Your assumptions and wicked math reminds me a lot of the anti-global warming folks. Ask folks in the south or the Midwest and just about everywhere else that has been directly affected by the extremes and they’ll say that Chicken isn’t very Llittle now.
I think “throwing caution to the wind,” in a situation like this is folly. Let’s just assume you’re right about your anti-consumptivists and your math assumptions.
Can you now predict when the next boom will be?
Can you account for the various nonhuman species that directly and indirectly depend on the sardine populations?
Is harvesting having any effect on the sardines and the rest of the reliant species?
How do you account for replacing the biomass that was removed from the ocean?
What effects do increased human harvesting of krill have on the sardine populations?
Will rising ocean temperatures affect the entire model?
Authoritatively answering these questions is difficult at best - we haven’t been here before. Why would one want to exacerbate this issue by assuming all will be well and the scientists are biased in some way? We’ve been down this road already and it appears every generation from this point on will have to deal with the calamities that we have created.