Saving Seafood

NEW JERSEY: LoBiondo joins bipartisan group opposing Atlantic Ocean seismic testing

December 10, 2018 — U.S. Rep. Frank LoBiondo has joined 92 other House members from both parties in opposing the Trump administration’s decision to allow seismic airgun blasting in the Atlantic Ocean.

Critics say the constant barrage of compressed air blasts used to find gas and oil deposits under the sea floor harms marine mammals and other sea life.

LoBiondo, R-2nd, said Friday he had signed a letter sent to Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, asking them not to issue final permits.

“Seismic testing is a prelude to drilling for oil and natural gas,” said LoBiondo, a longtime foe of drilling in the Atlantic.

Read the full story at The Press of Atlantic City

President Trump’s Monument Rightsizing: Myth vs. Fact

December 4, 2017 — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop:

Panic is gripping the Left. The President of the United States apparently has the audacity to enforce the Antiquities Act as it is written: he dares to confine monuments “to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected.”

President Trump has rightsized Bears Ears (BENM) and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments, and now special interest groups will again attempt to lie, distort and, misrepresent their way to another ill-gotten political victory at the expense of local communities.

Here’s what they’ll say, and here’s why they’re wrong.

MYTH:  The President’s actions are illegal.

  • FACT: False. Propagators of this particular myth put themselves in the absurd position of claiming that one unilateral presidential action can bind every successor in perpetuity. If this seems more reminiscent of an autocracy than a constitutional democracy responsive to the demands of the people, that’s because it is. Not only canpresidents scale back monuments, they have done so on at least 18 other occasions. Two examples: President Taft reduced his own monument by 89% and Woodrow Wilson shrank Teddy Roosevelt’s by 50%.

MYTH: The President’s actions are unpopular.

  • FACT: Mischaracterization. Unpopular with whom? While many people, separated from the consequences, may support the monuments, the affected communities have been staunchly opposed to excessively large designations. For example in BENM, the San Juan County Commission, the state legislature, the local chapter of the Navajo Nation, the Governor, and every member of the state’s congressional delegation fought the original designation tooth and nail.

MYTH: The President’s actions represent another broken promise to tribes.

  • FACT: Wrong. It’s important to note that tribal support for the monument was not unanimous. Regardless, the original BENM proclamation did not bestow legal co-management, nor did it ever have the authority to do so. The council created by Obama’s designation had only an advisory role and no official decision-making power. Congress will act to provide legally enforceable tribal co-management.

MYTH: The President’s actions are an attack on our country’s treasured national parks.

  • FACT: Not true. Attempts to blur the distinctions between national monuments and national parks are fear-mongering lies. No national parks were under review and no national parks were reduced. National monuments and parks are unrelated classifications.

MYTH: The President’s actions will hurt local economies.

  • FACT: Incorrect. Most monuments, which are created without congressional consultation, lack the infrastructure to support public access and a robust tourism economy, while simultaneously stifling traditional economic uses. The Grand Staircase national monument designation, for example, resulted in a $9M loss to the local economy, according to a study conducted by Utah State University.

MYTH: The President’s actions are a boondoggle for the oil and gas industry.

  • FACT: Wrong. The land in question remains in federal ownership and subject to the same rigorous environmental reviews all such land undergoes. In any case, there really aren’t economically recoverable oil and gas resources in BENM. Framing this debate as energy vs. protection may be a useful cudgel for litigation activists, but that doesn’t make it accurate.

MYTH: The President’s actions will harm conservation in the area.

  • FACT: Way off. The Antiquities Act was never meant to be a landscape conservation tool. It was designed to protect antiquities. President Trump’s proclamation maintains protections for bona fide antiquities while respecting traditional land uses. These communities, more attached to the land than anyone, have been maintaining the land for generations.

MYTH: The President’s actions will leave antiquities and resources without any protections.

FACT: Nope. Everyone is concerned about looting and desecration of antiquities or sensitive areas. Here’s a novel idea: rather than focusing exclusively on these particular lands, what if we protected all antiquities on federal lands? Great idea, right? In fact, Congress has already done just that. In 1979 Congress passed the Archaeological Resources Protection of Act (ARPA). ARPA gave the federal government the power to impose severe fines and even imprisonment for looting. It protects ALL federal lands, with or without monument designation.

