LETTERS

SHARKS UNDER ATTACK

"If we have begun virtually to wipe out sharks and other fish, imagine how endangered our own natural environment must be." SCOTT DE SAVOYE Vancouver, B.C.

Relentless slaughter and overfishing will drive sharks, the top predators in the sea, to the brink of extinction [ENVIRONMENT, Aug. 11]. If the scientific community and the world at large do not act quickly enough to reverse the trend, there will be an ecological catastrophe. We humans have come to be "nature's most fearsome predators," but what will happen when there is hardly anything left to keep the ecosystem in balance? FRED CESAR Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

Your portrayal of a piscatorial crisis is a real fish story. You swallowed hook, line and sinker the rhetoric of environmental groups. There is no question that some fish stocks are depressed, but more are stable and improving thanks to better science and management. World fish catches continue to grow, as does aquaculture, which now provides 25% of the global seafood supply. And your minuscule list of fish "O.K. to Eat" omits scores of products from well-managed, regulated fisheries, ranging from Alaskan salmon, halibut and pollock to New England lobster, scallops and yellowfin tuna. LEE J. WEDDIG, Executive Vice President National Fisheries Institute Arlington, Va.

The overused comparison of the risks of driving a car to the chances of being attacked by a shark is "de-bait-able." It does not comfort those of us who occasionally dip in the ocean to know that we may be one of a mere 10 or 15 people who are fatally wounded by a surprise shark attack each year. Driving has dangers that we can mitigate through a defensive approach. I'm not condoning the elimination of sharks, but I don't want one for my next water toy either. DON BRINTON Hanna, Alta.

Although scientific research continually adds to our knowledge of sharks, the rate of scientific discovery is far outpaced by the rapid growth of shark fisheries worldwide. Some shark populations may be destroyed by overexploitation before scientists even have a chance to study them. Public awareness and sympathy for sharks may ultimately prove the most effective weapon against hideous practices such as live finning and the destruction of sharks for their cartilage resulting from the baseless claims of pill pushers. To find out more about current shark research, visit the shark-research Website at www2.hawaii. edu/~carlm/tigershark.html CARL MEYER Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology Kaneohe, Hawaii

If we continue down this same road, what will this earth look like generations from now? Empty oceans, chopped-down forests and bumper stickers that read SAVE US FROM OURSELVES. JENNIFER LEE, age 16 New York City I have been fishing for bluefin tuna commercially for 30 years and have seen an incredible increase in the stock since 1988. The conservation program has worked, but at the expense of commercial fishermen. We are heavily restricted in the amount and size of the tuna we catch, while recreational anglers are not. If consumers want to do something to help fish stocks, they should pressure the government to hold amateur anglers to the conservation and reporting standards of commercial fishermen. The juvenile tuna that are caught and not reported by amateurs outnumber all the giants that are caught and reported by commercial fishermen. JOEY JANCEWICZ Newburyport, Mass.

In the harbor area of Montauk, N.Y., everybody knows there is a crisis in the fisheries, but just a few miles away in the village, people are often shocked to hear there is any problem at all. It was heartening to see your article because if there is a lack of awareness here in a seaport, the rest of the country (and the rest of the world) must be completely in the dark. Fish, being slimy and all that, are not easy to get comfortable with, but if what happened to a noble creature like the swordfish was the fate of a land-based mammal of equal esteem, it would be headline news and somebody would be in jail. Thanks for dragging the news out of the depths. BILL AKIN Montauk, N.Y.

Your articles underlined the urgent need to turn our fishermen into farmers--sea farmers. Rather than battling over fishing rights, nations should be establishing giant seafood farms in the multiplicity of bays and gulfs on our planet. If we are to survive, aquaculture must become as ordinary as agriculture. GILLIAM CLARKE Wesley Chapel, Fla.

Hacking off its fins and then throwing a shark back into the ocean to die is cruel. But fishing can also involve hooks and death by suffocation. As sentient beings, sharks and other fish deserve protection regardless of population issues. We can easily live without using them for food, medicine or other purposes. It is unfortunate that we, with our genius for economics, have not created alternatives for those who continue to practice a primitive livelihood. DAVID J. CANTOR Glenside, Pa.

