New Hampshire Underground

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Please log in on the special "login" page, not on any of these normal pages. Thank you, The Procrastinating Management

"Let them march all they want, as long as they pay their taxes."  --Alexander Haig

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: How would you handle a wide-reaching environmental disaster?  (Read 2857 times)

yonder

  • Guest
How would you handle a wide-reaching environmental disaster?
« on: January 19, 2008, 02:27 PM NHFT »

I'm taking on some work as the associate editor of a fisheries-related magazine, and one of the big stories going on the last couple of years in North America is a fish pandemic called VHS.  This has been responsible for some huge fish kills, and the statist response to it is to implement some rather totalitarian regulations to try to contain the disease since there is no cure.

Vermont is now in a state of panic.  I predict that New Hampshire's government will be dealing with this soon, as well.

These regulations affect all fisherman, many other outdoorsy people, aquarists (yes, even at the hobby level), potentially also canoeists and kayakers as well.

How does a free society deal with major pandemics like this?
Logged

sandm000

  • Bunch O' Krap
  • Resister
  • ***
  • Karma: 72
  • Posts: 563
  • Blue Blaze Irregular
Re: How would you handle a wide-reaching environmental disaster?
« Reply #1 on: January 19, 2008, 02:46 PM NHFT »

After reading the regulations they seem to want to restrict the transportation of bait and ballast water. 

In the free market most likely someone would own the lake.  And would regulate the fishing allowed in their lake.  Possibly by requiring the purchase of bait on site and ensuring that the ballast and bilge and live holding areas are cleaned and empty before taking to the water, possibly even offering the service of cleaning out the holds with a mild detergent before launching.  They might put a UV purifiers in the tributaries. (They would be enormous, but you want to ensure that the virus doesn't get through.) 

Or they may start a private hatchery, with ultra pure water and restock the lake on a regular basis, because there is no cost effective way to keep the virus out.
Logged

yonder

  • Guest
Re: How would you handle a wide-reaching environmental disaster?
« Reply #2 on: January 19, 2008, 02:57 PM NHFT »

In the free market most likely someone would own the lake.

That would have to be one wealthy dude.  Keep in mind, this outbreak started in Lake Ontario which has a surface area of roughly 7,500 square miles.

The bilge water we're talking about is coming from large freight vessels, oil tankers, etc.  Not Bubba & Earl's bass boat.

Quote
They might put a UV purifiers in the tributaries. (They would be enormous, but you want to ensure that the virus doesn't get through.) 

That would indiscriminantly kill all simple life forms, not just pathogens.  With many native (and in many cases endangered) crustaceans and molluscs having a planktonic stage, they would be zapped by this, too.

Not trying to be argumentative, but this is the sort of thing that I think the Free Market advocates tend to overlook or blow off without ever really providing a good answer.

If I heard something particularly insightful from a particularly quotable person, I could try to work it into my articles which are read pretty widely by fisheries professionals and state & federal level fish & game bureaucrats.
Logged

MaineShark

  • Enemy of the State
  • ******
  • Karma: 1307
  • Posts: 2990
Re: How would you handle a wide-reaching environmental disaster?
« Reply #3 on: January 20, 2008, 06:03 PM NHFT »

Not trying to be argumentative, but this is the sort of thing that I think the Free Market advocates tend to overlook or blow off without ever really providing a good answer.

If I heard something particularly insightful from a particularly quotable person, I could try to work it into my articles which are read pretty widely by fisheries professionals and state & federal level fish & game bureaucrats.

It's not the the advocates of the free market ignore issues.  We just don't claim to be able to solve things which we can't solve.

Sometimes, there isn't a "perfect" solution.  We're simply honest enough to admit it, rather than claiming we have a "magic bullet," which is what the government does.

Joe
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • Revolutionary
  • ******
  • Karma: 1040
  • Posts: 2269
Re: How would you handle a wide-reaching environmental disaster?
« Reply #4 on: January 20, 2008, 06:17 PM NHFT »

Its quite possible that a private owner would install many of the same regulations. But then again, kayakers and canoeist would be paying to be on the lake.
Logged

yonder

  • Guest
Re: How would you handle a wide-reaching environmental disaster?
« Reply #5 on: January 20, 2008, 06:35 PM NHFT »

Its quite possible that a private owner would install many of the same regulations. But then again, kayakers and canoeist would be paying to be on the lake.

Again, how can one reasonable expect a private owner to exist for a resource the size of Lake Ontario.  We're not talking about a reservoir here.  The kind of boats we're talking about are not canoes and kayaks for the most part.  More like oil tankers.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2008, 08:27 PM NHFT by yonder »
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • Revolutionary
  • ******
  • Karma: 1040
  • Posts: 2269
Re: How would you handle a wide-reaching environmental disaster?
« Reply #6 on: January 20, 2008, 06:47 PM NHFT »

Take a gander at Ted Turner's land holdings.