Learn more about the House Committee on Natural Resources by visiting their site here.

 

Bishop Statement on President Trump Protecting Antiquities in Utah, Addressing Past Executive Abuse

December 4, 2017 — WASHINGTON — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources: 

House Committee on Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT) issued the following statement:

“I applaud President Trump for recognizing the limitations of the law. Americans of all political stripes should commend him for reversing prior administrations’ abuses of the Antiquities Act and instead exercising his powers within the scope of authority granted by Congress.

“These new proclamations are a first step towards protecting identified antiquities without disenfranchising the local people who work and manage these areas. The next steps will be to move beyond symbolic gestures of protection and create substantive protections and enforcement and codify in law a meaningful management role for local governments, tribes and other stakeholders.”

REMINDER:

 Tomorrow, at 11:00 AM EST, Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT), Rep. Chris Stewart (R-UT) and Rep. John Curtis (R-UT) will host a Pen & Pad to discuss President Trump’s visit to Utah and the introduction of related legislation. For reporters outside of Washington, D.C. there will be a call in number. In order to join in person or via phone, you must RSVP.

WHAT: Pen & Pad with Chairman Bishop, Reps. Stewart and Curtis
WHEN: Tuesday, December 5
11:00 AM EST
WHERE:

 

CALL:

 TBD

 

Number: 1-888-998-7893

Passcode: PROTECTION

 

To RSVP, please contact Katie Schoettler at katie.schoettler@mail.house.gov.

 

Catfish resolution makes splash in Congress

June 16, 2016 — Domestic catfish farmers are trying to stop the House from taking up a resolution that a trade group representing them says would make imported seafood unsafe.

The resolution, which passed the Senate last month, would shift responsibility for inspections back to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

“The House of Representatives has an important responsibility to continue the USDA inspection program of domestic catfish and imported catfish-like products,” said Chad Causey, spokesman for the Catfish Farmers of America, which represents U.S. catfish producers. “These inspections will keep American families safe from harmful toxins readily found in imported products that went previously undetected by the Food and Drug Administration.”

The group points to experts who have said that the FDA-led program was ineffective, only able to inspect roughly 2 percent of all foreign seafood imports, due to staffing problems and other issues.

Read the full story at The Hill

NEW YORK: Question Science Behind Fish Quotas

December 10, 2015 — Mid-Atlantic fishermen and their advocates told four members of Congress on Monday that inaccurate stock assessments needlessly limit their catch and endanger their livelihood as the House of Representatives’ Committee on Natural Resources held an oversight hearing in Riverhead.

Bonnie Brady of the Long Island Commercial Fishing Association and Captain Joe McBride of the Montauk Boatmen and Captains Association were among those providing testimony to Representative Lee Zeldin of New York’s First Congressional District and three members of the natural resources committee. Witnesses also included representatives of fishing and seafood trade associations and a scientist from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which manages fish species in federal waters.

At issue in the field hearing, called Restoring Atlantic Fisheries and Protecting the Regional Seafood Economy, were the science and data collection used in management of fish stocks.

Along party lines, the committee members either defended or disparaged NOAA and the National Marine Fisheries Services’ stewardship and stock assessments, from which quotas are determined. They disagreed on assessments of striped bass and fluke, for which the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission and the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council have recommended 2016 harvest reductions of 25 and 29 percent respectively.

Read the full story from The East Hampton Star

Legislation Introduced to Reform Seasonal H-2B Guest-Worker Program

November 9, 2015 — Legislation has been introduced in the House of Representatives to reform the H-2B seasonal guest-worker program. H.R. 3918, the Strengthen Employment and Seasonal Opportunities Now Act also known by its acronym the SEASON Act, will reform the guest-worker program used by American employers to hire foreign workers for temporary and seasonal work, such as forestry, seafood processing, and other industries.

