Saving Seafood

Trump administration loses bid to dismiss monument lawsuits

October 2, 2019 — A federal judge has rejected the Trump administration’s bid to dismiss lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of a 2017 decision to downsize two sprawling national monuments in Utah.

U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan’s written decisions issued Monday night means the legal challenges seeking to return the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments to their original sizes can move forward.

Chutkan didn’t decide the key question at the core of the lawsuits: Does the Antiquities Act give presidents the power to create monuments as well as reduce them?

The government has already created new management plans for the downsized monuments. President Donald Trump downsized Bears Ears by 85% and Grand Staircase by nearly half.

The lawsuits were filed by environmental organizations, tribal coalitions, an outdoor recreation company and a paleontology organization.

Those groups celebrated getting over an initial hurdle as they attempt to reverse decisions they say left sensitive lands and sites vulnerable to damage. Lands cut from the monuments are still under protections afforded to federal lands but are now open to oil and gas drilling and coal mining.

Read the full story at the Associated Press

REP. ROB BISHOP: It’s Time for Congress to Reform the Antiquities Act

May 3, 2019 — As the new Democratic chairman and top Republican on the House Natural Resources Committee, respectively, Arizona Congressman Raul Grijalva and I recently presided over a hearing examining the status of presidentially declared national monuments under the Antiquities Act, including Utah’s Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments.

I followed-up with a letter to Chairman Grijalva with a simple invitation: Let’s write a national monuments reform bill together that does exactly what he said he wants during that panel.

While the hearing initially focused on two Utah monuments, it didn’t take long for the whole room to realize we were confronting a deeper problem. Republicans, Democrats, and local stakeholders have all expressed frustration with the Antiquities Act. As written, the act incentivizes presidents of both major political parties to sidestep transparent democratic processes by mandating unilateral land use decisions. Consequently, voices from all sides of the political spectrum have been silenced and ignored even as generational decisions about their futures were being made behind closed White House doors.

The Antiquities Act is the law by which presidents have designated monuments ranging from Devil’s Tower in Wyoming to Arizona’s Casa Grande Ruins and Montezuma Castle. Rightly, some monuments enjoy overwhelming local support prior to designation. Due to a lack of a Congressional review requirement for  presidential declarations, designations under the Antiquities Act can be promulgated quickly to protect against imminent threats.

That feature of speedy monument designation can also be a curse. This fact has been amply, painfully demonstrated to communities across my state. In the last few decades, presidents have outright abused the Antiquities Act in Utah. Regardless of how you feel about the areas that were designated, the fact that Presidents Clinton and Obama came in the dead of night — without any input from state or local elected officials! — and locked up millions of acres of land is outrageous. Local representation opposed the massive monuments. The livelihoods of ranchers and access for recreators was scuttled overnight, and the traditions of families with generations of responsible land stewardship were suddenly upended without due process.

Read the full opinion piece at The Daily Caller

Western Pacific Council Director: Marine Monuments ‘Major Impediment’ to U.S. Fisheries

WASHINGTON — May 1, 2019 — The following was released by the National Coalition for Fishing Communities:

In testimony before a House subcommittee today, Kitty Simonds, the Executive Director of the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council (WPRFMC) labeled the increasing number and size of marine monuments a “major impediment” to U.S. fisheries. According to Ms. Simonds, these designations force fishermen to travel farther, longer, and at greater costs, with little conservation benefit.

Members of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities also submitted a letter to the Subcommittee, which was entered into the committee hearing record, asking that fishing inside of the marine monuments be managed under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and that future monument designations include input from commercial fishermen. The letter notes that previous monument designations were made “with no formal public hearings, cost-benefit analyses, or input from affected constituents, and despite no compelling reason or threat to marine resources.”

“The Council process allows for stakeholders, scientists, and concerned citizens to review and debate policy decisions in a transparent manner,” the letter states. “In contrast, the Antiquities Act authorizes the president to take away public areas and public resources with no public input. Using executive authority, the President can close any federal lands and waters in an opaque, top-down process that too often excludes the very people who would be most affected.”

The letter was signed by 20 fishing organizations and 8 fishing vessels, representing fishermen from 11 states: California, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Maryland, North Carolina, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, and Rhode Island.

Ms. Simonds cited other negative consequences of the policy, including making it harder to prevent illegal fishing by foreign vessels in the U.S. EEZ; limiting, along with other closures, fishermen to operate in as little as 17 percent of the U.S. EEZ; and a decrease in the number of longline vessels and the amount of their catch.

“These prohibitions have forced our fishermen out of more than half of the U.S. [Exclusive Economic Zone] EEZ in the [Western and Central Pacific Ocean] and onto the high seas, where they are forced to compete with foreign fleets on the fishing grounds,” said Ms. Simonds in her testimony, delivered before the Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Oceans, and Wildlife. “Currently 70 percent of the Hawaii longline effort is on the high seas. We also know, based on expert scientific knowledge, that forcing U.S. vessels out of U.S. waters has no conservation benefit to tuna and highly migratory stocks or to protected species.”

