Saving Seafood

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

 

 

FLORIDA: Struggle continues over Biscayne National Park marine reserve

August 3, 2015 — Lloyd Miller, a 95-year-old Florida conservationist, waited patiently through the testimony of nine people at a hearing about a marine reserve zone in Biscayne National Park before he rose to his feet with the help of a cane to address three members of Congress Monday morning.

“If anyone should be able to speak at something like this, it’s me,” said Miller, who advocated for the creation of Biscayne National Monument in 1968, a precursor to today’s nearly 174,000 acre-national park. “It’s so important for us to save it.”

Miller was one of about 150 people who came to a joint congressional hearing in Homestead of the House Committee on Natural Resources and the House Small Business Committee to discuss a controversial portion of the National Park Service’s general management planfinalized in June — a 10,500 acre “no fishing” reserve. The joint hearing was requested by Republican U.S. Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Mario Diaz-Balart and Carlos Curbelo and included invitation-only witnesses, many saying the National Park Service’s data was outdated and that the fish population in Biscayne National Park isn’t endangered enough to warrant a reserve.

“I don’t think the fishing and the resources are as bad off as they’re making it,” said Jimbo Thomas, owner of charter fishing business Thomas Flyer. “I’d rather see the state put in rules, regulations, seasons, size limits — let them do the work.”

Read the full story at the Miami Herald

 

Field Hearing Highlights Oversight Failures in Plan to Ban Fishing in New Biscayne Bay National Park

August 3, 2015 — WASHINGTON, D.C. — The following was released by the House Natural Resources Committee:

Today, the House Committee on Natural Resources and the House Small Business Committee held a joint field hearing in Homestead, Florida, on the National Park Service’s (NPS) General Management Plan (GMP) for Biscayne National Park released in June 2015.  The GMP, which includes a Marine Reserve Zone (MRZ) that would be closed to all commercial and recreational fishing, conflicts with the position of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and the recommendations of the park’s own stakeholder working group.

“Today we heard first-hand accounts from Florida’s Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, local fishermen and businesses on the National Park Service’s draconian plan to close a third of the Biscayne National Park’s reefs from fishing,” stated House Committee on Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (UT-R). “The National Park Service set up local management advisory groups on Biscayne National Park – and then ignored the recommendations.  The State of Florida’s input on the plan was rebuffed. This is not the way to run a National Park System.”

“I commend my Florida colleagues Rep. Curbelo, Rep. Ros-Lehtinen and Rep. Diaz-Balart for helping to elevate public attention to this matter,” Bishop added. “Together, we will take action to address the abuses of the National Park Service and re-establish public input and access at Biscayne Bay.”

On Thursday, July 30th, Rep. Ros-Lehtinen introduced the Preserving Public Access to Public Waters Act (H.R. 3310), which would ensure that federal and state agencies collaborate in the development of any new fishing access restrictions in areas where state marine waters and national park or national marine sanctuary boundaries overlap. The Committee on Natural Resources will be acting on the legislation.

During the hearing, witnesses discussed the NPS’s disregard for state and public input, lack of transparency, and disregard for the scientific process in developing the GMP, as well as the economic and environmental implications of the final GMP.

Ms. Jessica McCawley, Director, Division of Marine Fisheries Management, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), stated: “FWC cannot support this plan for many reasons. First, the Park’s refusal to explore alternatives to a no-fishing marine reserve zone early in the GMP planning process ultimately contributed to a failed attempt to find a workable compromise. Second, FWC views the implementation of a no-fishing zone within the marine reserve zone under the GMP as a breach of the partnership agreement established through the MOU. Third, the proposed fishery closure is being based on an inappropriate application of scientific analysis. Fourth, the closure would unnecessarily restrict public access and negatively impact the south Florida economy.”

“The data bases used to begin the development of the GMP more than a decade ago are no longer germane to current stock levels or the condition of sea grasses, corals and other benthic habitat.  Park managers find it far too convenient to blame fishing for all of the ills facing the park because it is the easiest to regulate,” stated Mr. Ernie Piton, Florida Keys Commercial Fishermen’s Association. “The development of the GMP is now 14 years old and again, working groups assembled to help in the formulation of the plan have not met for at least 12 years.”

Mr. Carl Liederman, Owner of Miami’s Captain Harry’s Fishing Supply, stated: “While significant in terms of lost public access, closing this area will do nothing biologically to improve the overall fisheries conditions in the park. There is simple no good science to support it, as the FWC can attest here today. And that coupled with the adverse economic impact this closure will bring to many of the marine related small businesses in south Florida makes this closure a very bad idea.”

Click here to view additional information on the hearing.

Legislation Introduced to Preserve Fishing Access in Biscayne National Park

July 31, 2015 — On the heels of the recent announcement to close over 10,000 acres of Biscayne National Park to fishing, a coalition of recreational fishing and boating organizations praised the introduction of a bipartisan bill, H.R. 3310, that will help stop this and similar unwarranted fishing closures from occurring. Led by Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.), Carlos Curbelo (R-Fla.), and 28 other original sponsors, the “Preserving Public Access to Public Waters Act” requires the National Park Service and Office of National Marine Sanctuaries to have approval from state fish and wildlife agencies before closing state waters to recreational or commercial fishing.

“Probably the most concerning aspect of the Biscayne National Park marine reserve decision is the total disregard for the fisheries management expertise of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission,” said Mike Leonard, Ocean Resource Policy director for the American Sportfishing Association. “The states are responsible for nearly all of our nation’s saltwater fisheries management successes. This legislative safeguard will prevent the federal government from ignoring the fisheries management expertise of the states in these types of situations.”

Throughout the development of the General Management Plan for Biscayne National Park, through which the marine reserve is being implemented, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission has provided detailed recommendations to improve the condition of the fisheries resources in the park. The Commission has continually expressed its position that the proposed marine reserve is overly restrictive to the public; will not be biologically effective; and that less restrictive management tools can rebuild the park’s fisheries resources and conserve habitat.

 

Read the full story at Florida Sportsman