Introduced by House Small Business Committee Chairman Steve Chabot from Ohio, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte of Virginia, Congressman Andy Harris of Maryland, and Congressman Charles W. Boustany, Jr., MD of Louisiana, the SEASON Act is designed to bring needed reforms to the H-2B program in order to protect American workers, help U.S. employers who play by the rules hire seasonal guest-workers, save taxpayer dollars, and ensure the H-2B program is truly a temporary, seasonal guest-worker program.

“New regulations for the H-2B visa program issued by the current Administration are increasing the red tape and creating higher costs for the small and seasonal businesses using the H-2B program,” said Gulf Seafood Institute member Frank Randol, owner of Randol’s Restaurant and a shellfish processor who depends on guest-worker labor. “Many of our Gulf seafood processing plants were unable to open in 2015 due to a lack of labor. The industry will struggle to survive if they have a second year without these workers. This legislation is desperately needed.”

Read the full story at Gulf Seafood Institute

 

Crabbers Applaud Bipartisan Effort to Combat Illegal Fishing

November 9, 2015 — The following was released by the Alaska Bering Sea Crabbers:

The Alaska Bering Sea Crabbers (ABSC) applaud the Obama Administration and members of Congress from both sides of the aisle for their bipartisan effort to combat Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU), or “pirate” fishing. Late last week President Obama signed into law H.R. 774, the “Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing Enforcement Act.”

Originally introduced in the House by Representatives Bordallo (D-GU) and Young (R-AK) and championed in the Senate by Senators Murkowski (R-AK), Sullivan (R-AK), and Schatz (D-HI), this vital legislation will help “level the playing field” for America’s commercial fishermen who often face stiff market competition with illegally harvested seafood products. This legislation complements other ongoing efforts to prevent illegal seafood from entering US ports.

The legislation also allows the US to continue its leadership on the issue of pirate fishing at the international level through formal ratification and implementation of the Port State Measures Agreement. The Agreement is the first global instrument specifically designed to address the issue and calls upon signatory nations to effectively police their ports and prevent illegally harvested seafood products from entering into commerce.

These efforts are particularly relevant for crabbers and coastal communities in Alaska. For nearly two decades the Alaskan crab industry has been the “poster child” of what can happen to law-abiding fishermen when their markets are flooded with illegal product. According to a 2013 Wall Street Journal article, Administration officials estimate that illegal Russian crab has cost Alaskan crabbers $560 million since 2000. This translates to millions of dollars in lost tax revenue to Alaskan coastal communities.

While crab poaching in Russia has declined over the past few years, recent comments by the Russian Association of Crab Catchers indicate the very high likelihood that poaching will resume on a larger scale in the coming year as a result of reduced legal quotas in the Russian Far East. As such, passage of this legislation is particularly timely and welcomed by Alaskan crabbers.

Read a PDF of the release

House science panel demands more NOAA documents on climate paper

November 5, 2015 — It’s getting hot in here. A dispute between the chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) over a climate change paper published this summer is escalating. The latest salvos include a second letter from Representative Lamar Smith (R–TX) to NOAA Administrator Kathryn Sullivan seeking internal communications and documents authored by NOAA employees and a letter from the American Meteorological Society condemning Smith’s demands and warning about its implications for all federally funded research.

The quarrel began with a paper by NOAA scientists published 5 June in Science that revised historical atmosphere and ocean temperature data records found to have been poorly calibrated. In 2013 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had noted that the temperature data seemed to suggest that global warming had slowed down beginning around 1998. But the Science paper showed that apparent slowdown in global warming vanished when the data were corrected to account for various sources of bias.

That paper immediately caught Smith’s attention, triggering multiple committee requests for data and methodologies related to the study. NOAA told the committee that the findings were already publicly available and met twice with committee staff to brief them on the results.

But that response didn’t satisfy Smith. On 13 October, he subpoenaed all of NOAA’s internal emails related to the paper, asking for the information by 27 October. In response, the committee’s Democrats wrote to Smith on 23 October, noting that the subpoena “appears to be furthering a fishing expedition” and saying that it oversteps the committee’s bounds, as the paper is a research study and not a policy decision. House Republican leadership this year had given Smith the authority to issue subpoenas without the consent of the minority party.