 

Rep. Aumua Amata Urges Congress to Reform Marine Monuments

March 15, 2019 — The following was released by the office of Rep. Aumua Amata (R, American Samoa):

Congresswoman Aumua Amata gave a statement in the Committee on Natural Resources to make the case in Washington, D.C. that much-needed reforms are needed for the marine monuments on behalf of American Samoa. This full Committee Oversight Hearing was titled, Forgotten Voices: The Inadequate Review and Improper Alteration of Our National Monuments.

The text of her speech is as follows:

Talofa lava. Thank you, Chairman Grijalva and Ranking Member Bishop for holding this hearing today. The topic of today’s hearing is a bipartisan issue I have been strongly advocating for since I was first elected to Congress.

On January 6th, 2009, President Bush established the Rose Atoll Marine National Monument and the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument with Proclamation 8337 and Proclamation 8336. On September 29th, 2014, President Obama expanded the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument with Proclamation 9173. The American Samoan Government and its people were barely consulted before these monuments were established or expanded. As a result, our local fishermen were barred from accessing the waters that Samoans have been visiting for over a millennium.

The monuments serve a good purpose, and I fully support that effort, but not without local input, and not at the expense of access to our people who have utilized these areas for centuries, long before any relationship with the United States.

Many island economies are often heavily reliant on a single industry and in our case it’s the fishing industry.  Our tuna cannery is the dominant economic force in our community. American Samoa’s economy depends on access to our own EEZ. The establishment or expansion of the monuments and the restriction of all local fishing has had a major negative impact on American Samoa. We have lost two out of three of our canneries in the last decade alone.

Our fishermen are the most responsible and regulated in the world. As it stands currently, these fish swim through the monuments and are then caught by nations with little to no environmental regulations…that is not helping the sustainability for the future stock. Using the Antiquities Act to close U.S. waters to domestic fisheries is a clear example of federal overreach and regulatory duplication and obstructs well managed, sustainable U.S. fishing industries in favor of their foreign counterparts, especially when the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument was arbitrarily expanded to over six times its size. It is now half a million square miles or an area the size of three California’s that now is off limits to U.S. domestic fishing.

Congress has already passed laws that ensures the protection and conservation of ecosystems and the species contained therein including the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The Department of Interior has asked the President to restore regulated fishing in the monuments because of the protections put in place by the Magnuson-Stevens Act, protections that the Antiquities Act does not have. Limited commercial fishing can be done without harm to fish stock sustainability or the environment because Congress has already passed and continues to update laws to ensure it.

The Rose Atoll and Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monuments are just two local examples, and the establishment and alteration of our national monuments remains a bipartisan issue affecting the whole country. We need to be looking at the Antiquities Act, because any President from either party should not be permitted to establish or alter a declared monument without input from the public. To that end I am proud to cosponsor Mr. Bishop’s Monument Reform Bill again this Congress, and I want to make it clear that I will welcome legislation from either side of the isle that addresses this oversight.

The unilateral use of an executive order when declaring sites for a national monument designation is not the right way to go about protecting our lands and waters. American Samoans and the other indigenous and local groups represented here today should not have had their way of life so easily threatened by the establishment and alterations of monuments without their input.  We must ensure that all parties involved have a say, and I look forward to working with the committee on addressing what I hope remains a bipartisan issue.

Read the release here

Trump’s National Monument Changes Return to Spotlight

March 13, 2019 — As Democrats in Congress prepare to scrutinize President Donald Trump’s review of 27 national monuments, most of the recommendations made by ex-Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke remain unfinished as other matters consume the White House.

Trump acted quickly in December 2017 on Zinke’s recommendations to shrink two sprawling Utah monuments that had been criticized as federal government overreach by the state’s Republican leaders since their creation by Democratic Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton.

But in the 15 months since Trump downsized the Utah monuments, the president has done nothing with Zinke’s proposal to shrink two more monuments, in Oregon and Nevada, and change rules at six others, including allowing commercial fishing inside three marine monuments in waters off New England, Hawaii and American Samoa.

Zinke resigned in December amid multiple ethics investigations — and has joined a Washington, D.C. lobbying firm. Trump has nominated as his replacement Acting Interior Secretary David Bernhardt, a former lobbyist for the oil and gas industry and other corporate interests.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at U.S News and World Report

Rep. Rob Bishop Introduces Bill to Reform Outdated Antiquities Act

March 12, 2019 — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources:

Today, Ranking Republican Rob Bishop (R-Utah) and U.S. Rep. John Curtis (R-Utah) announced the introduction of H.R. 1664 the National Monument Creation and Protection Act (CAP Act).

“The 1906 Antiquities Act was originally intended as an executive tool to protect historical and archeological artifacts and structures under threat. Unfortunately, this worthy goal has been manipulated for ulterior political purposes. Today the Act is used as an excuse for presidents of both parties to unilaterally lock up vast tracts of public land without any mechanism for people to provide input or voice concerns. This is wrong.

