Saving Seafood

MASSACHUSETTS: Warren, Markey speak on port of New Bedford

March 27, 2017 — Behind closed doors, politicians from around the state discussed how to improve the Port of New Bedford Friday afternoon at Seatrade International.

“We want to make sure the 21st century is just as prosperous and even more so than the 20th and 19th centuries were for New Bedford,” Markey said. “We’re going to work down in Washington every day to advocate for the commercial fisherman of New Bedford.”

Senators Markey and Elizabeth Warren, along with state representatives Bill Strauss, Paul Schmid, Christopher Markey, Robert Koczera and Antonio Cabral joined Mayor Jon Mitchell, City Council President Joe Lopes and Ward 4 Council Dana Rebeiro, discussed policies affecting the port.

The meeting lasted about an hour and according to Ed Anthes-Washburn, the executive director of the Harbor Development Commission, about two-thirds of the discussion revolved around dredging.

“We heard example after example of what it will mean if we could get proper dredging for new businesses, expanded businesses, more opportunities,” Warren said. “That’s what we want to see in New Bedford. That’s what we want to see here in Massachusetts.”

The New Bedford Harbor Development Commission predicts the dredging would create  898 permanent jobs, $65.1 million in wages and $11.5 million in state and local taxes.

“We have a number of docks in the harbor that are on very shallow water,” Mitchell said. “There are businesses that want to pull boats up to those docks but can’t because of the shallow water.”

According to Washburn, who attended the meeting, lawmakers agreed that Phase V dredging would be most beneficial for the port in terms of cost and reward.

Read the full story at The New Bedford Standard-Times

Billionaire heads toward confirmation as Commerce secretary

February 27, 2017 — The Senate is set to vote on Ross’ nomination Monday evening. Ross easily cleared the Senate Commerce Committee and a procedural vote by the full Senate.

Senators also are expected to move forward on Trump’s nomination of Montana Rep. Ryan Zinke to lead the Interior Department. If Zinke clears a procedural vote set for late Monday a final vote on confirmation could occur on Tuesday or Wednesday.

Senators from both political parties were deferential to Ross at his nearly four-hour confirmation hearing, which was much more subdued than the confirmation hearings of other Trump nominees.

Former Commerce secretaries have praised him, including one who served under former President Barack Obama.

“I believe his extensive management experience in the private sector, and his understanding of the challenges faced by workers and businesses alike, will equip him well for the job of leading the Department of Commerce,” said Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., chairman of the Commerce Committee.

At least one Democratic senator opposes Ross.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts criticized Ross’ business ties to Russia and the way he ran a mortgage lender during the housing crisis.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at Seattle P-I

Lawmakers call lobster ban ‘excessive’ in letter to EU

September 29th, 2016 — Sweden’s push to list live American lobsters as an invasive species and ban their import by the full European Union is “an excessive and unscientific response” that jeopardizes its $125 million lobster trade with Massachusetts, according to Rep. Seth Moulton, Sen. Edward J. Markey and the remainder of the state’s congressional delegation.

In a letter sent today to the EU’s directorate-general for the environment that listed Moulton and Markey as the lead signatories, the Bay State delegation picked up where many North American scientists and fisheries regulators have left off in the escalating international trade tiff.

“Isolated reports of individual American lobsters found in European waters do not constitute the invasion of an alien species,” the delegation wrote to Daniel Calleja Crespo. “This possible designation is not merited because, as indicated in the data provided to the (EU) Scientific Forum by the United States and Canada, there is no evidence that American lobster can reproduce in waters as warm as those of coastal Europe.”

They also insist that the initial Swedish risk assessment, which serves as the basis for the Swedish claim, “failed to demonstrate that interbreeding between European and American lobsters produces fertile offspring” and an “outright ban of the importation of live American lobster to the EU is an excessive and unscientific response.”

