The fact that the Hawaii longline fishery is a sustainable fishery and an international model would contradict any argument that suggests this fishery is "willing to destroy anything that is not important to itself... for it's own amusement."  We don't solve the problems that you're mentioning (sustaining increasing world population with finite natural resources) by expanding this monument boundary.  That is the point.  Are you actually saying that "arguing to set aside something that can still be preserved" is insane?  What exactly is threatening anything in the proposed expansion area?  What are you trying to save?  Reminds me of crocodile hunter in the early days.  He was "saving" the crocs by taking them to his private zoo.  "protecting" them from what?  Why do we need to expand the monument?  To save the world?  Give me a break from the hyperbole