Saving Seafood

Military’s Issues With Offshore Wind Farms Now Added to U.S. Spending Bills

June 6, 2019 — The U.S. military has been eyeing America’s offshore wind development, concerned about impacts on training and operations, with project-siting issues brewing in some states. The dispute moved to the national stage May 21 when a House of Representatives committee passed federal appropriations bills that would set new curbs on where turbines could go. Industry advocates say they are duplicative impact mandates.

The House Appropriations Committee approved an amendment to fiscal 2020 spending bills for the U.S. Defense and Interior departments to require more National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration study of turbine construction and operations impacts on marine life.

Introduced by Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), it also says wind turbines in large arrays may interfere with radar and underwater sonar, and directs DOD to issue a report next year to address possible national security issues.

The amendment comes as Maryland enacted on May 22 a bill to raise its offshore wind commitment by up to 1,200 MW.

“Some in Congress continue to seek to sow conflict between offshore energy development and military operations,” said Randall Luthi, National Ocean Industries Association president. He said developers and DOD have long worked “with NATO allies in the North Sea.”

Read the full story at the Engineering News-Record

U.S. Is Likely to Add About 15,000 Work Visas This Summer

May 11, 2018 — WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is expected to make about 15,000 additional H-2B visas available for low-skilled foreign workers this summer, a modest supplement to the popular program, lawmakers and aides familiar with the planning said.

The number of visas available each year is capped by statute at 66,000, evenly divided between the summer and winter seasons. Congress declined to lift that cap during negotiations this spring. It did, however, give the secretary of Homeland Security authority to issue up to 69,000 more this summer if she determines there is sufficient need.

A range of businesses—including fisheries, landscapers and those in summer tourist spots—have been waiting to see if Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen will use that authority.

Rep. Andy Harris (R., Md.), who is concerned about the need for visas among Maryland crab processors, said Ms. Nielsen told him to expect about 15,000 additional visas. An aide to another GOP member of Congress said he was told the same.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R., Alaska) said that in her home state, fisheries, which are heavy users of the program, are in desperate need of a decision within a week in order for the companies to have workers in place for the summer fish run.

“We are in a situation where, once again, our processors aren’t able to be on the ready to receive the fish when they hit. We can control lots of things. We cannot control when the fish come,” she said. “We are asking you, urging you, politely and then forcefully, to address this very, very quickly.”

Read the full story at the Wall Street Journal

 

House Committee Approves Harris Chesapeake Bay Amendment

July 17, 2017 — The following was released by the office of Representative Andy Harris (R-MD)

On July 13, the House Appropriations Committee adopted an amendment introduced by Congressman Andy Harris (MD-01) to the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2018. This amendment prohibits the use of funds to implement or enforce the designation of any area of the Chesapeake Bay watershed as a “Critical Habitat” for the Atlantic Sturgeon. Congressman Harris issued the following statement praising the amendment’s passage:

“The Appropriations Committee’s adoption of this amendment is a victory for both the conservation of the Bay and the Eastern Shore’s economy. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) proposal to designate the Chesapeake Bay as a Critical Habitat for the Atlantic Sturgeon was crafted without adequate opportunity for input from the communities surrounding the Chesapeake Bay. Furthermore, NOAA has failed to document sufficient cause for the designation.

Designation of the Bay as a Critical Habitat for the Sturgeon is an unnecessary and burdensome regulation that could lead to restricted use of various regions of the Bay, stifling commercial activity in the Bay and inhibiting oyster restoration and other important conservation activities.”

Rep. Andy Harris amendment aims to stop Chesapeake sturgeon effort

July 17, 2017 — An amendment from Congressman Andy Harris (R-Md.-1st) to an appropriations bill would prohibit funds to implement a “Critical Habitat” designation for Atlantic Sturgeon anywhere in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

On Thursday, the House Appropriations Committee adopted Harris’ amendment to the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2018, according to a statement from Harris’ office.

Harris said a proposal from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to designate the Chesapeake Bay as a Critical Habitat for the Atlantic Sturgeon was created without adequate opportunity for input from the communities surrounding the bay, and that NOAA has not documented sufficient cause for the designation.

Read the full story at Delmarva Now

Members of Congress Call on Trump to Allow Fishing in Northeast Canyons and Seamounts National Monument

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) — June 14, 2017 — Yesterday, nine Members of Congress wrote to President Trump, urging the Administration to lift restrictions on fishing in the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts National Monument and to return fisheries management to the regional fishery management councils. The monument, designated via Executive order by President Obama last September, has prohibited commercial fishing in more than 4,900 square miles of ocean off the coast of New England.

