Saving Seafood

MARK HELVEY: Protect California’s Drift Gillnet Fishery

August 24, 2018 — WASHINGTON — California’s drift gillnet (DGN) fishery has come under attack in recent months. One of the most prominent media attacks was a July Los Angeles Times editorial “Dead dolphins, whales and sea turtles aren’t acceptable collateral damage for swordfishing,” which irresponsibly called for the shut down of the fishery. Like many similar critiques, it overlooked the ways DGN fishermen have worked to reduce bycatch and the unintended consequences of shutting down the fishery.

It is first important to note that the DGN fishery operates legally subject to all bycatch minimization requirements in federal law. This includes not just the Magnuson-Stevens Act—the primary federal fishing law—but also the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). These statutes are precautionary and conservation-minded, and help make U.S. fisheries some of the most environmentally conscious and best managed in the world.

DGN fishermen have collaborated extensively with NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service over the years to further reduce bycatch. Since 1990, the fishery has operated an observer program to effectively monitor bycatch. It has deployed devices such as acoustic pingers to ward off marine mammals from fishing gear, has established the Pacific Offshore Cetacean Take Reduction Plan to further reduce marine mammal interactions, and has implemented time/area closures to reduce interactions with endangered sea turtles.

These measures have led to significant progress in reducing bycatch. For example, no ESA-listed marine mammals have been observed caught in the DGN fishery since the 2010-2011 fishing season and no listed sea turtles since the 2012-2013 season.

As mentioned in the Times editorial, there is indeed good news from fisheries deploying new, experimental deep-set buoy gear. But it is just that – experimental, and it is still unclear whether it will become economically viable. And while fishermen hope that it does, the volumes produced won’t make a dent in the over 80 percent of the 20,000 metric tons of swordfish consumed annually in the U.S. that comes from foreign fisheries.

Often missing from the discussion of the drift gillnet fishery is that most foreign fisheries are far less regulated and are much more environmentally harmful than any U.S. fishery. Should the U.S. DGN fishery be shut down, it will only further increase our reliance on this imported seafood. All U.S. fishermen abide by the highest levels of environmental oversight relative to their foreign counterparts, meaning that U.S. caught seafood comes at a fraction of the ecosystem impacts occurring abroad.

Californians need to understand this and help protect U.S. fisheries that are striving to do things the right way. California’s DGN fishermen provide seafood consumers with a local source of sustainably-caught, premium quality swordfish. We should thank them by keeping them on the water.

Mark Helvey had a 30-year career with NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) before retiring in 2015.  He served as the last Assistant Regional Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries with the NMFS Southwest Region in Long Beach, representing the agency on fishery conservation and management for highly migratory and coastal pelagic species on the west coast.

 

Environmental forums across Southern California will focus on oil drilling, public lands

August 21, 2018 — Concerned with the prospects of new offshore oil drilling and easing of protections for public lands, environmentalists and community leaders will hold a series of public forums throughout Southern California over the next two weeks.

In addition to expert panels, organizers have invited state and federal legislators to participate in the events, which will include town halls in Newport Beach, Santa Clarita and Irvine.

“At stake are valuable fisheries and a way of life for many coastal communities,” according to a release by organizers. “The events will provide a venue for local community members and experts to discuss how a healthy ocean impacts their lives and how they can work with their elected leaders to protect the coast.”

The Trump administration is pursuing a plan to open new offshore oil leases throughout U.S. waters, including those off the entire California coast. Additionally, environmentalists have become increasingly concerned about federal recreation lands since the administration shrunk several national monuments last year and is considering dialing back some wildlife protections of the Endangered Species Act.

Read the full story at The Daily Breeze

DAVID BERNHARDT: At Interior, we’re ready to bring the Endangered Species Act up to date

August 13, 2018 — A modern vision of conservation is one that uses federalism, public-private partnerships and market-based solutions to achieve sound stewardship. These approaches, combined with sensible regulations and the best available science, will achieve the greatest good in the longest term.

Last month, the Trump administration took this approach to bringing our government’s implementation of the Endangered Species Act into the 21st century. We asked ourselves how we can enhance conservation of our most imperiled wildlife while delivering good government for our citizens. We found room for improvement in the administration of the act.

