Saving Seafood

NOAA Fisheries weighing ESA protection for Chinook salmon

July 1, 2025 — The National Marine Fisheries Service, or NOAA Fisheries, will determine whether spring-run Chinook salmon in the Pacific Northwest warrant protection under the Endangered Species Act beginning in the fall.

Under a stipulated settlement agreement filed June 26 in U.S. District Court’s Portland division, the agency has until Nov. 3 to determine whether listing Oregon and California coastal salmon as threatened or endangered is warranted, and Jan. 2 for Washington coastal salmon.

“We are unable to comment on matters of litigation,” NOAA Fisheries spokesman James Miller told the Capital Press.

Read the full article at Capital Press

US court sets deadline for NOAA to make ESA decisions on Chinook salmon

July 1, 2025 — Following a lawsuit filed by a coalition of conservation groups, a U.S. district court has set deadlines for NOAA Fisheries to determine whether some Chinook salmon runs in the Pacific Northwest should be protected by the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

NOAA Fisheries must now make a decision on Oregon Coast and Southern Oregon/Northern California coastal Chinook by 3 November 2025 and on Washington coast spring-run Chinook by 2 January 2026.

Read the full article at SeafoodSource

Gay Head Tribe Sues Over Offshore Wind Farm

June 3, 2025 — The Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) joined a lawsuit last week that is attempting to nullify the approvals of a large offshore wind energy project off the Vineyard’s shores.

The tribe, along with several Nantucket residents, fishermen groups and the ACK for Whales nonprofit, filed the suit in federal district court in Washington, D.C., claiming that several federal government agencies did not take enough into consideration when they greenlit the New England 1 and 2 projects.

The tribe and other plaintiffs argue that the approvals violate the Endangered Species Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act and other laws around historic preservation.

“Like all the other plaintiffs, we as individual tribal members and our tribe as a whole are being harmed by these giant wind farms, making an industrial park out of our waters,” said Cheryl Andrews-Maltais, the tribal council chairwoman. “However unlike the other plaintiffs, the negative impacts to us go back as far as time immemorial and as deep as to who we are as Aquinnah Wampanoag people; harming our culture, traditions and spirituality, which connects us to the lands, waters, sky and all living things. Since individually we weren’t being listened to, we hope that maybe now with this lawsuit our collective voices will be heard.”

Read the full article at the Vineyard Gazette

Seafood Producers Cooperative response to WFC lawsuit

May 22, 2025 — On behalf of the nearly 400 members of Seafood Producers Cooperative, who are very dependent on the wild chinook fishery for a large part of their livelihoods, and as such, are very supportive of conservation efforts regarding Chinook, I would like to respond to the recent news of another attempt by the Wild Fish Conservancy (WFC), in their typical fashion of accusations and demands via litigation, to sue the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for not listing Alaska Wild King Salmon stocks under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), which the WFC, in their opinion, feels is necessary.

Alaska possesses the largest coastline of all other states combined, over 33 thousand miles, with 19,000 rivers and streams that salmon spawn in. To undertake a scientific study that identifies the Chinook returns to these spawning areas is a huge task, and to complete this with any degree of accuracy could take years. With NOAA currently facing major budget reductions, it is likely that NMFS will be even more challenged in their ability to conduct the studies to determine whether Chinook ESA listing is warranted or not, in a time frame that satisfies the WFC.

Read the full article at the National Fisherman

Greens sue NOAA over delayed ESA decision on Alaska chinook salmon

May 21, 2025 — Environmentalists are suing NOAA for failing to issue an Endangered Species Act listing decision for Gulf of Alaska chinook salmon within one year of receiving a petition to protect the species.

In a filing before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Wild Fish Conservancy says NOAA’s listing decision delay means Alaskan chinook salmon “are more likely to continue to decline toward extinction.”

“The Endangered Species Act sets clear deadlines … to evaluate the risk of extinction and trigger action while recovery is still possible,” Emma Helverson, executive director of Wild Fish Conservancy, said in a statement. “By ignoring those deadlines, NOAA isn’t just breaking the law — it’s perpetuating the collapse of Alaskan chinook and threatening the ecosystems and communities that depend on them.”

