Let us take a moment to admire the sheer brilliance of modern government logic. In Scotland, a land famous for its rugged beauty and rain, the powers that be have declared a massive victory for nature. They have announced that 37% of their waters are now "Marine Protected Areas." That sounds wonderful, doesn't it? It sounds like a sanctuary. When you hear the word "protected," you probably imagine a pristine underwater garden where fish can swim freely without fear of being scooped up and turned into fish sticks.

But you would be wrong. Because in the sophisticated language of politics, "protected" does not actually mean "safe." It apparently just means "we have drawn a line on a map." According to the reality of the situation—which is often very different from the press release—destructive fishing practices are continuing in most of these so-called sanctuaries.

Specifically, we are talking about bottom trawling. For those who do not spend their time reading about industrial fishing methods, let me explain what this is. It is not a gentle process. It does not involve a man with a beard patiently waiting for a bite on his line. Bottom trawling involves dragging heavy, weighted nets across the sea floor. It is the underwater equivalent of driving a bulldozer through a forest to catch a few squirrels. You catch the squirrels, certainly. But you also knock down the trees, crush the bushes, and ruin the dirt.

Now, imagine if the government declared a forest to be a "Protected Nature Reserve." They put up signs. They hold a fancy party. They pat themselves on the back. And then, every Tuesday, they allow a team of bulldozers to drive through the reserve and flatten everything in their path. If you asked them why, they would say, "Well, we have to balance the needs of the trees with the needs of the bulldozer drivers."

This is the theater of the absurd that we are living in. The Scottish government, like almost every other government in Europe, loves the *idea* of environmentalism. They love the labels. They love the maps colored in nice shades of green and blue. It makes them look responsible. It makes them look like they are saving the planet for future generations. But they lack the courage to actually do the hard part.

The hard part, of course, is telling people "no." To actually protect the ocean, you have to tell the fishing industry that they cannot drag heavy metal chains across the coral reefs in these specific areas. But that would make people angry. That might cost money. So instead, we get this pathetic compromise. We get a "Protected Area" where the destruction is allowed to continue, just with a different label.

It is a perfect example of bureaucratic cynicism. They want the credit for saving the ocean without the inconvenience of actually saving it. It is the "have your cake and eat it" strategy applied to ecological collapse. The report highlights that this scraping of the ocean bottom is happening in the majority of these zones. Not just a few accidents. The majority. This means the policy is a failure by design.

Why do we accept this? Because the language is designed to confuse us. They use words like "sustainable management" and "strategic designation." These words are meant to put you to sleep. They are meant to make you think that very smart people are handling the problem. But if you strip away the fancy words, the reality is simple: they are letting industrial machines smash up the places they promised to keep safe.

This is the specific kind of madness that drives me up the wall. If you want to let people fish, fine. Let them fish. But do not insult our intelligence by calling it "protection." Do not sell us a broken car and tell us it is in mint condition. The ocean floor is being scraped clean, turning complex ecosystems into underwater deserts, all while politicians in Edinburgh nod solemnly and talk about their green credentials.

In the end, this story is not really about fish. It is about truth. It shows us that for the political class, reality is optional. The only thing that matters is the headline. They have their 37% figure. They can put it on a poster. They can brag about it at international conferences. The fact that the figure is a lie—or at best, a meaningless technicality—does not matter to them.

So, the next time you hear a leader claim they have "protected" a huge amount of land or sea, do not clap. Be cynical. Ask them if they have actually stopped the bulldozers, or if they just gave them a new permit. Because usually, the destruction continues right on schedule. The ocean is dying, but the paperwork? The paperwork is absolutely perfect.