|
This article is so full of holes it is very hard to take seriously. Main issue is it is talking about all fisheries as if they were one and the same. This is especially true with his econimic statement on balance of trade. Guy needs to take some business courses.
"- problem is ..........rec fishers aren't the general public.
- they are part of the general public.
- when it comes to individual fish species the rec fishers for that species are typically a very small percentage of the general public."
Partly true but very short sighted in that the economic gain for certain types of fish are far greater due to the money recreational fishermen are willing to spend.
"- The commercial fisheries are typically regionally based, where opportunities for alternative employment are limited.
- the recreational fisheries are urban based , where the opportunities for alternative employment are high.
- recreational fisheries are a discretionary expenditure."
I guess rec fisherman don't have cars and aren't willing to drive to the middle of no where to fish. Those regional fisherman seem to be making a lot of money from the recs coming to their area. From the trade balance stand point, he is forgetting that many foreigners come to America to fish. When the fishing sucks here many won't stop fishing, they will just leave the country and spend their money in other counteries.
Just about the entire freshwater fishery is maintained to support recreational fisherman. Why is that? Because the economic gain and benefit to the public is far greater if we manage this from a recreational stand point. Same is true for hunting. While both were a commercial resource historically there was no obligation to continue this and we didn't.
The real point is the narrow thinking that it is only commercial fishing if the money comes directly from the sale of the fish. From a true economic standpoint what we call recreational fishing, including charter boats, is commercial fishing.
|