Saving Seafood

Battle over Cashes Ledge continues between fishermen, environmentalists

August 29, 2016 — Despite the Obama administration’s declaration that Cashes Ledge has been taken off the table as a possible location for a marine national monument, the divisive issue of the monuments continues to percolate nationally between fishermen and conservationists.

From Hawaii to New England, the lines are clearly drawn.

Conservation groups have sustained a steady lobbying campaign to convince President Obama to employ the Antiquities Act to create new marine national monuments in the waters around Cashes Ledge, about 80 miles off Gloucester, and the seamounts off southern New England and Monterey, California.

On Friday, Obama ended a contentious process in the Pacific Ocean when he expanded an existing marine national monument area in the northwest Hawaiian Islands to create the largest protected area on Earth — 582,578 square miles.

Fishing stakeholders and fishing communities have countered with their own public campaign that sharply criticizes the collateral impact of closing more areas to commercial and recreational fishing, as well as the method of using the Antiquities Act as an end-run around the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Act.

“The Antiquities Act does not require transparency or a robust analysis of the science,” the Gloucester-based Northeast Seafood Coalition said in a statement. “It does not require any socioeconomic considerations be taken into account. No process is required other than an executive action by the president of the United States.”

The coalition and others, including several members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation and Gov. Charlie Baker, have tried to drive home the point that the current system of federal ocean management requires fishing businesses and communities to follow the established and intricate regulatory procedures established under Magnuson-Stevens.

To allow the creation of marine national monuments by what amounts to presidential fiat, they say, is unfair to those who have operated under the established rules and makes a mockery of Magnuson-Stevens.

“The New England Fishery Management Council is in charge of carrying out this requirement in our region,” the NSC said. “Last year, the council approved Omnibus Habitat Amendment 2 and is presently working on an Omnibus Deep Coral Amendment. These areas include the very areas now proposed and under consideration for a national monument.”

Read the full story at the Gloucester Times

Rep. Rob Bishop blasts Obama’s marine monument

August 29, 2016 — President Obama’s decision to expand a national monument off the coast of Hawaii will cause “great harm” to local industry and fisheries and is an abuse of power, said the Republican head of the House Natural Resources Committee.

“The sweeping size of this expansion is unjustified,” said committee Chairman Rob Bishop of Utah. “It will impose great harm to a critical local industry.”

The president expanded the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument by 442,781 square miles on Friday, one day after the 100th birthday of the National Park Service. Bishop called it an abuse of the Antiquities Act by barring native Hawaiians from providing “meaningful input.” He said the president’s “legacy may be intact,” but it comes at “the expense of local fisheries, cultural traditions and state rights.”

Read the full story at the Washington Examiner

Fishing industry fears Obama’s power over coastal waters

August 25, 2016 — The prospect that President Barack Obama could designate as marine monuments areas off the Massachusetts and California coasts is being met with resistance from various fishing groups and port-town mayors. If Obama uses his authority under the Antiquities Act to name as federal monuments the New England Coral Canyons and Seamounts, and many of the seamounts, ridges and banks off California’s coast, commercial fishing would be significantly restricted and the viability of two of the country’s most important fishing ports would be threatened — Monterey, Calif., and New Bedford, Mass., (the nation’s highest-grossing fishing port), the mayors of those ports argued in letters to the White House on Wednesday.

The mayors — Jon Mitchell of New Bedford and Clyde Roberson of Monterey — and industry groups, like the National Coalition for Fishing Communities, also argue such actions would sidestep the fishery management system overseen by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which makes decisions based on scientific analysis and public input to ensure the sustainability of seafood stocks.

