Saving Seafood

Only 366 Endangered Right Whales Are Alive: New NOAA Report

October 29, 2020 — The population of extremely endangered North Atlantic right whales has fallen even further in the last year, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said Monday.

The agency said that there were only 366 of the whales as of January 2019, down from 412 in January of 2018, The Associated Press reported. But their numbers are likely even lower than that. NOAA Fisheries has documented the deaths or likely fatal injuries of a further 15 whales since, the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) pointed out.

“These population estimates are devastating,” CLF senior attorney Erica Fuller said in response to the news. “The outlook is grim if we do not act today. We know human activities are decimating this population, what will it take for federal fishery managers to finally take action to protect these magnificent animals?”

Read the full story at EcoWatch

Judge orders new fisheries impact analysis on right whales, decides not to close fishery

September 10, 2020 — United States District Court Judge James Boasberg in Washington, D.C., handed down his remedy Aug. 19 to the National Marine Fisheries Services, which he ruled last spring had violated the Endangered Species Act in licensing the fisheries in the northeastern U.S.

He gave the NMFS until May 31, 2021, to conduct a new biological opinion on the fishing industry’s impacts on the endangered right whale species and measures to decrease whale deaths caused by the industry, vacating the previous biological opinion.

Earlier this year he found that the NMFS had failed to file an incidental take report in 2014 after discovering the vertical lines used in the fishing industry could be responsible for up to three whale deaths a year, which is more than the species can sustain, according to NMFS’ own calculations.

Center for Biological Diversity, Conservation Law Foundation, Defenders of Wildlife and the Humane Society of the United States, the plaintiffs in the case, requested over 5,000 square miles south of Cape Cod, Massachusetts, where large numbers of whales congregate, be closed to vertical line fishing.

Intervenors in the case argued that closing off that area to fishing would place more nets outside its boundaries, creating a situation where lines are closer together, increasing entanglement risks for whales trying to reach the area considered for fishing closure.

The judge decided against the plaintiffs’ request because there is no legal precedent for such an action, he said in his opinion. He decided it would be too detrimental to the New England fishing industry that is already struggling because of the coronavirus.

Read the full story at Village Soup

Judge won’t close offshore lobster area; grants NMFS more time for whale analysis

August 21, 2020 — A federal judge granted the National Marine Fisheries Service a May 31, 2021 deadline to produce new biological opinion on the Northeast lobster fishery and northern right whale, following up on his earlier ruling that the agency had violated the Endangered Species Act with a 2014 opinion.

But in his new decision issued Monday, U.S. District Court Judge James E. Boasberg granted NMFS the nine-month grace period it had requested, rather than a Jan. 31, 2021 deadline sought by environmental groups that had sued the agency.

Boasberg also decided against ordering an immediate halt to the use of vertical lines for lobster gear in an area traversed by right whales south of Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket – a ‘Southern New England Restricted Area,’ about the size of Connecticut, proposed by plaintiffs including the Center for Biological Diversity and Conservation Law Foundation.

In a 31-page memorandum of opinion, the District of Columbia judge laid out his reasoning, and recognized the difficulties NMFS faces in resolving the right whale issues. But he included a stern warning to the agency and to make progress.

Read the full story at National Fisherman

Court Ruling Gives Lobster Industry A Reprieve — And A Deadline

August 21, 2020 — A federal judge has ordered fishery managers to reanalyze the impact of the American lobster industry on endangered North Atlantic right whales, and issue a new rule for protecting the whales by May 31, 2021.

The judge did not, however, ban lobster fishing with vertical buoy lines in a right whale feeding area, as environmental advocates requested.

Part of Cape Cod Bay is already closed to lobster fishing in the late winter and early spring to protect right whales from getting tangled in fishing gear. But environmental groups — The Humane Society of the United States, Defenders of Wildlife, Conservation Law Foundation and the Center for Biological Diversity — wanted an additional area in southern New England closed immediately as well.

