As yer man from the protest says, the point is not the specific impact of this loophole, it's the precedent of baking "commercial fishing is ok if the minister says so" into our marine reserve policies, and the bycatch changes which will let commercial fishers profit from "whoopsie daisy" bycatch
November 21, 2025 at 4:46 AM
As yer man from the protest says, the point is not the specific impact of this loophole, it's the precedent of baking "commercial fishing is ok if the minister says so" into our marine reserve policies, and the bycatch changes which will let commercial fishers profit from "whoopsie daisy" bycatch
Yep, and they're fundamentally the same problem, which is that we have a Minister of Fisheries who regards serving the commercial sector as his major duty in govt. But "commercial fishing in a marine reserve" is something anyone should be able to get salty about
November 20, 2025 at 9:16 PM
Yep, and they're fundamentally the same problem, which is that we have a Minister of Fisheries who regards serving the commercial sector as his major duty in govt. But "commercial fishing in a marine reserve" is something anyone should be able to get salty about
Even so it is a BIG bet that whoever was responsible for classifying the bits that could implicate the president and his cadre have done a competent enough job to withstand the fine-toothed combing it will immediately receive
November 19, 2025 at 2:01 AM
Even so it is a BIG bet that whoever was responsible for classifying the bits that could implicate the president and his cadre have done a competent enough job to withstand the fine-toothed combing it will immediately receive