Read the full story at POLITICO

REP. LEE ZELDIN: To Protect the Antiquities Act, Don’t Abuse It

August 25, 2016 — The Antiquities Act was passed by Congress in 1906 and signed into law by President Teddy Roosevelt in an effort to preserve American land after the pillage and destruction of a number of Native American and archaeological sites in the Southwest United States. The Antiquities Act is one of the most important pieces of conservation legislation in our nation’s history, providing the President with the sole power to declare National Monuments on federal land for the purposes of historical and natural preservation and waters. These sites often become part of the National Parks Systems under the care of the National Parks Service which is tasked with the protection of all of our valuable monuments.

Throughout its history, the Antiquities Act has had bipartisan support and has been used by 13 Presidents. The preservation of the Statue of Liberty, Death Valley and Grand Canyon are just a few of the monumental and historic American sites that were saved through the Antiquities Act. However, for fishermen on Long Island and nationwide, the current administration’s overzealous and overly broad interpretation of this law is causing great concern.

Recent Marine Monument designations proclaimed by the Obama Administration have been the largest in U.S. history, locking out fishing in perpetuity—a severe departure from the original intent of the Antiquities Act to preserve historical sites and archeological treasures. In 2014, President Obama declared a 490,000 square mile area of water in the Pacific Ocean as a National Marine Monument after receiving little public input and through a process where transparency was severely lacking. As a result of this new monument, recreational fishing was severely limited and commercial fishing was completely banned, hurting fishermen in the Pacific Ocean. Now, important fishing areas in the Northwest Atlantic, where fishermen from Greenport, Montauk, and throughout the entire New York and New England region have worked for centuries, are under consideration for a National Marine Monument designation by the current administration. As the President is pushing to apply this power to large areas of ocean in the Northwest Atlantic, he is threatening to shutdown thousands of square miles of ocean from Long Island fishermen through abuse of the Antiquities Act.

Read the full op-ed at Rep. Lee Zeldin’s House Website

East & West Coast Mayors Write White House on New Marine Monument Declarations

August 25, 2016 — New Bedford Mayor Jon Mitchell recently sent a letter to the White House Council on Environmental Quality expressing concern about the possibility of President Barack Obama issuing an Executive Order that would declare certain offshore areas marine monuments.

Bob Vanasse, the Executive Director of Saving Seafood, told WBSM News that one of the biggest complaints from members of the fishing industry is that, although they met with federal officials, they weren’t presented with any specific proposal.

“There was no actual proposal from the administration to be discussed,” said Vanasse “they were having this listening session but the listening session was something of a peculiar one way street, in that they listened to concerns, but they never responded.”

Vanasse says that if the administration issued the order, through the Antiquities Act, it could have a huge impact on the local fishing industry.

“The best estimate suggests that 20 to 25 percent of the fishing areas in these regions could be affected,” said Vanasse “the most affected fisheries are the red crab industry, lobster, and tuna but there are other industries.”

While stating that the fishing industry would be opposed to such a move Vanessee says including at least one concession would make it more tolerable for many fishing families.

Read the full story at WBSM

HAWAII: Papahanaumokuakea: It Is Hawaii’s Business

August 24, 2016 — The people of Hawaii are divided over the expansion of Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. Papahanaumokuakea encompasses 10 islands and 140,000 square miles filled with seamounts, atolls, coral and rare species indigenous to Hawaii.

Senator Brian Schatz first proposed the plan to increase the monument’s territory from 50 nautical miles to 200 nautical miles off the shores of each of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. Supporters say that protecting this region would help maintain the biodiversity that thrives in these waters for future generations. The Antiquities Act gives President Obama has the power to create national monuments to protect important cultural, scientific and natural resources without holding a public hearing. But opponents of the expansion say the plan needs a thorough discussion with Hawaii’s people.

Some argue that the expansion will harm Hawaii’s fishing industry, and potentially make it more expensive to “buy local.” This could cause Hawaii to rely more on mainland imports, says Mike Irish, owner of Diamond Head Seafood, Halm’s Enterprise and Keoki’s Lau Lau.

“All the fishermen of the state of Hawaii will be impacted. All the fish that is caught here, over 80 percent is eaten by us,” explains Irish. “It’s our one sustainable industry we have today and they want to start taking that away from us.”