U.S. District Court Judge James E. Boasberg, who ruled on the matter this week, said a sudden closure “would disrupt fishermen’s current operations and their near-term plans.”

“The COVID-19 pandemic has gutted the market for lobster, cutting the price in half and pushing fishermen, most of whom are self-employed, to the economic brink,” Boasberg wrote in his ruling.

Read the full story at WBUR

Make ship speed limits mandatory to protect right whales, advocates say

August 11, 2020 — Vessel speed limits must be mandatory offshore when endangered northern right whales are present, because ship strikes are a leading cause of deaths in the whale population now down to only around 400 animals, ocean conservation groups say in an appeal to the U.S. government.

“The unprecedented number of recent deaths and serious injuries warrants the agency acting quickly to ensure that this endangered species receives the protections necessary to reduce the risk of vessel strikes and ensure its continued existence throughout its range,” the groups state in a petition submitted Aug 6 to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross and Chris Oliver, administrator of the National Marine Fisheries Service.

“The time has come for NMFS to follow through on the promises it made in 2008 to expand the ship speed rule based on the best available scientific data to address the urgent crisis the right whale faces,” according to the groups Whale and Dolphin Conservation, Center for Biological Diversity, Conservation Law Foundation, Defenders of Wildlife, Humane Society of the United States and Humane Society Legislative Fund.

“While the species faces a plethora of threats, collisions with marine vessels remains one of the two primary threats inhibiting the species’ recovery and threatening its continued existence,” according to the groups. “Since 2017, just over half of the known or suspected causes of mortality for the species have been attributed to vessel strikes, closely followed by incidental entanglements in fishing gear.”

Read the full story at National Fisherman

Environmental groups sue Trump, saying he can’t open marine monument to fishing

June 18, 2020 — Environmental groups are suing President Trump over a decision to open a national marine monument off the coast of southern New England to commercial fishing, arguing the president’s proclamation violates federal law.

The president announced the decision during a June 5 visit to Maine.

The lawsuit filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., says that under the U.S. Antiquities Act a president can only create protections for national monuments and does not have the right to remove them – only Congress can.

In a statement Wednesday, Bob Vanasse, executive director of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities, a fishing industry advocacy group, noted that the proclamation will still require commercial fishing to be managed under the Magunson-Stevens Act, a federal law governing marine fisheries, and does not modify the monument in any other way.

“(The Conservation Law Foundation) argues that President Trump’s modification of the monument created by President Obama is illegal,” Vanasse said. “But President Obama exercised the power to modify monuments created by his predecessors to expand Pacific marine monuments created by President Bush.

“It would seem that CLF’s position is that it is legal for a president to modify monuments created by a predecessor when CLF agrees with the modification, but illegal when CLF disagrees with the modification.”

Read the full story at the Portland Press Herald

Return of Fishing in Atlantic Marine Monument Spurs Legal Challenge

June 18, 2020 — Two weeks after President Donald Trump opened the door to commercial fishing in scientifically important ocean waters off the coast of Cape Cod, environmentalists shot back Wednesday with a federal complaint.

“From our perspective, President Trump seemed to know, actually, very little about what the purpose of the monument was or what it was trying to accomplish when he signed his proclamation,” Conservation Law Foundation senior counsel Peter Shelley said in a phone call Wednesday.

“We’ve been in there for 40 years,” Jon Williams, owner of the Atlantic Red Crab Company, told Trump. “And so if the environmental groups can deem the place pristine and we’ve been operating in that area for 40 years and they can’t find any evidence where we’ve done any damage, I would say we’ve been pretty good stewards of that 5,000 miles.”

Coinciding with Wednesday’s lawsuit, the New England Fishing Management Council unveiled new steps it has taken to protect fragile corals, specifically by prohibiting the use of bottom-tending commercial fishing gear in areas where corals are common.

“We’ve said from the beginning that fishery management councils are best suited to address the complicated tradeoffs involved in managing fisheries, and we appreciate regaining our control to do so in the monument area,” John Quinn, chairman of the council, said in a statement.