The import ban, they argued, would dismantle the $200 million trans-Atlantic lobster trade between Canada and the United States with the 28 members of the EU and severely and negatively impact the Massachusetts lobstermen and lobster sellers who annually send about $125 million worth of live American lobsters to the EU.

A link to the letter can be found here 

Read the full story at The Gloucester Times 

Reps. Moulton, Keating, Lynch Lead Delegation to Protect Massachusetts Lobster Industry

May 2, 2016 — The following was released by the office of Congressman Seth Moulton:

WASHINGTON – Today, Congressmen Seth Moulton (D-MA), Stephen Lynch (D-MA), and Bill Keating (D-MA) led an effort to protect the Massachusetts lobster industry in response to the Swedish government’s petition to classify the American lobster as an invasive species. The petition ultimately seeks to ban the import of live American lobsters from the United States to the European Union (EU).

Moulton, Keating, and Lynch were joined by the entire state delegation in sending a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry, Ambassador Michael Froman, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrator, Kathryn Sullivan. The letter notes that the EU’s alien species regulations must offer robust scientific evidence in support of any species ban, and argues that this is not the case for the American lobster. The letter can be viewed here.

“The Sixth District is home to the largest and most active lobster fleet in Massachusetts, and the lobster industry is a critical part of our history and local economy,” said Congressman Seth Moulton. “This effort to ban U.S. exports of American lobster is not based in science. In fact, studies conducted by leading marine scientists refute Sweden’s assertions that American lobster meet the criteria to be banned by the European Union. This ban would not only have a detrimental impact on the livelihoods of hardworking men and women in the lobster industry, but it would also hurt the entire Massachusetts economy. I’m grateful that our entire delegation stands united to ensure our lobster industry continues to thrive, and I am committed to working with my colleagues in Congress and the Administration to advance a collaborative and transparent dialogue on this issue.”

“The lobster industry is as important to our local economy as it is to our history,” said Congressman Bill Keating, who represents Massachusetts’s South Shore, South Coast, and Cape and Islands. “I will continue working with my Massachusetts colleagues to oppose efforts to list the North American lobster as an invasive species, including by working directly with our European counterparts in my role as Ranking Member of the Trade Subcommittee on the Foreign Affairs Committee.”

“I respect Sweden’s commitment to protecting the environment from invasive species, but their proposal to halt imports of North American lobsters is not based on sound scientific reasoning,” said Congressman Stephen F. Lynch. “The evidence they have presented is inconsistent with E.U. standards and I hope the State Department, the United States Trade Representative, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration will continue to work together to advocate for the continued trade of live American lobsters with the E.U. A ban could have serious effects on our hardworking Massachusetts lobstermen and their families.”

“From the decks of Massachusetts lobster boats to the plates of European diners, we need to ensure American lobster continues to benefit families and businesses on both side of the Atlantic,” said Senator Edward J. Markey. “The current effort by Swedish authorities to reclassify American lobsters an invasive species and ban their importation into the European Union would undermine a centuries-old relationship and have enormously negative impacts on the Massachusetts lobster industry. Any decision by the EU Commission on the American lobster should be informed by scientific principles and current standards. American lobster is one of our most delectable exports, and we should ensure that Europeans can continue to enjoy it for years to come.”

“Lobsters are a big part of the Massachusetts economy, and I’m very concerned about any attempt to block imports of American lobsters. A ban on live lobster imports is not in line with the EU’s standards or with the research conducted by New England’s leading marine scientists on how best to protect the environment,” Senator Elizabeth Warren said. “I’ll keep working with the congressional delegation to support our local lobstermen and to keep the markets open for Massachusetts’ lobsters.”

“The European Union markets are extremely important to our commercial Lobstermen here in the Commonwealth,” said Beth Casoni, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Lobstermen’s Association. “We are appreciative and encouraged by the efforts being put forth by Congressmen Moulton, Keating, Lynch, and the entire Massachusetts Delegation to bring a resolve to this matter.”

