Talk:Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Content deleted Content added


 

Line 13: Line 13:

There is literally zero criticism in this article, even though the Council has been the subject of a lot of it for their management practices. This is a NPOV issue. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 02:01, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

There is literally zero criticism in this article, even though the Council has been the subject of a lot of it for their management practices. This is a NPOV issue. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 02:01, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

:Needs to mention their longtime opposition to protected marine areas, which flies in the face of scientific research showing, as of 2022, that protected areas may lead to increased catches beyond their boundaries, in effect, acting as fishing nurseries. The Council appears to either ignore or dispute this, and is continuing to argue for and defend commercial fishing in protected areas. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 02:05, 24 November 2025 (UTC)


Latest revision as of 02:05, 24 November 2025

The literature referring to this org as Westpac or WestPac goes back 49 years, yet the SPA that wrote this article (User:Wpcouncilfan) would have us believe that is goes by WPRFMC instead. This is very odd. Granted, there may be good reasons the org wants to distance themselves from the name Westpac, primarily because, for example, that name has been used by Westpac Banking Corporation since 1982. However, current studies, papers, books, and newspapers use the name “Westpac” as shorthand to exclusively refer to the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council. Viriditas (talk) 01:12, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like NOAA uses either “WPRFMC” or “Council” as of the Biden admin. However, all Hawaii news outlets use “Westpac” or “WestPac”. Viriditas (talk) 02:03, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is literally zero criticism in this article, even though the Council has been the subject of a lot of it for their management practices. This is a NPOV issue. Viriditas (talk) 02:01, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Needs to mention their longtime opposition to protected marine areas, which flies in the face of scientific research showing, as of 2022, that protected areas may lead to increased catches beyond their boundaries, in effect, acting as fishing nurseries. The Council appears to either ignore or dispute this, and is continuing to argue for and defend commercial fishing in protected areas. Viriditas (talk) 02:05, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top