When Congress created the Endangered Species Act, it built a tiered classification for our most at-risk wildlife, designing different protections for “endangered” and “threatened” species. The act was designed to give endangered species the most stringent protections while affording federal agencies the authority to tailor special rules for lower-risk, threatened species on a case-by-case basis.

It may surprise most Americans, however, that the highest level of protection is often applied, regardless of the classification, through application of a “blanket rule.” The use of this rule by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service automatically elevates protections for threatened species to the same level as those given to endangered species.

But automatically treating the threatened species as endangered places unnecessary regulatory burden on our citizens without additional benefit to the species. The blanket rule reflexively prohibits known habitat management practices, such as selective forest thinning and water management, that might ultimately benefit a threatened species.

Read the full opinion piece at The Washington Post

HAWAII: HPA Sea Turtle Research Program turns 31

August 7, 2018 –Those who love Hawaiian green sea turtles will be pleased to learn that they’re currently doing well and thriving.

Such is the summation of Marc Rice, a marine biologist who, for the past 31 years, has directed the Hawaii Preparatory Academy (HPA) Sea Turtle Research Program, and worked at the school for 47 years.

“Hawaii’s turtles weren’t always doing well; in fact, in the ’70s and early ‘80s you didn’t hear much about them,” he said. “I was here for years before I even realized there were green turtles around because they were pretty much hunted out of existence. You hardly ever saw them.”

The situation began changing for the better in 1978, when the Hawaiian green sea turtle was listed as threatened under the U.S. Endangered Species Act.

The HPA Sea Turtle Research Program was created in 1987 through a collaborative partnership between the school and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA/NMFS). George Balazs, a NOAA senior sea turtle biologist who’s now retired, was the driving force behind the cooperative program.

The program’s first tagging trip took place in October 1987 when Balazs, Rice, David Gulko and 20 students traveled to Kiholo State Park Reserve along the Kohala Coast.

“We were out there for three days, had nets in the water 24 hours a day and caught seven turtles,” Rice recalled.

Read the full story at West Hawaii Today

CHARISE JOHNSON: The newly endangered species of the Trump era is the Endangered Species Act

July 24, 2018 — The Endangered Species Act itself is currently endangered, as a result of predation by lobbyists, conservatives in Congress and President Donald Trump.

Last week, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service announced proposed revisions that would change the way the agencies implement the Endangered Species Act – actions that could lead to the destruction of essential habitat and otherwise preventable species extinctions. And President Trump’s allies in Congress are preparing their own additional attacks on the law, pushing bills in both the House and the Senate that would demolish the scientific foundations of the law.

Speaking to the New York Times, Richard Pombo – a former member of Congress notorious for his hostility to environmental laws who is now paid to lobby for mining interests – says that the Trump administration and Congress are offering “probably the best chance that we have had in 25 years to actually make any substantial changes” in the law.

Read the full opinion piece at NBC News

Trump Administration Proposes Revamping the Endangered Species Act

July 23, 2018 — A decades-old environmental law credited with saving the American bald eagle from extinction would be reworked under a proposal the Trump administration announced Thursday.

Enforcement of the Endangered Species Act, which seeks to prevent plans and animals from becoming extinct, would be changed to make it is easier to remove species from the list of protected ones. The proposal also makes changes that speed the approval process that federal agencies are required to complete before making changes that could harm endangered species, and would weaken protections for critical habitat.

“We are proposing these improvements to produce the best conservation results for the species while reducing the regulatory burden on the American people,” U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Principal Deputy Director Greg Sheehan, said in a statement. “One thing we heard over and over again was that ESA implementation was not consistent and often times very confusing to navigate.”

The effort underscores the ways the Trump administration is moving to change bedrock environmental laws in a manner long sought by industry. Last month the administration began the process of overhauling the National Environmental Policy Act which requires environmental reviews on projects ranging from oil fields to highways that require a federal permit. The Environmental Protection Agency, meanwhile, has used industry guidance documents and policy memos to dial back its oversight of air pollution under the Clean Air Act.

