The precautionary principle has been used by “conservation” organizations and fisheries managers in their efforts to get fishermen off the water. Yet when it comes to non-fishing activities the precautionary principle is nowhere near as well developed. In fact, it appears that it is virtually non-existent.
For over a decade the precautionary principle has been the mantra used by anti-fishing “conservation” organizations and federal fisheries managers in their relentless efforts to get recreational, commercial and party/charter fishermen off the water. Most simply, the precautionary principle states that when there is any doubt about the accuracy of the data propping up a proposed management action, assume the worst and manage accordingly. Thus, if the estimate of a stock of fish is in the range of 75,000 to 125,000 metric tons (plus or minus 25% would be doing really well considering the average stock assessment), the managers should assume that the lower figure is accurate and set catch parameters as if it were. No allowance for fishermen’s on-the-water observations, no allowance for common sense or intuition, no allowance for “anecdotal” observations; just go with the lowest possible estimate regardless of the costs to the affected fishing communities.
Needless to say, this forced and arbitrary conservatism has unnecessarily cost fishermen and the businesses that depend on them untold millions of dollars and untold thousands of jobs (lest there be any doubt about this, the current “realignment” in the management of the New England groundfish fishery and the imminent closure of all bottom fishing off the coasts of Northeast Florida and Georgia – and the billions of dollars of direct and indirect economic impacts of these arbitrary actions on fishermen and fishing related businesses – have many people on the East Coast on the verge of active revolt against today’s fisheries management regime.)
Jane Lubchenco was one of the outspoken proponents of the precautionary principle, at least when applied to fishing and used to punish fishermen, in her past employ as a foundation subsidized researcher and “conservation community” leader and now in her role as the head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the federal agency in charge of regulating fisheries in federal waters.
Yet when it comes to non-fishing activities, or at least to non-fishing activities involving Big Oil, Ms. Lubchenco’s commitment to the precautionary principle is nowhere near as well developed. In fact, it appears that it is virtually non-existent.
Read the complete editorial at Fish Net USA.