But it was clear from the start that the Preservation Fund, which paid for Harshbarger’s services, essentially had the probe and the report right under its own thumb. And instead of answering questions, the report itself — released thr
ough selected public presentations last week, yet still protected under attorney-client privilege, as its own pages note — has unfortunately raised new ones. Read more here
NILS STOLPE: The New England groundfish debacle (Part IV): Is cutting back harvest really the answer?
While it’s a fact that’s hardly ever acknowledged, the assumption in fisheries management is that if the population of a stock of fish isn’t at some arbitrary level, it’s because of too much fishing. Hence the term “overfished.” Hence the mandated knee jerk reaction of the fisheries managers to not enough fish; cut back on fishing. What of other factors? They don’t count. It’s all about fishing, because fishing is all that the managers can control; it’s their Maslow’s Hammer. When it comes to the oceans it seems as if it’s about all that the industry connected mega-foundations that support the anti-fishing ENGOs with hundreds of millions of dollars a year in “donations” are interested in controlling. Read the article here
Leave a Reply