to be a balance between economics and the environment, there has to be a balance between human life and sustainability, there has to be a balance between maintaining our way of life and livelihoods and maintaining our natural world. Are we trying to find that balance by listening and learning? Or are we running on our own assumptions of what’s good or bad, right or wrong? Here’s an example. Farmed or imported fish and seafood. Everyone knows you don’t buy imported fish. Or is it farmed fish that's bad? Or are both bad? We get so hung up on what we think we know that we stop hearing facts and rely only on our own knowledge. The truth of it is that fish farmed in foreign countries seldom, if ever, comes from the sort of safe, clean facilities we expect our food to come from. And economically, if you buy imported fish, you’ve chosen not to buy from an American fisherman. However, I can’t see the downside in buying fish farmed in this country. Our FDA regulations make certain that farmed fish are clean, fed healthy diets, aren’t pumped full of medications and chemicals, and all those other things we set our healthy standards by. You’re also still choosing to keep an American family in business. I’m guilty of it, too. I walked into Ken’s Seafood in Richmond Hill recently to buy some fish and shrimp for dinner. Kevin ran down the list of what he had in stock and included, “Tilapia, but I know you won’t want that.” I shuddered, shook my head, and laughed. “Hell, no!” Because we all know tilapia is raised in nasty ponds on the other side of the world and is disgusting. But he caught me off guard. “Actually, this is from a farm in Texas. It’s raised clean and healthy. You might be surprised.” And I was surprised – that I’d jumped immediately to my own foregone conclusions and failed to keep an open mind. Yes, I know, someone’s going to argue, “But it’s our FDA that allows genetically modified foods to be produced and sold!” True, but if you wander down every rabbit hole, you’re going to find yourself in a wonderland of conundrums. We need fuel to operate our vehicles so we can get to work, but rather than producing our own, we purchase it from war-torn countries. Sure, hybrids use less fuel, but let’s talk about how those batteries impact our natural world. None of us are entirely self-sufficient for our own food, but we buy from corporate farms rather than the American farmer. We want to encourage the American Dream, but then we import shrimp and put the American shrimper out of business. We want to rid the world of dirty coal plants, but we don’t give any thought to the jobs we’ll eradicate in the process, and none of us is going to sleep through a hot, southern summer night without AC. We humans have made a lot of mistakes in our centuries of advancement. So many, I don’t know if we can ever hope to fix them all. For some, the solution is to turn a blind eye, worry about their own issues and hope the rest will sort itself out. For others, the solution is to pick a passion and focus their attention on solving that one issue. For still others, the solution is to dedicate their careers or lives to changing the world. No matter where you fall in that spectrum, I would encourage you to educate yourself, to look at all sides of an issue, to keep your mind open to new ideas, and to listen and learn rather than assuming you have all the answers. Just because an idea sounds good or makes sense when you hear it, doesn’t mean it’s the right solution, or even the only solution. So I say all that to say this: on all topics, Southern Tides will remain firmly objective. We’ll report facts, we’ll promote healthy sustainability with fair balance, but both sides of any discussion will be given a voice. There are no easy answers, no easy fixes, and taking a hard line in either direction is almost always going to result in unforeseen negative consequences. Southern Tides will remain unbiased and objective in what we bring you each month. If you want to know where I personally stand, come on over. And bring beer.
E ditor’s N ote A
t a lunch meeting with an elected official a few weeks ago, the subject of offshore drilling came up. A few days later, I got an email about the spotted bass Release Over Eighteen (ROE) program. On another occasion recently, I got a call about a proposed article on climate change. And a while back I heard someone talking about being adamantly opposed to the harbor deepening project. These are all controversial topics in our politics-driven society and many people have very strong opinions one way or another about each, as well as a plethora of other issues that face us, both in our coastal region and the world at large. As an individual, I have my own thoughts on all those things, but as a magazine publisher, I have to remain objective. Firmly and undeniably objective. I’d LOVE to tell you how I feel about any of those topics, or on the subjects of immigration, climate change, gun control, abortion, foreign policy, healthcare, education, or transgender issues. And I’ll be happy to do so with any of you, over a beer, but never in these pages. That would take this magazine from being a source of information, to being my own personal platform. That’s just unethical. But I will say this. Every issue facing us locally, regionally, nationally, and globally, has more than one side, and each has a whole lot of gray area, too. The thought of standing on the beach on one of our barrier islands and gazing out to sea at oil rigs or windmills is enough to make many people cringe. Most who live on our stretch of coast take pride in the pristine natural beauty of it and don’t want it marred by ugly eyesores, and many have concerns about the impact on our waters and the sea life inhabiting them. However, our dependence on oil and power isn’t likely to change in the next decades. In an ideal world, I wouldn’t need my gasguzzling SUV, but if y’all want this magazine every month, I do. And I’m not alone, so we have to find a balance between our dependence on foreign oil, our daily consumption, and maintaining a safe and healthy environment. As to fishing regulations, two sides to that coin as well. No one who fishes for a living, or even recreationally, wants to cast their line and reel it in empty, and most fishermen have at least a basic understanding of conservation tactics and the importance of not overfishing. It takes a lot of science and a lot of man hours to determine the health and abundance of a species. And impractical regulations may protect a fish population but at what cost to the human population? Lost revenue in boat sales and services, in tackle, gear, fuel sales, marina dockage and storage, and charter trips. In an area like this where those things are part of our day to day life, extensive regulations can have a negative impact on the local economy and the livelihood of residents. A balance between practical regulations and sustaining a way of life is important. I’ve never believed that mandatory regulations should be the starting point – with anything. Laws should be the last resort, never the first. The Savannah Harbor Expansion Project (SHEP), has been hotly debated as well. On one side are those who worry about saltwater intrusion into the aquifer, beach erosion, spoil sites, and other potential impacts on the environment. On the other side are those who worry about the economic losses that will occur if post-panamax ships have to find other ports. Losses not just for Savannah but for the entire Southeast and beyond, to a tune of $282 million annually. Who’s right? The days of producing our own food, pumping our water by hand from a well, saddling a horse or hitching up a wagon to go somewhere, and being entirely self-sufficient, were over decades ago. We rely on fuel and electricity to power most every aspect of our lives. We rely on technology far more than we rely on ourselves, from our daily lives to the national economy. It’s all so interwoven now that when the economy is in trouble, it impacts us directly. Which means there has March 2018
Southern Tides Magazine
Amy Thurman
Editor in Chief
amy@southerntidesmagazine.com 5