“This legislation modernizes the law to restore its intent, allowing for the protection of actual antiquities without disenfranchisement of local voices. It also standardizes and limits the president’s power to reshape monuments.

“As a gesture of bipartisanship, the bill also adopts the direct suggestions made by Democrats during last year’s hearings, including new transparency requirements surrounding lobbying, local government consultation, and economic impact analysis. If my colleagues were serious about their calls for accountability under this Act – no matter which party controls the White House – they will support this bill.”

– said Ranking Republican Rob Bishop (R-Utah)

“Difficult public land issues are best resolved through the collaborative process of congressional legislation, not unilateral antiquities designations. I am proud to support the National Monument Creation and Protection Act, which would facilitate a better balance of voices, including state, local, and other leaders.”

– said Representative John Curtis (R-Utah)

Link to the bill text can be found HERE.

Feds beat fishermen: Court dismisses challenge to Atlantic monument

October 10, 2018 — A federal judge upheld the creation of the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument last week, dismissing a lawsuit from commercial fishing groups that challenged presidential authority to establish the monument.

The national monument, created by former President Barack Obama, was authorized under the Antiquities Act. Representatives from the Massachusetts Lobstermen’s Association argued that the act does not include authorization to protect bodies of water and that the monument in question, an area of nearly 5,000 square miles, was too large.

But U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ruled that the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument complied with the law and sided with the Trump administration’s motion to dismiss the suit.

“In all, plaintiffs offer no factual allegations explaining why the entire monument, including not just the seamounts and canyons but also their ecosystems, is too large,” wrote Boasberg in his decision.

He also clarified that the Antiquities Act histories grant that waterways, as well as land, can be protected under the act.

Read the full story at National Fisherman

 

Federal court rules against fishermen in Northeast Canyons monument lawsuit

October 10, 2018 — A federal judge last week dismissed a lawsuit brought by commercial fishing groups that challenged the creation of a marine national monument in 2016.

The organizations, which included the Long Island Commercial Fishing Association and the Massachusetts Lobstermen’s Association, claimed the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama did not have the authority to establish the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument.

The monument is the first national marine monument established in the Atlantic Ocean. Because of the designation, commercial fishing – except for certain red crab and lobster fishing – is prohibited in the 5,000-square-mile area. The crab and lobster fishing will continue until their permits expire.

While the administration of current U.S. President Donald Trump has been considering reopening it and other marine monuments for commercial fishing, it did seek the dismissal of the lawsuit, claiming the Antiquities Act gave presidents the right to establish and define such monuments.

“This is not a joke, jobs will be lost and thousands of people’s lives will be impacted through a back-door process that did not require formal federal review,” said Bonnie Brady, executive director of the Long Island Commercial Fishing Association in a Facebook post.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

 

Trump administration backs Obama in national monument clash

July 27, 2018 –A dispute over acts of Congress in 1906 and 1937 has put the Trump administration in court — and into the unusual position of supporting a proclamation by former President Barack Obama.

Contrary to President Donald Trump’s numerous efforts to shred Obama’s legacy, U.S. Justice Department lawyers are in Obama’s corner as they defend his expansion of a national monument in Oregon.

That puts the Trump administration in direct opposition with timber interests that Trump vowed to defend in a May 2016 campaign speech in Eugene, 110 miles (180 kilometers) south of Portland.

However, that opposition may be temporary in a case full of ironic twists that centers on a unique habitat where three mountain ranges converge. It is home to more than 200 bird species, the imperiled Oregon spotted frog, deer, elk and many kinds of fish, including the endangered Lost River sucker.

A federal judge is being asked to consider limits of power among all three government branches. For the Trump administration, the case is about protecting the power of the president of the United States, even if it was Obama who exercised his authority under the Antiquities Act of 1906 that allows a president to declare a national monument.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the Sioux City Journal

JONATHAN WOOD: Land ahoy! Fishermen challenge presidential designations of ocean monuments

Jule 2, 2018 — This month, the Antiquities Act turned 112 years old. Originally conceived to protect Native American artifacts in the Southwest, the law has, like so many federal laws, been twisted over time by power-hungry government officials.

Controversy over the law’s abuse is coming to a head in New England, where fishermen are locked out of a large section of their fishery by the creation of the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument. After spending years working to recover fish stocks and promote more sustainable fishing methods, they rightly see this move as a betrayal that threatens their livelihoods.

Why is a 112-year-old law so controversial today? The answer lies in the aggressive reinterpretation of the law by presidents seeking to expand their power.

Consider that in the law’s first century, Presidents Teddy Roosevelt through Bill Clinton collectively designated 70 million acres of national monuments. That’s a lot, to be sure, but it pales in comparison to the last 12 years. From 2006 to 2017, an additional 700 million acres were designated — a ten-fold increase over the prior century’s total.

What explains this explosion? It’s the interpretation of a single word: “land.” Congress limited the president’s monument power to “land owned or controlled by the Federal Government.” Most of us would have no trouble figuring out what “land” means: If you look at a map, it’s the part that isn’t blue.

Read the full opinion piece at the Washington Examiner