News Law Oceana Challenges Government Decision Allowing Eight U.S. Fisheries to Harm 14 Times More Threatened Sea Turtles |
Oceana Challenges Government Decision Allowing Eight U.S. Fisheries to Harm 14 Times More Threatened Sea Turtles |
|
Oceana, the largest international advocacy group working solely to protect the world’s oceans, filed a complaint
today about the United States government’s decision in October of 2010
to allow eight New England and Mid-Atlantic fisheries to harm 14 times
more (from 42 to 610) threatened loggerhead sea turtles. Specifically,
Oceana is disputing the U.S. government’s decision to allow these
fisheries to injure and kill more loggerhead sea turtles without
adequately assessing the aggregate impacts of the fisheries on this
species. The fisheries harm leatherback, Kemp’s ridley, and green sea
turtles as well, and those species also would benefit from proper
assessments of the fisheries’ impacts.
“The U.S. needs to ensure that fisheries kill fewer sea turtles, not more,” said Beth Lowell, campaign director at Oceana. “These decisions should not be made without considering all of the impacts affecting these sea turtle populations.” Oceana’s complaint addresses biological opinions for eight federal fisheries, including those for monkfish and for summer flounder, scup and black sea bass, which are responsible for the highest levels of sea turtle bycatch in the region. Biological opinions are part of the consultation and review process when a federal agency authorizes commercial activities that are expected to harm or kill a species protected by the Endangered Species Act. Although these decisions came on the same day and were even announced in the same press release, the analysis for each fishery did not adequately account for the increased number of sea turtles harmed by the other seven fisheries. Read the complete story from Oceana
|
|||
|
|
||
HASTINGS: Time to improve the Endangered Species Act
May 18, 2012 - When the Endangered Species Act (ESA) was signed into law in 1973 by President Nixon, he spoke about the importance of preserving “the rich array of animal life with which our country has been blessed.” I believe that goal is as important today as it was back then. However, after nearly 40 years, it’s time to take a fresh, honest look at the law and consider whether there are ways it could be improved to do a better job of protecting and recovering species.
