Comments on: Where Have the Fish Come From? http://www.stubbornmule.net/2009/08/fish/ Obstinately objective Wed, 08 Sep 2010 00:13:41 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: stubbornmule http://www.stubbornmule.net/2009/08/fish/comment-page-1/#comment-3850 stubbornmule Fri, 14 Aug 2009 09:12:48 +0000 http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1993#comment-3850 <b>Dan: </b>I certainly do remember that Goodies episode. The explosion at the end resulting in raining fish and chips was one of the classic Goodies scenes. I also seem to recall that Graham played Max Bygraves to calm the giant cod. In any event, your theory sounds very plausible. My whale suggestion was based on a similar principle, but would clearly not be as comprehensive in it's application as a general reluctance to admit to illegal fishing. I think that this, with a possible tax effect as icing on top, sounds like a solution, if a depressing one, to the mystery. Dan: I certainly do remember that Goodies episode. The explosion at the end resulting in raining fish and chips was one of the classic Goodies scenes. I also seem to recall that Graham played Max Bygraves to calm the giant cod. In any event, your theory sounds very plausible. My whale suggestion was based on a similar principle, but would clearly not be as comprehensive in it’s application as a general reluctance to admit to illegal fishing. I think that this, with a possible tax effect as icing on top, sounds like a solution, if a depressing one, to the mystery.

]]> By: dan http://www.stubbornmule.net/2009/08/fish/comment-page-1/#comment-3849 dan Fri, 14 Aug 2009 07:34:36 +0000 http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1993#comment-3849 thanks for running with this one sean. i was listening to a radio national podcast earlier today: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/rearvision/stories/2009/2590761.htm and it describes in quite depressing - and graphic terms - how the rise rise of superior technology met the tragedy of the commons and lead to over-fishing. the interesting thing is the first reaction of most countries was to extend their exclusive economic zones and "nationalise" fisheries, that is boot out the foreign trawlers. goodies fans will remember their immortal take on the "Cod Wars". countries then tried to impose quotas, licences, restrictions on boat sizes, etc. in a an attempt to sure up local fishing industries but protect fish stocks. obviously they failed. so here's the theory: there are obviously a significant amount of fish being caught outside 200 NM EEZ of any particular country. it may very well be that no one 'fesses up to this kind of ocean rape. so the fish are imported, by all of us - but mainly the japanese. but they are exported by no one. and certainly not from any country which supplies stats to the FAO. thanks for running with this one sean. i was listening to a radio national podcast earlier today: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/rearvision/stories/2009/2590761.htm and it describes in quite depressing – and graphic terms – how the rise rise of superior technology met the tragedy of the commons and lead to over-fishing.

the interesting thing is the first reaction of most countries was to extend their exclusive economic zones and “nationalise” fisheries, that is boot out the foreign trawlers. goodies fans will remember their immortal take on the “Cod Wars”. countries then tried to impose quotas, licences, restrictions on boat sizes, etc. in a an attempt to sure up local fishing industries but protect fish stocks. obviously they failed.

so here’s the theory: there are obviously a significant amount of fish being caught outside 200 NM EEZ of any particular country. it may very well be that no one ‘fesses up to this kind of ocean rape. so the fish are imported, by all of us – but mainly the japanese. but they are exported by no one. and certainly not from any country which supplies stats to the FAO.

]]> By: stubbornmule http://www.stubbornmule.net/2009/08/fish/comment-page-1/#comment-3838 stubbornmule Thu, 13 Aug 2009 22:49:33 +0000 http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1993#comment-3838 <b>Brock: </b> happy to help on your R journey. By default, when R reads data into a data frame, it performs type conversions on the original character data. Data that looks numeric is converted to a numeric data (which is fine), but other character data is converted to factors and in my case I wanted to keep the country names in the file as characters. The as.is argument of read.csv over-rides the conversion. So, when I set as.is = c(1,4) it meant that no conversion was performed on columns 1 and 4 of the data. For more info, you can type ?read.csv into R and it will bring up the full help details. Brock: happy to help on your R journey. By default, when R reads data into a data frame, it performs type conversions on the original character data. Data that looks numeric is converted to a numeric data (which is fine), but other character data is converted to factors and in my case I wanted to keep the country names in the file as characters. The as.is argument of read.csv over-rides the conversion. So, when I set as.is = c(1,4) it meant that no conversion was performed on columns 1 and 4 of the data. For more info, you can type ?read.csv into R and it will bring up the full help details.