MASSACHUSETTS: Hull aims at luring NOAA fisheries center from Woods Hole

April 18, 2016 — HULL, Mass. — Few people around the state paid much attention recently, when officials with the federal National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said they may consider moving the agency’s Northeast Fisheries Science Center from its original site at Woods Hole.

But elected officials in Hull took notice – and they’ve gone into action to lure the research facility and its 275 employees to their town.

“It would be a real coup,” Selectmen Chairman John Brannan said. “We have the water, we have the marine life right here. The bay and the beach are within a half mile of each other. There’s a lot of opportunity for them to do what they need to do.”

Brannan and Hull Redevelopment Authority member Robert DeCoste said the boards have already contacted Congress members and others in Washington, where the ultimate decision will be made – among them, Congressman Stephen Lynch – whose 8th District includes Hull – and Sen. Elizabeth Warren. Lynch and Warren’s spokesmen couldn’t be reached for comment.

Read the full story at the Patriot Ledger 

FISHY BUSINESS: Lack of fairness, parity at play in at-sea monitors

January 11, 2016 — The New England coast has been synonymous with fishing for over 400 years. Throughout those years, fishing as a occupation has been known for its dangers, independence and ingenuity to overcome challenges. These traits remain, especially the danger.

According to the U.S. Department of Labor, New England ground fishermen are 37 times more likely to die on the job than a police officer. When compared to the average American worker, the New England ground fisherman is 171 times more likely to be killed on the job.

It is sadly ironic that the U.S. government is likely to put the final nail in the coffin of the industry. As this column outlined in October, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s insistence that ground fishermen fund the at-sea monitoring program is likely to put many of the fishing small businesses out of business. According to NOAA’s own report, the $710 per-day fee that the fishermen would need to fund to pay for the program will make 59 percent of the fishing enterprises unprofitable. So the men and women who literally risk life and limb to bring us fresh, local, sustainable seafood not only have the physical risks associated with their profession, but also the business risk of being driven out of business by NOAA’s unlawful regulation.

Read the full story from the Scituate Mariner

DAVID GOETHEL: Fishermen on the Hook to Pay for Their Own Regulators

December 28, 2015 — The following is a excerpt from an opinion piece published today in The Wall Street Journal. Mr. Goethel, a groundfish fisherman out of Hampton, N.H., writes that he is suing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration “to stop it from sinking New England’s groundfish industry for good.” He is represented by Cause of Action, a government watchdog group based in Washington, D.C.

Mr. Goethel writes: “The courts are the industry’s last chance. This month, along with the Northeast Fishery Sector 13, I filed a federal lawsuit- Goethel v. Pritzker. Our claim: Neither NOAA nor its subsidiary, the National Marine Fisheries Service, has the authority to charge groundfishermen for at-sea monitors. Even if Congress had granted this authority, they would have had to follow the process called for in the Administrative Procedure Act and other statutes-which they haven’t.  A bipartisan group of senators, including Susan Collins (R., Maine) and Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.), highlighted this troubling fact in April. Writing to the assistant administrator of NOAA Fisheries, they stated NOAA ‘has chosen an interpretation of the FY15 report language that is inconsistent with congressional intent, and consequently, that very high [at-sea monitoring] costs will soon unreasonably burden already struggling members of the fishing industry in the Northeast.'”

Few professions are as significant to New England’s economy and history as fishing. Yet the ranks of groundfish fishermen have dwindled so much that we’re now an endangered species. The causes are many-but the one now threatening us with extinction is the federal government. Along with one other plaintiff, I’m suing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to stop it from sinking New England’s groundfish industry for good.

Groundfish include cod, haddock and 11 other common bottom-dwelling species. After years of dwindling stocks, in 2012 the U.S. Department of Commerce issued a disaster declaration for groundfish territory off the coast of New England. Over the past four years my cod quota-my bread and butter-plummeted from 60,000 pounds to 3,700 this year. I caught my limit in four days in June.