Read the full story at Science Insider

 

House Natural Resources Committee Demands Obama Administration Info on Marine Monument Designations

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) October 7, 2015 — In a letter signed by the full committee chairman, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans, and the chairman and vice chairman of the Subcommittee on Indian, Insular, and Alaska Native Affairs, the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee has demanded records of all meetings, correspondence and memos related to marine monument designations. 

The letter references emails that “show representatives from the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF), the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Pew Charitable Trusts warning their members to avoid talking to the ‘outside world’ about the organizations’ efforts to influence the Administration to announce a Marine National Monument off of New England during the ‘Our Ocean Conference’ in Chile.” The emails in question were originally obtained by Saving Seafood via public records requests, and were first reported by Greenwire.

The following is the text of the press release from the House Natural Resources Committee:

Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT), and Reps. John Fleming (R-LA), Don Young (R-AK), and Aumua Amata Coleman Radewagen (R-AS) sent a letter today to Council on Environmental Quality Managing Director Christy Goldfuss and Assistant Administrator for the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Eileen Sobeck to request further information on the Obama Administration’s plans to designate new marine monuments or expand existing monuments. This concerns all coastal states.

In particular, the members of the Committee raised concerns about the apparent collusion and influence of environmental groups with regard to the Interior Department’s designation process, with almost no local input.

The letter stated, “[T]he day after the Subcommittee’s hearing, a chain of emails were publicly released which raise serious questions regarding the Administration’s plans for a new marine monument designation and the potential involvement of a number of outside interests. Specifically, the emails show representatives from the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF), the Natural Resources Defense Council, and Pew warning their members to avoid talking to the ‘outside world’ about the organizations’ efforts to influence the Administration to announce a Marine National Monument off of New England during the ‘Our Ocean Conference’ in Chile.”

The lack of transparency surrounding the number and scope of potential future designations was a point of emphasis for the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Ocean’s oversight hearing on September 29, 2015.

“As witnesses indicated in testimony before the Water, Power and Oceans Subcommittee hearing, the public input process surrounding the designation or expansion of national marine monuments has been woefully inadequate, or even nonexistent. The American people and those impacted by such potential designations deserve the right to know now what the federal government is or has been doing behind closed doors, given that a true public process simply does not exist under current law or practice.”

The letter requests records of all meetings regarding the designation or revision of national monuments, correspondence and memos related to national marine monument designations, and Executive branch communications including those with non-governmental organizations connected to the September 15, 2015 National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Town Hall meeting in Providence, Rhode Island.

Read the House Natural Resources Committee’s press release online

View a PDF of the House Natural Resources Committee’s letter to Christy Goldfuss and Eileen Sobeck

 

US House steps into marine monument fray

September 23, 2015 — A House subcommittee will convene in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday to discuss the implications of pending marine national monument designations, including conservationist efforts to create the Atlantic seaboard’s first marine national monument off the coast of Massachusetts.

The hearing, scheduled by the House Natural Resources Committee’s subcommittee on water, power and the oceans, comes in the midst of an expanding dispute between fishing stakeholders and the conservationists who want President Obama to use executive decree to designate Cashes Ledge and an area of deep-water canyons and seamounts south of Georges Bank as a marine natural monument, off limits to all fishing.

The conservationists, led by the Conservation Law Foundation, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Pew Charitable Trusts, are imploring President Obama to use the federal Antiquities Act to unilaterally create the national monument as a means of protecting the two areas from commercial fishing and future sea-floor development.

The proposal is being opposed by fishing stakeholder and advocacy groups, such as the Gloucester-based Northeast Seafood Coalition, who insist the current restrictions to fishing in both areas contained in existing habitat regulations established by the New England and Mid-Atlantic fishery management councils, and approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service, afford the necessary protections.

The opponents also charge that the conservationist effort is nothing short of an end-run around the nation’s current fishery management system, which provides for more public comment and participation, as well as a greater measure of transparency and scientific basis.

The New England Fishery Management Council has not adopted a formal position on the monument proposal, but council Chairman Terry Stockwell last week pointed out that the council in April reinforced the existing protections of Cashes Ledge — which sits about 80 miles east of Cape Ann — by continuing its approximately 530 square-mile closure to fishing.

Read the full story at the Gloucester Daily Times

Learn more about the subcommittee hearing here