It's been seven days now since the U.S. Department of Commerce Inspector General issued a blistering report on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's enforcement actions against the fishing industry.
That's seven days since IG Todd Zinser found, "systemic, nationwide issues adversely affecting NOAA's ability to effectively carry out its mission." Among those "issues" were inconsistent, heavy-handed enforcement by rogue agents who were essentially accountable to no one.
Yet nobody has apparently been fired, demoted, reassigned or suspended. Nobody has been disciplined or even rebuked publicly. The only expressions of outrage or vindication have been very justified outcries from political leaders, fishermen and others close to the industry.
The only real response from NOAA head Jane Lubchenco — who promised last year to fix the "dysfunctional" relationship between her agency and the industry — has been to call for a national "summit" on enforcement policies and practices, where presumably environmental and academic groups will join hands with commercial and recreational fishermen and walk together into some glowing new era of mutual understanding.
That's worse than wishful thinking. It's a shameful refusal to confront or even acknowledge an obvious problem. And it's one that even raises new questions — as in, why should the environmental and academic groups have a seat at any such summit? Yes, Lubchenco's background is as an academic, and she's a former vice president with the Environmental Defense Fund. But what in the world do they have to do with fisheries law enforcement?