Just to add some more worm to the fire... Article from a US site
In late 2006, "Fisheries Face Collapse by 2048!" was the headline read and heard around the world - at least in the world of Washington, DC. It just so happens that Congress was debating the reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Act at that precise moment. The media stories sited a study led by Dr. Boris Worm of Dalhousie University.
Dr. Worm, a regular recipient of of funding from Pew Charitable Trusts, working with SeaWeb, a Pew-funded public research group that specializes in media campaigns, worked on the message and the timing to get as much media coverage as possible. They were successful. Big media loves a crisis, and when you have the money and the manpower its easy to plant a good fish tale.
Dr. Worm's article was quickly labeled by top fisheries scientists and managers for what it really was - a Pew advocacy piece like much of his prior work funded by Pew. The kicker at the end of the piece calling for "No-Fishing marine reserves" (MPA's) as the cure was the final giveaway, a goal high on the agenda of most Pew-funded organizations! Worm's work in the past had been branded "invalid", "misleading" and "undermining the the trust placed in science." As it turns out this was a textbook study in disseminating misinformation disguised as science to a willing media with the express purpose of influencing Congressional debate. Such scare tactics have become the darling of the radical environmental movement.
The media firestorm was part of a broader, coordinated attack that included misleading ad campaigns aimed at smearing key politicians facing reelection. The targeted Members of Congress just happened to be those involved in crafting scientifically sound legislation that also recognized the needs of recreational fishjermen and industry. This campaign was led by another Pew-funded environmental group, the Marine Fish Conservation Network.
The Pew Charitable Trusts is the 800 Pound Gorilla of ocean issues. Created with funding from the Sun Oil Company and sitting on a $4.1 billion war chest, it is an organization that refuses to let reality get in the way of their agenda. In public documents their self-mandated mission is to "save" the oceans. Pew claims that their primary purpose "is to make grants to other organizations as well as direct planning and conducting projects and initiatives that carry out the organizations religious, charitable, scientific, literary and educational purposes." This proves that Pew grant recipients are carrying out the ideas and motivations of Pew.
The impact of such tactics is changing the direction of fisheries policy. True management and conservation is gradually being replaced by a call to stop all fishing through the use of paid-for science funneled to the media through Pew-financed conduits, and touted by Pew-funded environmental orrganizations. Much of their agenda is anti-fishing, even on well-managed, rebuilt or rebuilding fish stocks, to the point of being little more than a cleverly disguised attack on the publics access to the oceans. That attack includes targeting recreational fishermen like us.
Pew is a major grant provider to universities and professors in the marine sciences and the major provider of funds to environmental grouips that push the party line. Those groups include -
The National Environmental Trust
Oceana
Earthjustice Legal Defense
The New England Aquarium
The Public Interest Research Group
National Audubon Society
National Resources Defense Council
Sierra Club
Conservation Law Foundation
Marine Conservation Biology Institute
Marine Fish Conservation Network
Wildlife Conservation Society
Friends of the Earth
The Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership
Combined, these groups have received over $200 million dollars of Pew money and most have openly endorsed the implementation of of arbitrary no-fishing zones (MPA's) !
The Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership is the most worrisome. It is attempting to become an umbrella group for recreational sportsman's organizations and has attracted the participation of some well-known recreational fishing organizations with the lure of Pew money. And when the going got tough during the Magnuson reauthorization, these recreational fishing groups ended up on the same page as the Pew-funded groups.
This is what Congressman Pombo, chair of the House Resources Committee had to say recently. "Throughout the long process to reauthorize the Magnuson Act, the RFA was consistently at the table, insisting on sound conservation policies based on the most accurate science. The RFA's goal was clear: a sustainable fishery so that this generation of recreational fishermen and following generations would have fish to catch. Most of the others engaged in this debate had other agendas or were totally missing in action. At the end of the 109th Congress it was clear to me that the RFA was the only player left insisting on protecting the future of recreational fishing. I will always be grateful to the RFA and respect their tenacity during what proved to be a difficult reauthorization."
Since the implementation of the Sustainable Fisheries Act in 1996, the management of US fisheries, while far from perfect, has become a model for the rest of the world. Yet Pew continues to use scare tactics to drive its agenda domestically while the most egregious fisheries problems can be found abroad. PEW'S AGENDA MAY SOUND LAUDABLE BUT THE REALITY IS THAT THEIR GOAL IS TO STOP ALL FISHING. Pew used the money of its well-heeled donors like a school-yard bully during the Magnuson debate and attacked those who stood in their way. Pew has seriously damaged the the ability of recreational fishermen to do what we love to do - GO FISHING.
