Using the inverse of Ardy’s commons analogy, if a fisherman knows that his and his family’s livelihood depends on not over-fishing his section and treating it in an environmentally safe manner, he will regulate his harvest so that reproducing stock are left for the next season. He may even compete with other fishermen to make his section more hospitable and attractive to the fish, especially if the fish he is after is a migrating species.
--The above almost NEVER happens in modernized culture, and almost never happens even in the most idyllic of aboriginal cultures either, regardless of what political, philosophical or religious system it is governed by. The lessons of Easter Island point to mankind's inability to properly husband his resources without regulation.
Libertarian epic fail.
And.... the reality is that fish swim. If other fisherman do not have the same management practices, then all the fish will be gone for everyone.
This dynamic can be clearly seen in the enormous industrial fishing operations that are operated in the ocean. These ship drag giant nets that capture an kill everything. It works well for each ship.... but the practice is destroying the fishery.
Further example... lets say for purpose of discussion that there is in fact a problem that results from increasing atmospheric carbon gasses. Then there is no alternative other than to come to some arrangement where everyone addresses the problem. There is no way we can "own" the atmosphere over our own country and be indifferent to the atmosphere in the world at large.
"It's not a lie if you believe it." -- George Costanza The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves. --Bertrand Russel