Read the full article at E&E News

ALASKA: Alaska fishing groups denounce ongoing effort to list Chinook salmon under ESA

May 19, 2025 — Alaska’s commercial fishing sector is up in arms again over ongoing efforts to have the state’s Chinook salmon listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), a determination that could have massive impacts for the state’s fisheries.

Last year, Wild Fish Conservancy, a conservation group based out of Duvall, Washington, U.S.A., petitioned NOAA to list Alaskan Chinook salmon under the ESA, arguing that the once-abundant species had suffered chronic declines. An initial review by the agency found that ESA protections may be warranted; however, the government has yet to complete its review, completely missing its 12-month deadline for issuing a determination.

Read the full article at SeafoodSource

Gulf of Maine may be impacted by Trump’s offshore oil and gas drilling expansion

May 8, 2025 — As part of the Trump’s administration’s effort to expand fossil fuel production in the United States, the Department of the Interior announced recently that it would accelerate the permitting process for a range of energy sources and seek new oil and gas lease sales in offshore waters, including in the Gulf of Maine.

Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum said the permitting changes — which speed up review under the National Environmental Policy and Endangered Species Acts, among others — would cut what is often a multi-year review process down to several weeks.

Environmental groups and Maine lawmakers decried the moves while oil and gas industry representatives celebrated them. Days later, a group of New England Senators, including Sens. Susan Collins and Angus King, introduced legislation to ban offshore drilling in waters throughout New England.

“The waters off Maine’s coast provide a healthy ecosystem for our fisheries and are an integral part of our tourism industry, supporting thousands of jobs and generating billions of dollars in revenue each year,” said Collins in a statement. “Offshore drilling along the coast could impact Mainers of all walks of life for generations.”

Read the full story at the Boston Globe

Trump’s plan to merge ESA offices could be a hard sell

May 7, 2025 — Businessman Howard Lutnick provided a seemingly straightforward answer when a Democratic senator asked him earlier this year whether he was considering moving NOAA Fisheries out of NOAA.

“No,” Lutnick said.

Strictly speaking, Lutnick’s written answer to a question posed by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) still holds up. Since his confirmation as Commerce secretary, Lutnick has not proposed a wholesale relocation of NOAA Fisheries.

But as part of its new fiscal 2026 budget proposal, the Trump administration revived a proposal to move to the Interior Department the NOAA Fisheries office that handles Endangered Species Act and Marine Mammal Protection Act issues.

The partial merger has been floated before, but it’s never gone very far. If the Trump administration is serious about pursuing the idea now, it will confront entrenched bureaucracies, congressional turf conflicts and a lot of very serious questions, former officials and advocacy organization leaders predict.

“It seems consolidating ESA functions would make sense to ensure consistent application of the law,” said Greg Sheehan, former FWS deputy director in the first Trump administration.

Read the full story at E&E News

US proposes looser interpretation of law that protects threatened species

April 17, 2025 — The Trump administration on Wednesday proposed a major change to how threatened species are considered in agency actions by removing regulatory language that seeks to prevent their habitats from being degraded.

The move was aligned with President Donald Trump’s pledge to unwind what he says are burdensome federal regulations for businesses.

The Endangered Species Act is a key regulatory consideration for agencies when considering whether to grant permits for oil and gas, mining, electric transmission and other operations on federal lands and water. Under federal law, agencies are required to evaluate the environmental impact of proposed industry operations that could threaten endangered species.

In a regulatory notice, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service, divisions of the Departments of Interior and Commerce, proposed to rescind the definition of “harm” included in their ESA regulations.

Read the full story at Reuters

Court says NOAA must explain lack of protective measures for corals

March 10, 2025 — A federal judge has ordered NOAA to explain why it declined to adopt regulations to protect 20 coral species designated in 2014 as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.

In a 42-page decision, Judge Micah W.J. Smith of the District Court of Hawaii said NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service, failed to provide adequate explanation for denying a 2020 petition from the Center for Biological Diversity to impose protective measures for the species that live Florida, the Caribbean, and the Indo-Pacific region and are threatened by the impacts of climate change.

“Even under [a] highly deferential standard of review, two facets of NMFS’ denial letter fall short,” Smith wrote. “NMFS offered no reasoned explanation for declining to protect the threatened coral species from their gravest threat, climate change. And for one set of the threatened species, the Caribbean corals, NMFS offered no reasoned explanation for declining to adopt regulations addressing localized threats.”

Read the full article at E&E News