12. Apr 20, 2010 #11
    The whole term mouths to feed begs the question that salmon exists for the sole purpose of feeding humans, and that there are mouths that need to be fed. I see no reason to accept that. I also don't see how this is a boundary to the discussion of privatizing the salmon.

    The options are the same. Keep it common, and then everyone fishes them to extinction. License it, which has some enforcement problems, or privatize it, which introduces the profit motive.

    The Tragedy of the Commons seems to re-appear when profits are taken out of the equation. Salmon is one example, and the journal has many others. One that most people can relate to is public parks. They are riddled with trash, and all sorts of elements, because there is little motive to keep it clean, except for some environmentalists willing to take the time or some public servant for hire. Perhaps if someone owned the park, they'd have the motive to keep it clean so customers would keep coming back.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Privatizing Animals?
  1. Private Messages (Replies: 50)

  2. Private contractors (Replies: 39)

  3. Private Messages (Replies: 25)

  4. Privatize everything! (Replies: 71)

  5. Private messaging (Replies: 8)

Loading...