Read the full story at Hawaii Business

D.B. PLESCHNER: Monument proposal would devastate California’s fishing industry

August 15, 2016 — The following is excerpted from an opinion piece written by D.B. Pleschner, executive director of the California Wetfish Producers Association. It was published today in the Sacramento Bee:

California’s fisheries provide healthy, sustainable food, but that could change under a dangerous new proposal being circulated, until recently, behind closed doors at the Legislature.

California’s fishing community – more than 40 harbors, chambers of commerce, seafood processors and recreational and commercial fishing groups – has united to oppose the proposal to declare virtually all offshore seamounts, ridges and banks off the coast as monuments under the Antiquities Act and permanently close these areas to commercial fishing.

After pursuing rumors, fisheries groups discovered the proposal, along with a sign-on letter encouraging legislative support. But no one bothered to seek any input from recreational and commercial fishermen. Even worse, there has been no scientific review or economic analysis, no public participation and no transparency.

The areas identified in the proposal are indeed special places, rich in marine life and valuable corals, sponges and structures. The seamounts and banks are also very important for fisheries.

Tuna, swordfish, rockfish, spiny lobster, sea urchins, white sea bass and species including mackerels, bonito and market squid are all sustainably fished in Southern and Central California. And in Northern California, albacore tuna and other species provide opportunities to fishermen who, for the past few seasons, have been unable to rely on Chinook salmon and Dungeness crab.

These areas do deserve protection. But policies for protecting resources in federal waters exist under the federal Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and other bipartisan laws, such as the Marine Mammal Protection Act and Endangered Species Act, which require science-based, peer-reviewed analysis conducted in a fully public and transparent process.

Read the full opinion piece at the Sacramento Bee

Obama’s Environmental Legacy: Some 24 National Monuments

August 15, 2016 — The race is on to win President Barack Obama’s attention as he puts some final touches on his environmental legacy.

Conservation groups, American Indian tribes and federal lawmakers are urging his administration to preserve millions of acres as national monuments. Such a designation often prevents new drilling and mining on public lands, or the construction of new roads and utility lines.

The flurry of activity is creating enthusiasm — and tensions — in several parts of the country.

Efforts are underway in Utah, Arizona, Nevada, Maine and elsewhere to get Obama to designate new national monuments. Proponents aren’t just focused on land. They’re also looking to greater protections for vast swaths of ocean bottom off the coasts of New England, California and Hawaii.

Proponents of the various monument proposals know that the next administration will have other immediate priorities. Some presidents, including Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, never exercised their powers to designate national monuments through the 1906 Antiquities Act. The proponents recognize the window of opportunity could be closing for several years.

They’re also aware that Obama’s immediate predecessors, Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, waited almost exclusively until their final months in office to designate national monuments, so there is a chance Obama will become even more active.

That’s disconcerting for many members in Congress, particularly Republicans, who say the Antiquities Act wasn’t designed to bolster a president’s legacy.

“Presidents are starting to abuse this authority as they leave the office. If they actually tried to do this on the first day so that Congress had some ability to respond to it, and the people did, I’d be more comfortable about what their motives are,” said GOP Rep. Rob Bishop of Utah, chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at ABC News

Creation Of World’s Largest Marine Reserve In Hawaii Sparks Water Fight

August 15, 2016 — HONOLULU — The vast ocean surrounding the remote western portion of the Hawaiian archipelago has become the focus of a fierce debate in the state where lawmakers and longline fishers have been pitted against conservationists and Native Hawaiian groups who hope the president will designate it as the world’s largest marine reserve.

Earlier this summer, US Sen. Brian Schatz sent a proposal to President Barack Obama to greatly expand the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument (PMNM), an existing protected area established 10 years ago by President George W. Bush.