As one who has covered Alaska's commercial fisheries for print and broadcast media for nearly a decade, I am troubled by your vivid portrayal of some of the favorite fish "entrees" that could soon disappear. In Alaska we have more salmon than we know what to do with. Annual statewide salmon catches usually hover at around 200 million fish. To make matters worse, you urge consumers to "help out" by eating just farm-raised salmon! Sending that message to readers serves only to cripple further an industry that has steadily been losing market share for its wild, free-roaming salmon to those that are farmed. LAINE WELCH Kodiak, Alaska JUST SAY NO TO SHARK-FIN SOUP

For years I have tried to persuade my Chinese mother-in-law not to make shark-fin soup because of the overfishing of sharks [ENVIRONMENT, Aug. 11]. She feels the "health benefits" of eating shark fins are more important than the shark's survivability. Sharply increasing prices have slowed down her use of shark fins, but, unfortunately, this soup is often a featured course at Chinese banquets. I suspect most consumers are ignorant of the plight of sharks or have the same cultural beliefs as my mother-in-law, beliefs that are hard to change. Unless farm-raised sharks become possible, I fear the extinction of sharks. MARILYN NG San Diego

THE CHOICE: VIOLENCE OR PEACE

Bravo to Charles Krauthammer for asking why Israel should continue to negotiate with the Palestinians who utilize terror and violence [ESSAY, Aug. 11]! Someone finally has the nerve to tell it like it is. Let the U.S. send a message to Yasser Arafat that neither we nor Israel will deal with him or any other Palestinian until he controls the terrorists and ends their attacks, suicide or otherwise. ALLEN SOKOLOFF Bensalem, Pa.

Krauthammer is mistaken. If Israel backs away from the negotiating table now, the terrorists will have achieved their objective: interrupting the peace process. No one expects Israel to ignore terrorism or cease attempting to prevent it. But by suspending the peace talks, Israel will ensure that any effort to resume the negotiations will again be met with violence. If the talks continue, however, the terrorists' acts will be rendered futile. Negotiating with terrorists is "obscene," as Krauthammer says, but it is far better than a full retreat, which would mean the terrorists win. JONATHAN FONTENOT Lake Charles, La.

The commentary on the situation in Israel represents unilateral and simplistic thinking. We have seen suicidal actions in Vietnam and Algeria and in other places. These are the acts of desperate people. Why are they desperate? Is the destruction of all Palestinians the only good solution, as some in Israel see it? Didn't the fact that Israel could not avoid all terrorist attacks persuade it to agree on some peace process rather than continue a spiral of violence? Benjamin Netanyahu has harvested what he sowed. Please save us from this kind of simplistic and shortsighted commentary. HUBERT CHRISTIAEN Heverlee, Belgium

The peace process must continue regardless of any terrorist activity. This will send a clear message to Hamas that the desire of ordinary people for peace and stability is stronger and more lasting than the terrorists' desire for conflict. ILANA GORDON Johannesburg

How refreshing to hear logic and sensitivity like Krauthammer's in a world that has become so cruel and callous. LEAH WOLF Metar, Israel

I found Krauthammer's opinion piece historically warped and obnoxiously jingoistic. It almost made me wish the Soviets had won the cold war! STUART EDGAR Sydney

WHERE THE TAXES FLOW

You may claim that the balanced-budget and tax-cut law "gives away something to just about everyone" [NATION, Aug. 11], but it's not true. The clear winners are the upper middle class and the rich. The tax benefits flow disproportionately to the wealthiest Americans. And I was horrified to read Daniel Kadlec's commentary arguing that the "victims" of this legislation are the "upper-income wage slaves." He describes an imaginary couple struggling to make ends meet on their $160,000-a-year income in their cramped $475,000 four-bedroom house. I don't know if Kadlec is serious or not, but this tax law is no laughing matter. I don't find it funny for the government to cut the taxes of those making $100,000 a year and give practically no tax relief to working families earning $20,000. JAMES R. MCCORKELL St. Paul, Minn.

I'd like to thank Kadlec for complaining about the "tax cut" for me. My financial situation is very similar to the one he described. The income thresholds are set too low for the new tax credits and deductions. As a result, we "wealthy" two-income professional families, making less than we did 25 years ago in inflation-adjusted dollars, will see no benefit from the tax changes. DAVID HEARD Seattle

It is discouraging to see President Clinton and both parties beating their chests about balancing the budget when all they have done is put off the real task of cutting government spending to a manageable level. The financial threat to Medicare and Social Security is looming on the horizon, but all the politicos can focus on is getting re-elected. Term limits are the only answer. ERNEST J. ALLEN Dunnellon, Fla.