“The monument area will not be ‘wide open to industrial fishing,’” Tom Nies, the council’s executive director, said in a statement.

“The council worked hard to walk that fine line between providing strong habitat and coral protections in the area while balancing the social and economic impacts to the industry,” Nies continued. “We don’t think the recent criticism from the environmental community since the announcement of the second monument proclamation is entirely warranted. Existing fishery management measures provide strong protections for Lydonia and Oceanographer Canyons, and with the coral amendment, we’re preventing commercial fishing from expanding beyond its historical footprint. The council took this step while carefully weighing the associated impacts. We look forward to the implementation our amendment.”

Read the full story at Courthouse News Service

Environmental groups sue Trump administration for allowing commercial fishing in protected waters

June 17, 2020 — Environmental groups filed a federal lawsuit against the Trump administration on Wednesday, challenging its recent decision to allow commercial fishing in nearly 5,000 square miles of protected waters off Cape Cod.

The Boston-based Conservation Law Foundation and other groups said President Trump’s decision to open the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument — the only such protected waters off the East Coast — violated the Antiquities Act, a 1906 law that President Obama used to create the monument in his last year in office.

Fishing groups had lobbied for the change, saying the restrictions had cost the industry millions of dollars. In a meeting with fishermen in Bangor, Trump told them: “This action was deeply unfair to Maine lobstermen. You’ve been treated very badly. They’ve regulated you out of business.”

Critics of Obama’s decision to use the Antiquities Act said the move circumvented federal law established in the 1970s to regulate fisheries.

“President Obama swept aside our public, science-based fishery management process with the stroke of a pen,” said Bob Vanasse, executive director of Saving Seafood, a Washington, D.C.-based group that represents commercial fishermen. “That was a mistake, and whatever anyone thinks about President Trump is irrelevant.”

He also criticized the Conservation Law Foundation for its interpretation of the law.

“The record is clear that the highest political bidder during the Obama years was the environmental community, and that is why they succeeded in including a prohibition against commercial fisheries,” Vanasse said, noting that Obama did not ban recreational fishing in the protected area.

He and others in the fishing industry called Trump’s decision overdue. Before the ban, fishermen estimated that as many as 80 boats had regularly fished the area for lobster, crab, scallops, swordfish, and tuna. Fishermen said the closure has harmed their livelihoods.

Read the full story at The Boston Globe

NCFC Executive Director Bob Vanasse Responds to CLF Lawsuit Over Restoring Commercial Fishing in the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Monument

June 17, 2020 – The following was written by Bob Vanasse, executive director of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities, in response to CLF’s announcement that it is filing suit over a presidential proclamation restoring commercial fishing in the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument:

The creation of an Atlantic Marine monument without appropriate stakeholder consultation has been a centerpiece of the Conservation Law Foundation’s (CLF) political agenda for over five years.

In 2015, a public records request filed by Saving Seafood revealed emails showing that the CLF was working with the Center For American Progress, the Pew Charitable Trusts, Earth Justice, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the National Geographic Society in an attempt to convince President Obama to announce the monument plan at the Our Ocean Conference in Chile in October 2015. In the emails, CLF’s Peter Shelley wrote, “I hope no one is talking about Chile to the outside world. It’s one of the few advantages we may have to know that it could happen sooner rather than later.” The email discussion included Monica Medina, who had served as Principal Deputy Undersecretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere during President Obama’s first term.

In a subsequent interview with E&E News, Mr. Shelley made clear that the effort was aimed at getting the monument proclaimed before the fishing industry could fully engage in the public process. “The time was pretty short to pull it off. We thought there might be an opportunity we could get them to think about these areas for an announcement in conjunction with the Our Ocean Conference,” Mr. Shelley said. “We were trying to keep that quiet because we didn’t want to give the opposition more of an advantage. The more time they had, the more opportunity they would have to lobby, to fight it, to organize against it.”

