At the hearing last night in Galveston I had a way too short conversation with Assane about current economic theory and what that could mean for fisheries management.

He's reading a book now where the author presents an interesting postulate. In terms of an oil spill, the government may spend 8 billion to clean it up. That money however is not an investment in the oil or any other industry. It's not an investment at all. It is simply a government expenditure.

Let's bring that home. The number has floated around that the recreational fishing industry represents $8 million or so. But that is just an expenditure. Comparing that to what the commercial industry puts into the industry is not comparing apples to apples and not valid in terms of contemporary macro economics. So to model the two contributions, different expenditure variables must be taken out of considered from both sides to make them even. Then you can make projections based on equal contributions to the indusrty. In short, you run it like a really big business.

I find this to be a scary way of managing fisheries because the tangential variables are not at all considered. Primarily, will our children or thiers be able to harvest anything from the ocean? Will they even be able to enjoy it if the recreational boating industry crumbles?

If anyone knows what book he is talking about, I'd like to get my hands on a copy.