A static environment is a fallacy... so the intent of regulations is more considered to be the slowing of the process rather than a complete halting of such.
Logged

MaineShark

  • Enemy of the State
  • ******
  • Karma: 1307
  • Posts: 2990
Re: How would you handle a wide-reaching environmental disaster?
« Reply #7 on: January 20, 2008, 07:47 PM NHFT »

Again, how can one reasonable expect a private owner to exist for a resource the size of Lake Ontario.

Who should own it?

Oh, I doubt you would have a single individual as owner.  But a consortium of individuals who have an interest in that particular resource could own and manage it.

Joe
Logged

J’raxis 270145

  • Voluntaryist
  • Enemy of the State
  • ******
  • Karma: 1110
  • Posts: 3487
  • DILIGE·QVOD·VIS·FAC
    • Jeremy J. Olson
Re: How would you handle a wide-reaching environmental disaster?
« Reply #8 on: January 21, 2008, 05:49 AM NHFT »

Its quite possible that a private owner would install many of the same regulations. But then again, kayakers and canoeist would be paying to be on the lake.

Again, how can one reasonable expect a private owner to exist for a resource the size of Lake Ontario.  We're not talking about a reservoir here.  The kind of boats we're talking about are not canoes and kayaks for the most part.  More like oil tankers.

Who owns it now? The U.S. and Canadian governments, right? Governments are nothing more than groups of private citizens, the only difference between them and others being they claim to be able to “legitimately” subject others to their whims (the “monopoly of violence”).
Logged

sandm000

  • Bunch O' Krap
  • Resister
  • ***
  • Karma: 72
  • Posts: 563
  • Blue Blaze Irregular
Re: How would you handle a wide-reaching environmental disaster?
« Reply #9 on: January 21, 2008, 09:40 AM NHFT »

Its quite possible that a private owner would install many of the same regulations. But then again, kayakers and canoeist would be paying to be on the lake.

Again, how can one reasonable expect a private owner to exist for a resource the size of Lake Ontario.  We're not talking about a reservoir here.  The kind of boats we're talking about are not canoes and kayaks for the most part.  More like oil tankers.

Big boats have to pay to use the Panama Canal , why wouldn't a private owner (or group of owners) charge the big boats?

Also I gave a couple of ideas on how to take care of the problem 15 minutes after you gave us the problem.  Also you aren't paying me.  If you want a perfect solution, I'd like $100,000 and 3 months to research this virus.  For instance there are nano-ceramic filters which may remove only viruses, activated iron systems, or a spinning cone filtration system. I don't know but I could probably figure something out.  I'm not a virologist, I have worked before as a Microbiologist, for whatever that's worth.
Logged

srqrebel

  • Guest
Re: How would you handle a wide-reaching environmental disaster?
« Reply #10 on: January 21, 2008, 01:02 PM NHFT »

It's not the the advocates of the free market ignore issues.  We just don't claim to be able to solve things which we can't solve.

Sometimes, there isn't a "perfect" solution.  We're simply honest enough to admit it, rather than claiming we have a "magic bullet," which is what the government does.

Joe

Joe is right on target.

When the current Authoritarian Model of Government actually provides a real solution to this problem, one that does more good than harm, then you have room to challenge the supporters of the Free Market model to see if they can demonstrate an equal or better solution through their model.

There is no such thing as a utopia, where instant solutions exist for all problems, and no one ever falls through the cracks.

The only claim we make is that the Free Market, or Voluntaryist, Model of Government does an exponentially better job of enhancing human life overall than the obsolete, archaic Authoritarian Model.
Logged

David

  • Secessionist, Peacemaker and Non-violent
  • Enemy of the State
  • ******
  • Karma: 1124
  • Posts: 2819
  • Came home on feb 3rd '07'
Re: How would you handle a wide-reaching environmental disaster?
« Reply #11 on: January 21, 2008, 02:38 PM NHFT »

Not trying to be argumentative, but this is the sort of thing that I think the Free Market advocates tend to overlook or blow off without ever really providing a good answer.

If I heard something particularly insightful from a particularly quotable person, I could try to work it into my articles which are read pretty widely by fisheries professionals and state & federal level fish & game bureaucrats.

It's not the the advocates of the free market ignore issues.  We just don't claim to be able to solve things which we can't solve.

Sometimes, there isn't a "perfect" solution.  We're simply honest enough to admit it, rather than claiming we have a "magic bullet," which is what the government does.

Joe

Agreed. 
The gov'ts blunt force approach may work to one degree or another to stop disease outbreaks, but it discourages the individualistic approach.  For example, I cannot stop a person who has a cold from walking around potentially spreading it.  But I can take steps to protect myself from likely infection to some degree. 
A person who makes a living from fishing or other aquaculture can separate his 'farm' from the communal lakes, or ocean and maintain rigid sanitation etc.  Expensive up front, but lucrative if disease wipes out much of the native supply of fish.  This is being done with abalone, some fish, and shrimp.  In the absence of being able to control others, the individual must choose to adapt, or go out of business. 
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up