Saving Seafood

US representatives introduce bipartisan bill to undo Trump’s ESA rollback

July 29, 2026 — A pair of U.S. lawmakers has introduced a bill that would reverse the federal government’s decision to roll back the definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to exclude habitat destruction.

“Congress enacted the Endangered Species Act to prevent extinction – not to document it after the damage has already been done,” U.S. Representative Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pennsylvania) said in a release. “For more than 50 years, our nation’s protections have reflected a basic legal, scientific, and commonsense truth: When habitat destruction actually kills or injures protected wildlife, that destruction is harm. The administration’s rule would erase that longstanding safeguard through regulatory action and leave vulnerable species exposed at the precise moment the law is intended to protect them.”

Read the full article at SeafoodSource

Environmental groups sue government to stop a big change to the Endangered Species Act

July 15, 2026 — By altering the interpretation of a single word in the Endangered Species Act, the Trump administration has made what could be a sweeping change to how wildlife is protected in the United States.

That word is “harm.” For more than 50 years, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service defined harm to refer to anything that injures or kills a protected organism, including “significant habitat modification or degradation” that might impact a species’ ability to feed, reproduce or seek shelter.

But now, the federal government has officially rescinded that definition — a move that is already being challenged in court.

“This action restores common sense, respects private property, provides much-needed certainty for landowners and follows the statute Congress actually passed,” Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum said in a statement Friday, when the change was announced.

“The final rule will restore the definition of ‘harm’ to its original intent as written under the ESA, and will maintain protections for endangered species while reducing unnecessary or duplicative permitting requirements, cutting compliance costs, and eliminating confusion for Americans,” a representative for NOAA Fisheries said in an emailed statement Tuesday.

But environmental groups worry the rule change, which goes into effect on September 14, could destroy the wild places that endangered species depend on, undermining the protections that have helped sustain them.

Shortly after the new rule was published in the federal register Tuesday, the law firm Earthjustice, alongside more than half a dozen other environmental groups, filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Seattle against the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries (also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service).

Kristen Boyles, an attorney with the group, told NPR that they’re contesting the change on various levels. “The agencies haven’t explained themselves adequately,” she says. “Making this kind of dramatic change doesn’t make any legal sense because it goes against the fundamental purpose and spirit of the statute itself. All of those things make it an unreasoned and unreasonable decision.”

Read the full article at NPR

 

Scientists worry that the Chesapeake’s natural shoreline is turning into a wall

December 26, 2015 — On the banks of the Potomac River, construction cranes that look like metal dinosaurs tower over Southwest Washington. They swivel in all directions, delivering concrete and other heavy material to workers building a large development behind a steel-and-concrete wall that holds back the water.

Within two years, the Wharf will begin emerging as a playground of trendy apartments, shops and entertainment venues. But below the river’s surface, animals that depend on vegetation in the water may continue to struggle, marine scientists say.

The Wharf is part of the great wall of the Chesapeake Bay. Because of development along the bay and its rivers, vast swaths of soft shorelines have been turned into stone. The spread of what scientists call “the armored shore” is depriving young fish, crabs and other organisms of food and shelter. And it is yet another reason why life in the bay is disappearing, according to new research funded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Houses, offices, bike paths, marinas — and walls built to protect them from erosion and rising sea levels — are replacing marshy shores, uprooting plants that young fish, crabs and other organisms use for food.

Read the full story at The Washington Post

 

NOAA announces $4 million in funding to build coastal resilience

December 1, 2015 — The following was released by NOAA Fisheries:

As part of its efforts to provide communities and businesses with products, tools, services, and funding to better address weather- and climate-related threats, today NOAA announced $4 million in recommended funding for six habitat restoration projects across the United States.

The projects recommended for funding, under NOAA’s 2015 Coastal Ecosystem Resiliency Grants Program, focus on dam removal in New England, creation of living shorelines in North Carolina, and reconnection of rivers to floodplains and flood protection in Washington, Florida, Massachusetts and California.

“Funding these innovative habitat restoration projects supports our mission of fostering resilient coastal communities and sustainable marine resources, and that’s a priority for us,” said Eileen Sobeck, assistant NOAA administrator for fisheries. “These on-the-ground restoration projects, along with the other restoration projects we support, will enhance ecosystem resilience against extreme weather and changing environmental conditions, provide habitat to support sustainable fisheries, and help recover protected species.”

Habitat restoration experts from around the country selected these projects based on rigorous reviews and a highly competitive process. Recommended projects have been approved by their state’s Governor’s offices. At least $2 million in the federal grants will be matched by applicants, and the projects must begin within 12 months of funding.

