Some recreational fishermen have decided they're going to make Wal-mart blink. Angered by the Walton Family Foundation's funding of ocean conservation (thanks WFF!), the Recreational Fishing Alliance is calling for a boycott of Wal-mart stores.
Why would this fishing group oppose ocean conservation? Seems nonsensical, doesn't it? Conservation means more fish, but RFA thinks that's not OK if it means creating no-fishing areas.
As if taking on Wal-mart isn't enough, the RFA is already supporting a boycott of Safeway, the 2nd largest retail grocery chain in the US.
Spending by anglers does matter, but it's hard to believe that these Quixotic moves will have an impact. Will we really see the "nationwide protests" that RFA expects? Or is the campaign more about driving traffic to the button on the RFA's website (top left)?
A quick search of the news provided no evidence of boycotts or protests against Wal-mart by fishermen. In fact, it looks like anglers will have to wait in line to get attention for their boycott, behind other groups that are targeting Wal-mart for other reasons.
Here's a group calling itself "Boycott International," a group who's reason for being is to organize boycotts in "recognition of the power of individuals in situations where governments have chosen to, or are unable to, influence companies that exploit children and/or violate basic human rights of their workers."
Watch this space for news about retail giants crumbling (or not) under the pressure of anglers upset about ocean conservation harming their "right to fish."