Freshwater Fish: An Invaluable Resource

The choice of regulatory control as opposed to economic incentives is a very debated topic. Many rationalists tend to agree that in order to measure a population’s effects on the environment, it is logical to create a monetary value for everything and to use these monetary values to compare the benefits and costs of doing certain actions. The opposing thought would be that certain things in life, for example clean air, simply cannot be measured monetarily, and that it would be immoral to do so.

In a policy statement created for the regulation of fish species in Victoria, Australia, the concept of regulatory control is favoured. The purpose of this policy statement was to illuminate the fact that many native species of fish are disappearing from Victorian freshwater waterways, mostly due to today’s human’s actions. In order to maintain a good amount of self-reliant native fish, Native Fish Australia (NFA) decided the waterways should be separated into three distinct categories, that is to say, Native Fish Waters, Trout Waters, and Mixed Fishery Waters. The separation would ensure that trout and exotic fish would not interfere with the native fish, and that the Trout Waters and Mixed Fishery Waters would provide good amounts of fish for recreational use. The Native Fish Waters would also be separated into sub-categories, with the intention of keeping or breeding certain species, depending on the amount remaining in the waterways.

The regulatory control is applied in the cases of the different categories and subcategories, permitting or restricting certain actions. Such restrictions include limiting the size or the amount of bags of resources fished per species; having ‘closed’ seasons to prevent over exploitation; having total closures for certain parts of the waterways; regulating the methods of fishing (i.e. maximum number of rods per person); and banning the use of live bait to prevent diseases.

On the other hand, if economic incentives were to be used rather than regulatory control, excise taxes might have been a good way of managing the amount of fish remaining in the waterways. The idea is that a certain percentage be paid by the consumer, depending on the amounts and species fished, as well as the location (higher taxes for the areas with endangered species). Excise taxes could help protect certain species from being over-fished, and the money raised through these taxes could go toward research into conservation and harvesting of new fish.

I believe the policy of economic incentives is beneficial if used wisely. That being said, I disagree with certain economic ways of calculation such as cost-benefit analysis, since certain aspects of the environment do not get their full value in consideration. I also disagree with the idea of “willingness to pay” since a person who has less money will usually be willing to pay less, and so his or her lifestyle will be less respected than that of a richer person since they “cost less” to the government. However, when used properly such as with taxes on the resources used or with marketable permits, the results can be rewarding.

Both regulatory control and economic incentives can aid in keeping resources at a desired level. What is important to keep in mind is that everything has a value and that certain natural resources cannot be revived once they are over-exploited. Our natural resources are a gift and their upkeep requires important thought and discussion.

Resources:

Native Fish Australia. NFA (Victoria) Freshwater Fisheries Management Policy, 1993. http://www.nativefish.asn.au/fwpolicy.html#objective. 17 Nov. 2009.