The inclusion of prohibitions against commercial fishing was controversial throughout the process of creating the monument. A NOAA internal document in 2015 noted that the Atlantic deep-sea red crab and commercial and recreational pelagic fisheries for highly migratory species “have a substantial portion of their landings from within the proposed area.” The same document noted that “any designation within the jurisdiction of the New England or Mid Atlantic Fishery Management Councils, as well as the Secretary of Commerce as delegated to NMFS/HMS Management Division, that restricts fishing activities will be seen as usurping their authorities. These processes are rigorous and provide for significant public input which this process does not.”

Managing commercial fishing sustainably under the Magnuson-Stevens Act is not controversial. CLF falsely states that President Trump “eliminated critical natural resource protections” in the monument. In fact, the Presidential proclamation explicitly states that commercial fishing inside the monument will be managed under Magnuson-Stevens. The proclamation “does not modify the monument in any other respect.”

On the occasion of the 40th Anniversary of Magnuson-Stevens in 2016, CLF praised fisheries management under the Act, stating that Magnuson-Stevens is “the primary reason why the United States can say that it has the most sustainable fisheries in the world,” and “it has traditionally represented a bipartisan effort toward responsible management of our fishery resources, economically and environmentally.”

CLF was correct in noting that fisheries management has traditionally been bipartisan, and opposition to the prohibition of commercial fishing inside the monument was not a partisan issue. The commercial fishing industry is deeply grateful to Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey for the work he did with the Obama White House to ensure that the offshore lobster industry and the red crab industry – the first Atlantic fishery to be certified sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council – received a seven-year moratorium before fishing for those species inside the monument would have been prohibited. It is because of Senator Markey’s efforts that those sustainable fisheries have been preserved. Senator Elizabeth Warren has also been a longtime champion of fisheries management under the successful Magnuson-Stevens Act.

CLF argues that President Trump’s modification of the monument created by President Obama is illegal. But President Obama exercised the power to modify monuments created by his predecessors to expand Pacific marine monuments created by President Bush. It would seem that CLF’s position is that it is legal for a president to modify monuments created by a predecessor when CLF agrees with the modification, but illegal when CLF disagrees with the modification.

CLF President Brad Campbell states that President Trump’s action puts “national monuments on the block for the highest political bidder.” The record is clear that the highest political bidder during the Obama years was the environmental community. That is why environmentalists succeeded in including a prohibition against commercial fisheries in President Obama’s monument proclamation, but not against their friends in recreational fishing. If Mr. Campbell is interested in finding the historical “highest political bidder” on the designation of marine monuments, he should look in his own office.

The environmental community had ample opportunity to create a protected area using the Marine Sanctuaries Act, and they have actively worked with both the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council and the New England Fishery Management Council on actions to protect those areas under the Magnuson-Stevens Act.  But, as NOAA noted, those “processes are rigorous and provide for significant public input.” Instead, they chose the politically expedient route, and used their contacts and clout in the Obama administration to circumvent the scientific and public process. What they are now discovering is that what one president might create with the stroke of a pen, another president might take away.

Lobster fishery violates Endangered Species Act, judge declares

April 13, 2020 — U.S. District Judge James Boasberg filed a 20-page order Thursday, April 9, declaring the American lobster fishery violates the Endangered Species Act.

The federal lawsuit challenged a biological opinion filed by NMFS in 2014 stating that the American lobster fishery “may adversely affect, but is not likely to jeopardize, the continued existence of North Atlantic right whales.”

The judge ruled against NMFS, noting that the agency failed to include an “incidental take statement.” That failure, the judge declared, renders the biological opinion illegal under the Endangered Species Act. The suit — filed by the Center for Biological Diversity, Conservation Law Foundation and several other environmental groups — is similar to the California Dungeness crab lawsuit (led by the Center for Biological Diversity) which also claimed the fishery violated the ESA. The finding there forced the crab fishery to file for an incidental take permit, a process that can take years, and negotiate with the plaintiffs on whether there will be fishing seasons in the interim and what those opening and closing parameters will be.

Read the full story at National Fisherman