The current monument covers 139,800 square miles in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, an area nearly the size of California, and is home to some of the world’s most extensive coral populations, at least 7,000 marine species, and 22 types of seabirds. When it was established in June 2006, it was the largest protected area in the world, but now ranks 10th.

Under Schatz’s proposal the monument would expand to 582,578 square miles — four times its current size — and would include almost the entire exclusive economic zone of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. While advocates say the expanded protection will better safeguard endangered species, preserve biodiversity, and fight climate change, opponents argue that it would significantly restrict their access to certain fish and hinder the state’s economic well-being.

In May, 30 state lawmakers, including Hawaii House Speaker Joe Souki and Senate President Ron Kouchi, signed a letter asking Obama not to expand the monument and questioning his authority to use the Antiquities Act. The law, passed in 1906, gives the president the power to designate national monuments with the stroke of a pen, and is among the most controversial tools used to set aside land.

“Without sufficient scientific and empirical data and evidence, this arbitrary expansion would be in direct violation of the Antiquities Act,” the letter read.

The lawmakers said an expansion of the preserve would cut Hawaii’s commercial fishing industry by 8% and would mean 2.16 million fewer pounds of fish, resulting in an estimated $6.8 million loss.

Read the full story at Buzzfeed News

New England Fishing Groups Oppose Use of Antiquities Act for Atlantic Marine Monument as Requested by Connecticut Lawmakers

August 4, 2016 — The following was released by the National Coalition for Fishing Communities:

WASHINGTON (NCFC) – August 4, 2016 – Led by Sen. Richard Blumenthal, the Connecticut Congressional Delegation today asked President Obama to use executive authority under the Antiquities Act to designate the New England Coral Canyons and Seamounts as a Marine National Monument. The Connecticut Congressional Delegation is comprised of Sen. Blumenthal, Sen. Chris Murphy, Rep. John Larson, Rep. Joe Courtney, Rep. Rosa DeLauro, Rep. Jim Himes, and Rep. Elizabeth Esty.

Members of the National Coalition for Fishing Communities (NCFC) have previously expressed opposition to the misuse of the Antiquities Act to designate an Atlantic Marine Monument. A monument designation would subvert the open and transparent process for fisheries management currently in place under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and threatens the jobs and livelihoods of hardworking fishermen.

Below are statements from NCFC members on their opposition to an Atlantic Marine Monument designation.

David Frulla and Andrew Minkiewicz, Fisheries Survival Fund (Atlantic Scallops):

“A monument designation, with its unilateral implementation and opaque process, is the exact opposite of the fisheries management process in which we participate. Public areas and public resources should be managed in an open and transparent manner, not an imperial stroke of the pen.”

Jon Williams, New England Red Crab Harvesters’ Association:

“The red crab fishing business I’ve been operating for twenty years is active in some of the areas under the proposal. Not only has our fishery complied with every regulation, but we have expended significant resources and time to ensure the health of the resource we fish. These efforts to both understand and minimize our impact on the environment have been so successful that after forty years of red crab fishing, our fishing grounds are described as ‘pristine’ by the same environmental groups who seek the monument designation. If these habitats are still ‘pristine’ after forty years of fishing, how can a serious argument be made that the area is in imminent danger and in need of immediate, unilateral protection by presidential fiat?”

Greg DiDomenico, Garden State Seafood Association:

“The Antiquities Act was perhaps a necessary tool to protect sensitive areas in 1906, but with our increased technological capabilities, knowledge, and an all-encompassing regulatory system, it is an unnecessary and blunt tool for 2016. It is time that the years of on-the-water experience possessed by the commercial fishing industry be acknowledged, especially in the context of this issue.”

Richard P. Ruais, American Bluefin Tuna Association:

“Given that our fishing gear has no negative impact on deep sea coral, a proposed prohibition on the fishing methods we employ would be arbitrary, completely unnecessary and would result in significant negative economic consequences.”

Statements from more NCFC members on their opposition to an Atlantic Marine Monument are available here.