According to the letter, this misuse of executive power will not only put commercial fishermen out of business, but will also harm many ocean communities that depend on a strong fishing economy. The letter calls for fisheries in the area to once again be managed under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, which has long ensured the United States has one of the most sustainable and environmentally friendly fisheries management systems in the world.

The letter was co-signed by members Tom MacArthur (R-RJ), Andy Harris (R-MD), Frank LoBiondo (R-NJ), Aumua Amata Coleman Radewagen (R-AS), David Rouzer (R-NC), Lee Zeldin (R-NY), and Walter B. Jones (R-NC).

Read the letter here

Congressmen MacArthur, Smith, and LoBiondo Announce Major Victory for New Jersey Fishing Community

February 3, 2017 — Washington, D.C. — The following was released by the office of Representative Tom MacArthur:

Today, Congressmen Tom MacArthur (NJ-03), Chris Smith (NJ-04), and Frank LoBiondo (NJ-02) announced a major victory for New Jersey’s fishing industry. After congressional opposition led by Congressman MacArthur, the Baltimore Aquarium has withdrawn their nomination for the Baltimore Canyon to be named a national marine sanctuary, a controversial designation which could have prohibited or restricted fishing access near South Jersey.

“This is a big win for our fishing industry and I’m so glad I had the opportunity to protect New Jersey’s fishermen,” said Congressman Tom MacArthur. “Too often, our commercial and recreational fishing industry has been stifled by too many regulations from nameless, faceless and unelected bureaucrats in Washington D.C. This will make sure that a burdensome designation won’t stand in the way of our fishermen’s success.”

“With our recreational and commercial fishing industry under constant attack from Washington bureaucrats, this is certainly welcome news for our region,” said Congressman LoBiondo. “I remain committed to fighting against such arbitrary restrictions on our fishermen and appreciate Congressman MacArthur’s leadership on this critical economic issue for South Jersey.”

“If implemented, a reduction of this magnitude will have harsh and immediate economic consequences for families and businesses along New Jersey’s 130 mile shoreline—many still struggling to fully recover from Superstorm Sandy. The impact will be felt not only in fisheries and fishing communities, but by the local businesses that rely upon the industry, the governments that depend on the revenue generated by these activities and other industries—such as tourism—that are a staple along the Jersey Shore,” said Rep. Chris Smith. “The Delegation is working on a full court press that we hope will delay, and ultimately severely alter, the implementation of this devastating decision.” 

In December, Congressman Tom MacArthur (NJ-03) along with Congressman Walter B. Jones (NC-03), Congressman Frank LoBiondo (NJ-2), Congressman Lee Zeldin (NY-01), Congressman Chris Smith (NJ-04), Congressman Rob Wittman (VA-01), and Congressman Andy Harris, M.D. (MD-01) sent a letter to the NOAA Administrator against the potential designations of Baltimore, Hudson, and Norfolk Canyons as Marine Sanctuaries.

The original letter can be viewed here

Mid-Atlantic Congressmen: No to Marine Sanctuaries in Baltimore, Hudson, and Norfolk Canyons

WASHINGTON — December 8, 2016 — In a recent letter to NOAA Administrator Kathryn D. Sullivan, Members of Congress representing five Mid-Atlantic states expressed trepidation regarding the potential designations of Baltimore, Hudson, and Norfolk Canyons as Marine Sanctuaries. Those signing the letter included Congressman Tom MacArthur (NJ-03), Congressman Walter B. Jones (NC-03), Congressman Frank LoBiondo (NJ-2), Congressman Lee Zeldin (NY-01), Congressman Chris Smith (NJ-04), Congressman Rob Wittman (VA-01), and Congressman Andy Harris, M.D. (MD-01).

In their letter, the Members of Congress argued the Canyons are already protected by the groundbreaking Deep Sea Coral amendment passed in 2015 by the Mid Atlantic Fishery Management Council.

The Garden State Seafood Association (GSSA), which took a leading role in the amendment effort, opposes the new designations, noting they are unnecessarily burdensome and fail to incorporate the voices of all ocean stakeholders.

“The GSSA does not believe a sanctuary designation is necessary as the canyons are already sufficiently protected by the Deep Sea Coral amendment,” said GSSA Executive Director Greg DiDomenico. “Designation of these canyons as marine sanctuaries would unjustifiably and unnecessarily extend prohibited fishing areas for hundreds of miles. Most egregiously, the unilateral nature of a marine sanctuary designation runs counter to the cooperative and participatory nature under which the Deep Sea Coral amendment was developed.”

Read the full letter here