RUSHDIE'S VIEW OF INDIA

In his commentary on the celebration of the country's 50th anniversary of independence from the British, Salman Rushdie provides a brutal but honest assessment of the grim political and social scenario in India [WORLD, Aug. 11]. I often wonder what has wounded India more--200 years of colonial rule or 50 years of pseudosocialist government by lackluster, dishonest politicians. RAJENDRA K. ANEJA Sao Paulo

Rushdie made a poignant observation about the dark side of India today, but there is some cause for celebration: democracy has taken strong roots in India. In the past, the Indian masses were left out of the political and economic systems. Now the democratic forces are disseminating the political power. The lower caste and the untouchables have joined Indian politics, understandably with a vengeance. The resulting chaos, Rushdie noted in his article, is the birth pang of an evolving democratic society trying to free itself from the clutches of feudalism. It takes time to evolve, and in its 51st year the process has just started. But look at history; it took centuries for Western democracy to reach its present glory. PRODIP DUTTA Terre Haute, Ind.

With a few thousand years of deeprooted history and traditions difficult to escape from, and with many obstacles still ahead, India is often seen as a nation whose future is an empty glass. That seems to be Rushdie's viewpoint. But India is an ancient country, a large democracy, a diverse people and a power that must be reckoned with. In spite of its diversity, overpopulation, vested interests and uninspired leadership, India has achieved remarkable economic and social progress. The country can only look forward to the next 50 years with hope and courage. CLEMENT R. PRABAKARAN Sterling Heights, Mich.

I have been in Boston for the past three years studying, but Rushdie's image of India is not the country I knew when I left. The picture I have held dearly in my mind's eye is what keeps me going. I know that India has a lot to offer me on my return: a challenging work environment, a busy social life and, above all, a sense of freedom. I agree that life in India also involves many struggles. We have serious religious, economic and political conflicts. It is a roller-coaster ride, but that is what makes life in India highly interesting. Rushdie talked about the corrupt politics, the poverty, the strife and the poor attitude of the people. But India has also been responsible for many great minds, philosophers, physicists and artists. India's 50th anniversary of independence is a time to look at the silver lining, not the cloud--a time to fill people with hope, not despair. LAXMI NAIR Boston

Rushdie's piece provided the perspective of the minuscule, intellectual, English-speaking, Westernized Indian ruling elite. He showed its prejudices about India, including the perception that history begins at the end of British rule. Rushdie made no mention of colonialism or its damages or of society's daily agony: thousands killed by automobiles, growing numbers of rapes and murders, contaminated rivers, polluted cities and uprooted people. Belonging as he does to this elite and being a beneficiary of this system, Rushdie has his reasons to celebrate. But how can others? ROMESH DIWAN Troy, N.Y.

As an expatriate, I am hurt to see the politics of India sinking ever deeper into a quagmire of corruption and caste rivalry. The situation today is significantly different from the time when Nehru said, "We made a tryst with destiny." INDRAJIT RAY Guelph, Ont.

THAT PILFERING NOVELIST

Romance writer Nora Roberts should be flattered that rival author Janet Dailey thought Roberts was so creative and talented that her words were worth copying [PEOPLE, Aug. 11]. In fact, maybe Dailey's plagiarizing of Roberts' phrases and ideas was a worthwhile endeavor. Edgar Allan Poe starts The Fall of the House of Usher with "During the whole of a dull, dark and soundless day in the autumn of the year, when the clouds hung oppressively low in the heavens..." Tell me, what author could help making that type of writing part of his or her own work? Of course, "like a rocket, the heat tore down her fingertips" may not be as poetic as Poe's words, but the principle is the same. THOM KERR Englewood, Colo.

The item on Roberts and Dailey was condescending in the extreme and trivialized the matter of plagiarism. If this had involved two male writers of a male-oriented genre--say the shoot-'em, blow-'em-up, stab-'em-in-the-belly genre (and we all know how classy these books are)--you probably would have treated it seriously. As a novelist who has more than 25 million books in print in various genres, including historical romance, suspense, fantasy and science fiction, I feel qualified to state that those of us who write books for a living take the theft of our material very seriously. Plagiarism is plagiarism, no matter what the type of book. And it's not funny! PATRICIA MATTHEWS Prescott, Ariz.