This plan provides solutions that are somewhat middle ground for both fishermen and environmentalists. Just like the environmentalists, the fishers who make a living catching these fish will have both positive and negative views of this plan as well. One positive aspect of this plan for fishers is that by implementing these restrictions, they are almost guaranteed to have plenty of fish to catch for years to come. Another positive of this plan to fishers is that the price of these fish will increase if the demand stays high and the supply of them is limited. On the other hand, fishers will view this plan negatively because now they have limitations on something that previously did not. As a result, they may be losing money because they are not selling as much fish as before. I believe if those commercial fishing companies were educated through presentations of relevant facts regarding damaging fishing techniques they just consider the possibility of change. Commercial fishing companies need to be informed of the use of clean fishing techniques that carry minimal impact on aquatic ecosystems, like harpooning for tuna and swordfish and hook-and-line techniques for smaller tuna, mahi-mahi, and salmon. As if the fact that declining fish stock was not bad enough, the techniques used by today’s fishers have other negative effects. Techniques such as dragging a large, heavy net along the sea floor to catch fish, known as bottom trawling, is one of the most destructive fishing practices. This technique of fishing is destroying the sea floor and many species that live down there. With seafood in such demand it has doubled during the last 30 years and is projected to continue growing at 1.5 percent per year through 2020. And with today’s modern fishing techniques, population growth and economic pressures have brought a rapid expansion of commercial fishing and greatly increased the capacity to exploit fish stocks. (Pegg, 2004). With the use