Shifting ocean patterns have certainly contributed to our struggles, but regulators are a separate anchor altogether. Groundfish fishermen are organized into a patchwork of 15 sectors, i.e., government-designed cooperative organizations. We operate under at least seven overlapping federal and state entities and programs, all of which have their own regulatory nets.

As if warrantless searches from the Coast Guard, catch inspections upon returning to port, and satellite tracking weren’t enough, at-sea monitors also accompany us on roughly one in five randomly selected fishing trips. They are hired by three for-profit companies-one of which is led by the former NOAA official who designed the monitor program. They follow us around and take notes on everything we do. That includes measuring our nets, measuring fish we bring in and those we throw back, and recording our expenses down to how much we spent on lunch.

The program is unnecessary given the heavy regulation that exists. And last month NOAA informed us that, beginning on Jan. 1, groundfish fishermen must pay an estimated $710 a day when a monitor is present. That fee covers the monitors’ training, mileage to and from the fisherman’s boat, supervisor salaries, data processes and all other administrative costs. It also covers a set profit margin for the three companies providing the monitors. What those margins are, neither NOAA nor the companies have disclosed.

Read the full opinion piece at The Wall Street Journal

Mass. Senators and Congressmen Call on Obama Administration for More Public Input on Marine Monuments

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) — October 13, 2015 — Both Massachusetts Senators and three Massachusetts Congressmen have written to President Obama calling on him to further engage regional industry stakeholders before advancing any plans to use his Executive Authority to designate a marine National Monument off the coast of New England. The Monument would potentially include Cashes Ledge in the Gulf of Maine and several of the New England Canyons and Seamounts.

In the letter, Sens. Warren and Markey, and Reps. Lynch, Keating, and Moulton urge the President to “include additional opportunities for our Massachusetts constituents to express their views on the potential designations in the context of ongoing conservation efforts,” as well as “provide more information on the potential designations, especially the objectives, geographic scope, and possible limits to activities, to help inform these additional discussions.” To date there has only been one opportunity for public input, a “town hall” meeting held last month in Providence, Rhode Island.

Their letter also notes that many of the areas under consideration for a monument designation already enjoy substantial protections. Specifically, the New England Fishery Management Council “has had in place protections for Cashes Ledge for more than a decade,” and “is currently considering management actions to protect Deep Sea corals in the region.”

The text of the letter is reproduced below:

Dear Mr. President:

For centuries, the ocean has been critical to the economy and culture of Massachusetts. As Members of Congress representing Massachusetts, we are working to ensure our coastal communities continue to thrive in the 21st century. A healthy ocean is critical for healthy coastal economies. The ocean economy of Massachusetts is worth more than $6 billion, according to the most recent economic data available. Given the unprecedented challenges our fishing industry, and the shore-side businesses that depend on it, have faced in recent years, we are acutely aware of the need for collaboration with our communities, the fishing industry, and other businesses that rely on the ocean and its resources.

We understand you are considering using your authority to make national marine monument designations of a number of submarine habitats–five coral canyons, four submarine seamounts, and an underwater mountain range known as Cashes Ledge–in the New England region of the Atlantic Ocean.

As the Chairman of the New England Fisheries Management Council discussed in his statement at NOAA’ s September 15111 public listening session in Rhode Island, the Council has long recognized the unique habitats of the deep canyons, seamounts and Cashes Ledge. The Council has had in place protections for Cashes Ledge for more than a decade and ultimately supported the continuation of protections for it in the Essential Fish Habitat amendment they adopted earlier this year. The Council is also currently considering management actions to protect Deep Sea corals in the region. Stakeholders not represented on the Council also conveyed their recognition of the conservation values of these areas.

While you have clear authority under the Antiquities Act to designate national monuments, we ask that you engage stakeholders further before making a final decision. We ask you to build on last month’s listening session in Rhode Island by expanding your stakeholder engagement efforts to include additional opportunities for our Massachusetts constituents to express their views on the potential designations in the context of ongoing conservation efforts. We also ask that you provide more information on the potential designations, especially the objectives, geographic scope, and possible limits to activities, to help inform these additional discussions.