Read the full story from Bloomberg at Yahoo! Finance

Rep. Bishop Statement on Department of the Interior’s Proposed ESA Changes

July 20, 2018 — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources:

Today, House Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah) issued the following statement in response to the Department of the Interior (DOI) releasing three proposed rules to modernize the Endangered Species Act:

“It’s no secret that modernizing the Endangered Species Act is long overdue. DOI’s proposed rules incorporate public input, innovative science and best practices to improve efficiency and certainty for federal agencies and the public. I commend Secretary Zinke and Deputy Secretary Bernhardt for their excellent leadership on this issue and look forward to working with my colleagues to enshrine these actions into law.”

Background:

DOI’s proposed rules focus on Sections four and seven of the Endangered Species Act, and would address improved consultation processes, changes to critical habitat designations, and issues within the criteria for listing and delisting species. They also incorporate public input and best practices to improve reliability, regulatory efficiency, and environmental stewardship.

Interior Department Proposes a Vast Reworking of the Endangered Species Act

July 20, 2018 — The Interior Department on Thursday proposed the most sweeping set of changes in decades to the Endangered Species Act, the law that brought the bald eagle and the Yellowstone grizzly bear back from the edge of extinction but which Republicans say is cumbersome and restricts economic development.

The proposed revisions have far-reaching implications, potentially making it easier for roads, pipelines and other construction projects to gain approvals than under current rules. One change, for instance, would eliminate longstanding language that prohibits considering economic factors when deciding whether or not a species should be protected.

The agency also intends to make it more difficult to shield species like the Atlantic sturgeon that are considered “threatened,” which is the category one level beneath the most serious one, “endangered.”

Battles over endangered species have consumed vast swaths of the West for decades, and confrontations over protections for the spotted owl, the sage grouse and the gray wolf have shaped politics and public debate. While the changes proposed Thursday by the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service wouldn’t be retroactive, they could set the stage for new clashes over offshore drilling and also could help smooth the path for projects like oil and gas drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Read the full story at The New York Times

Senate GOP seeks overhaul of Endangered Species Act

July 3, 2018 — Senate Republicans are embarking on an ambitious effort to overhaul the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

Draft legislation due to be released Monday by Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) would give new powers and responsibilities for state officials to determine how animals and plants should be protected.

The GOP contends that its goal is not to weaken protections, but to take advantage of the experience of state regulators.

“When it comes to the Endangered Species Act, the status quo is not good enough,” Barrasso said in a statement to The Hill in advance of the unveiling. “We must do more than just keep listed species on life support — we need to see them recovered. This draft legislation will increase state and local input and improve transparency in the listing process.”Conservationists, however, say the new bill represents the most significant threat in years to the 44-year-old law, which has been credited with rescuing the bald eagle, gray wolf and grizzly bear from possible extinction.

“It’s a bill which, on a broad basis, rewrites the ESA, with a whole host of consequences — as far as we can tell, almost entirely adverse consequences — for the protection of species,” said Bob Dreher, senior vice president for conservation programs at Defenders of Wildlife.

Dreher and other critics fear the effort would tilt the balance too far toward industries while de-emphasizing the role of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service.

“This bill is all about politics. It’s not about science. It’s especially not about better ways to conserve endangered species,” he continued. “It’s a partisan bill.”

Read the full story at The Hill

Big group of seafood distributors join opposition to Magnuson-Stevens update

June 28, 2018 — Opponents to representative Don Young’s bill to update the Magnuson-Stevens Act are continuing to make noise as the bill waits its turn for a vote on the floor of the US House of Representatives. The latest to sound off: Sea Pact, a coalition of 10 large US and Canadian seafood distributors, including Fortune Fish & Gourmet, in Chicago, Illinois, and Santa Monica Seafood, in Los Angeles, California.

The group called on Congress Tuesday to reject Young’s bill, the Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act, HR 200, saying it “risks the United States’ competitive advantage in the marketplace and weakens the sustainability of our fisheries”. It is urging lawmakers instead to “focus on supporting new market opportunities for sustainable U.S. seafood”.

Sea Pact does not say which particular provisions it takes issue with in the bill. Other opponents, including several advocacy groups, have noted their dislike of the flexibility HR 200 would give regional fishery management councils in following the acceptable catch limits recommended by their scientific advisory panels  and the top statutory authority the bill would give MSA over other laws, including the Endangered Species Act and the National Marine Sanctuaries Act.

Read the full story at Undercurrent News