Wilds and environmental dangers.

[mikeos]

If the demand for wild fish diminishes and the industries based upon them fail, the locals have NO interest in their ( the fishes) environment, and no means of support. They inevitably turn to other work ( obviously) and in this part of the world that means logging and mining. ( as well as fishing for food rather than income) This is far more harmfull to the aquatic environment than fishing.

There is NO simplistic solution, wild animals have to offer more by their continued existance than by their extinction if they are to survive. In this case that means education and the establishment of sustainable farming as well as encouraging environmental protection from all sectors of the economy. IMO a ban on wild fish will lead to more rapid declline than an eccologicaly sound, managed solution.

[GulfCoastDiscus]

Many of these issues are better said than done. If you ever lived in a third world country you'll see why corruption is prevalent. Natives don't have any other way to feed their children. It's purely economics and when you see your own kids starving it's easy to look the other way. To make what you can now and not see the future.
JMHO
Dan