NOAA is taking a multifaceted approach to building coastal resilience through two grant programs. NOAA Fisheries’ Coastal Ecosystem Resiliency Grants program is dedicated to the development of healthy and sustainable coastal ecosystems through habitat restoration. A complementary NOAA National Ocean Service grant program, the Regional Coastal Resilience Grants, focuses on regional-scale projects that enhance the resilience of coastal communities and economies to effects of extreme weather, climate hazards, and changing ocean conditions. Activities may include improving coastal risk assessment and communication, promoting collaborative approaches to resilience planning, and better informing science based decision making.

The National Ocean Service plans to announce the results of that grant competition in early 2016.

Application approval and funding is not yet final. Divisions of NOAA and the Department of Commerce must still give final approval for the projects. 

Are “Strongly Protected” MPAs the Future of Ocean Conservation?

November 19, 205 — A new paper in science by Jane Lubchenco and Kirsten Grorud-Colvert discusses the recent progress and advocates for creating and enforcing “strongly protected” marine protected areas (MPAs). For the purposes of this paper, strongly protected MPAs are those that restrict all commercial activity and allow only light recreational or subsistence fishing. Today only 3.5% of the ocean is protected but only 1.6% is strongly protected. The 10% protection goal for coastal marine areas by 2020 decided recently at the Convention on Biological Diversity is too loosely defined and should be specific to strongly protected MPAs or marine reserves. However it should be noted that significant progress has been made in establishing more strongly protected MPAs in the past decade, which, “reflects increasingly strong scientific evidence about the social, economic and environmental benefits of full protection.”

The authors highlight seven key findings suggesting that such MPAs are indeed needed in a greater percentage of global oceans. Successful MPA programs must be integrated across political boundaries but also with the ecosystems they assist – an ecosystem-based management approach is essential. Engaging users almost always improves outcomes. MPAs may improve resilience to future effects of climate change, but there is no question that, “Full protection works,” such that primary ecological goals are almost always met with strongly protected MPAs.

In conclusion, six political recommendations are outlined. An integrated approach is equally important in the political balance for successful MPAs – other management schemes must be considered and dynamic planning is most effective in preparation for changing ecological systems. There is no one-size-fits-all method for MPAs. Top-down or bottom-up approaches have been successful and to determine the right strategy stakeholders should always be involved in the process. Perhaps most importantly, user incentives need to be changed in order to alleviate the economic trauma of short-term losers.

Read the full story at CFOOD

 

 

Fishways Connect Habitats and Support Coastal Communities

October 6, 2015 — The following was released by NOAA Fisheries:

By Sean McDermott, Greater Atlantic Region, Habitat Conservation Division

Have you ever seen a fish ladder or a fish lift? Do you know how one works? For many people the answer to both is “no.” If you live along the coast or on a river, there may even be a fish ladder or lift near you. Why do fish need these devices?

Migratory fish such as sea lamprey, rainbow smelt, American shad, alewife and blueback herring live and grow in the ocean and return to rivers to spawn. They arrive in coastal rivers every spring, with some rivers seeing millions of fish. After spawning, they return to the sea. Then, in the fall, millions of young fish make their way from river to sea. These fish become prey, or bait fish, supporting popular commercial and recreational fisheries. Stripers, Atlantic cod, and bluefish, to name a few, rely on these migratory fish for food. In addition, marine mammals also prey on these fish.

Fish Versus Dams: A Centuries-Old Battle

Harvest of sea-run migratory fish once provided an important food source for Native Americans and colonial settlers. Rivers also provided travel routes, and hydro-mechanical power for development of agricultural and industrial technology. As technology developed, the construction of dams for navigation and hydro-mechanical power spread, blocking the migration of those sea-run fish. The conflict between dam-building industrialists and commercial fishers led to the “Shad Wars” from 1780 to the late 1800s, with warring parties shooting guns and cannons at each other and destroying weirs and dams, all in the pursuit of the best fishing spots.

In the end, dams rose and migratory fish populations fell, taking with them the economic and cultural traditions they once supported. Populations of several species are now at all-time lows. Three species (Atlantic salmon, Atlantic sturgeon, and shortnose sturgeon) are listed under the Endangered Species Act, and four others (rainbow smelt, alewife, blueback herring, and American eel) are either species of concern or have been petitioned for listing under the Act.

Read the rest of the story on our website.

Read more stories from our Habitat Conservation Division.

Questions? Contact Jennifer Goebel, Regional Office, at 978-281-6175 or Jennifer.Goebel@noaa.gov.

An Alaskan steeppass is typically designed for small dams. The ability to reduce energy within the chute allows the steeppass to be built at a higher angle. Photo credit: Sean McDermott, NOAA.