Thank you for your attention to these requests. We look forward to further discussions with you and your administration about these designations and other actions important to support the economies of our Massachusetts’s coastal communities.

Sincerely,

Edward J. Markey

United States Senator

Elizabeth Warren

United States Senator

Stephen Lynch

Member of Congress

William Keating

Member of Congress

Seth Moulton

Member of Congress

Read the letter here

 

Kerry: Obama looking to senators to make Atlantic monument happen

October 8, 2015 — Secretary of State John Kerry, speaking Tuesday from Chile, did nothing to tamp down the flames over a conservationist-led movement for President Obama to use executive decree to create a marine sanctuary or national monument off the coast of New England.

Speaking at the Our Oceans Conference in Valparaiso, Chile, Kerry followed a reference to the newly created sanctuaries off the coast of Maryland and along the Great Lakes coast of Wisconsin, by saying “We also have plans in the works which we are pursuing for still another significant one in the Atlantic, where we don’t have the kind of presence that we want and should.”

Kerry added that the Obama administration is working with senators “engaged in that particular area in order to make that happen.”

That seemed to toss the ball squarely back into the court of, among other New England senators, Elizabeth Warren and Edward J. Markey, both of whom have been silent on the issue.

Meanwhile, concerned by what it regards as a lack of transparency and undue influence from conservationists, a House committee on Wednesday sought more answers from the Obama administration on potential plans to create a national marine monument off the coast of New England that would be fully off limits to fishing or sea-bed harvesting.

In a letter to officials at NOAA and the White House’s Council on Environmental Quality, members of the Committee on Natural Resources, said witness testimony at last week’s oversight hearing on marine national monuments showed “the public input process surrounding the designation or expansion of national marine monuments has been woefully inadequate or even non-existent.”

The letter also pointedly questioned the relationship between the Obama administration and the phalanx of conservationist groups urging the president to use the Antiquities Act to create national marine monument in the vicinity of Cashes Ledge and Georges Bank.

The letter referenced a chain of emails — first obtained and reported by the Saving Seafood website — that committee members regard as raising “serious questions regarding the Administration’s plans for a new marine monument designation and the potential involvement of a number of outside interests.”

Read the full story at the Gloucester Daily Times

 

 

CARLOS RAPHAEL: White House should heed call on at-sea monitors

September 10, 2015 — In a show of bipartisan cooperation that’s all too rare in today’s politics, Massachusetts’ Republican governor and all-Democratic congressional delegation united late last month to call upon the Obama administration to reverse a particularly egregious federal policy: the current plan by NOAA to require the fishing industry to pay the full cost for at-sea monitors for the groundfish fishery. Fishermen will now be required to hire monitors from an approved short list of for-profit companies. This policy will impose a significant burden on area fishermen, and poses a threat to the future of a fishery that is already reeling from a string of onerous federal regulations.

Thanks goes to Gov. Charlie Baker, Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey, and all nine of our Massachusetts representatives in Congress for giving voice to what fishermen have been saying for years: Forcing fishermen to pay for the observers who monitor their catch will be a financially disastrous outcome for the fishery. As their joint letter notes, ther National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s own analysis of shifting the cost of monitors onto the industry finds that 60 percent of the fleet would be operating at a loss if required to pay for monitoring. In just the first year, the program would cost fishermen an estimated $2.64 million.

Yet NOAA does not seem to fully realize how seriously this policy puts the fishery at risk. The $2.64 million that NOAA expects the fishery to pay in monitoring costs is $2.64 million that fishermen simply don’t have. The fishery still has not recovered from years of declining quotas and a federally declared economic disaster in 2012. Imposing another unfunded mandate on the fishery will force many remaining fishermen to exit the industry altogether.

Read the full story at the New Bedford Standard-Times