]]> By: Brock http://www.stubbornmule.net/2009/08/fish/comment-page-1/#comment-3834 Brock Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:05:06 +0000 http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1993#comment-3834 Great post! I am new to R, so I hope you have a minute to help me out. I want to learn R by working through examples, and this is a great one. When you read in the data, what does the as.is =c(1,4) do? Are you only reading in 5 columns? I haven't seen any reference to as.is before, at least I dont believe I have. Thanks! Brock Great post! I am new to R, so I hope you have a minute to help me out. I want to learn R by working through examples, and this is a great one. When you read in the data, what does the as.is =c(1,4) do? Are you only reading in 5 columns? I haven’t seen any reference to as.is before, at least I dont believe I have.

Thanks!

Brock

]]> By: stubbornmule http://www.stubbornmule.net/2009/08/fish/comment-page-1/#comment-3824 stubbornmule Wed, 12 Aug 2009 09:32:02 +0000 http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1993#comment-3824 Interestingly, the same phenomenon does not seem to occur for beer (that's "beer of barley" not "beer of sorghum"). In 2006 total world imports were US$8.99 billion, slightly <i>lower</i> than total exports of US$9.06 billion. And, of course, there are bubbles in beer. Interestingly, the same phenomenon does not seem to occur for beer (that’s “beer of barley” not “beer of sorghum”). In 2006 total world imports were US$8.99 billion, slightly lower than total exports of US$9.06 billion. And, of course, there are bubbles in beer.

]]> By: Danny http://www.stubbornmule.net/2009/08/fish/comment-page-1/#comment-3821 Danny Wed, 12 Aug 2009 06:37:30 +0000 http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1993#comment-3821 Well, dolphins use bubbles to catch fish... And we all know about the dolphins. So I think this supports my interstellar fish trade hypothesis. Well, dolphins use bubbles to catch fish… And we all know about the dolphins. So I think this supports my interstellar fish trade hypothesis.

]]> By: stubbornmule http://www.stubbornmule.net/2009/08/fish/comment-page-1/#comment-3814 stubbornmule Wed, 12 Aug 2009 04:16:14 +0000 http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1993#comment-3814 <b>Tim: </b>"cock up over conspiracy" does have a better ring to it. <b>bigiain: </b>if there's a bubble in fish, we all know <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29127316/the_great_american_bubble_machine" rel="nofollow">Goldmans will be there to exploit it</a>! Tim: “cock up over conspiracy” does have a better ring to it.

bigiain: if there’s a bubble in fish, we all know Goldmans will be there to exploit it!

]]> By: bigiain http://www.stubbornmule.net/2009/08/fish/comment-page-1/#comment-3812 bigiain Wed, 12 Aug 2009 03:55:19 +0000 http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1993#comment-3812 It's clearly high speed computerised fish arbitrage at work. Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs have recently built fish transfer centres as close as possible to the Tokyo Fish Exchange, and regularly move thousands of tonnes of fish out of and back into Tokyo in milliseconds, making enormous trading losses (which is why the total fish value appears to have increased) and arranging government intervention to pay multi million dollar directors bonuses! _Brilliant!_ It’s clearly high speed computerised fish arbitrage at work. Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs have recently built fish transfer centres as close as possible to the Tokyo Fish Exchange, and regularly move thousands of tonnes of fish out of and back into Tokyo in milliseconds, making enormous trading losses (which is why the total fish value appears to have increased) and arranging government intervention to pay multi million dollar directors bonuses! _Brilliant!_

]]> By: Tim http://www.stubbornmule.net/2009/08/fish/comment-page-1/#comment-3803 Tim Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:29:37 +0000 http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1993#comment-3803 S, The variation of "truth lies in the mundane not the conspiracy" is always, having many years of government service, "always go for cock-up over conspiracy" it is far more likely....now having seen the Hanlon's razor entry in Wikipedia I can see that I'm not alone! T S,
The variation of “truth lies in the mundane not the conspiracy” is always, having many years of government service, “always go for cock-up over conspiracy” it is far more likely….now having seen the Hanlon’s razor entry in Wikipedia I can see that I’m not alone!
T

]]> By: Baume http://www.stubbornmule.net/2009/08/fish/comment-page-1/#comment-3787 Baume Tue, 11 Aug 2009 22:54:40 +0000 http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1993#comment-3787 Sean I would imagine there are a few factors relating to intermediary costs. If the value to the exporters is the price FOB the cost to importers will be greater because of shipping and insurance. Another leakage would be FX intermediaries spread (as most imports need to be paid in foreign currency.) Another would be the cost of refrigeration and examination at the receiving dock. I wonder if this is typical for trade statistics generally? Sean I would imagine there are a few factors relating to intermediary costs. If the value to the exporters is the price FOB the cost to importers will be greater because of shipping and insurance. Another leakage would be FX intermediaries spread (as most imports need to be paid in foreign currency.) Another would be the cost of refrigeration and examination at the receiving dock. I wonder if this is typical for trade statistics generally?

]]>