Saving Seafood

  • Home
  • News
    • Alerts
    • Conservation & Environment
    • Council Actions
    • Economic Impact
    • Enforcement
    • International & Trade
    • Law
    • Management & Regulation
    • Regulations
    • Nutrition
    • Opinion
    • Other News
    • Safety
    • Science
    • State and Local
  • News by Region
    • New England
    • Mid-Atlantic
    • South Atlantic
    • Gulf of Mexico
    • Pacific
    • North Pacific
    • Western Pacific
  • About
    • Contact Us
    • Fishing Terms Glossary

New plant-based seafood analog products debut in Asia, US

June 8, 2021 — Plant-based and cell-cultured food manufacturers are rolling out new plant-based seafood analog products in recognition of World Oceans Day on 8 June.

Hong Kong-based OmniFoods, known for its imitation pork product OmniPork, is launching a line of plant-based seafood analog products that will include fish fillets, fish burgers, and tuna cuts.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Fisherman appeals case over monitoring costs

September 23, 2016 — New Hampshire fisherman David Goethel is looking to the federal appeals court to overturn a federal judge’s ruling that allows NOAA Fisheries to impose the cost of at-sea monitoring on Northeast groundfish permit holders.

Goethel, represented by lawyers from the Cause of Action watchdog group, has filed an appeal with the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston, hoping to reverse U.S. District Court Judge Joseph Laplante’s July 29 ruling in Goethel’s lawsuit that granted summary judgment to the federal government.

“NOAA lacks the authority to require industry funding for at-sea monitors. Its decision to do so violates federal statutes and the Constitution,” said Alfred Lechner Jr., president and chief executive officer of Cause of Action as well as a former federal judge. “Our clients had a legal right to their day in court at the time they filed suit. The decision holding otherwise is an error. An appeal from the decision of the district court has been filed.”

The original lawsuit, filed by Goethel and the South Dartmouth-based Northeast Fishing Sector 13 last December in U.S. District Court in Concord, New Hampshire, claimed the federal government violated fishermen’s constitutional rights by mandating they pay for the at-sea monitoring coverage designed to make sure fishermen are adhering to the intricacies of the federal fishery management regulations.

Read the full story at the Newbury Port Daily News

Judge rules for government in monitoring suit

August 1, 2016 — A federal judge presiding over the lawsuit filed by New Hampshire fisherman David Goethel challenging the legality of NOAA Fisheries forcing groundfishermen to pay for at-sea monitoring has ruled in favor of the federal government.

U.S. District Court Judge Joseph N. Laplante issued his 31-page ruling Friday in Concord, N.H., granting summary judgment to the defendants in the lawsuit that was filed last December naming Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker — whose department oversees the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration — as lead defendant.

“Ultimately, the voluminous administrative record demonstrates that (Amendment 16) — including the industry funding requirement — was the end product of a lengthy period of deliberation and public comment,” Laplante wrote in his conclusion.

Laplante went on to say that the mandated industry funding of at-sea monitoring is authorized by the Magnuson-Stevens Act that governs commercial fishing in U.S. waters and does not violate a variety of federal acts as claimed by the plaintiffs.

Read the full story at the Gloucester Daily Times

Justice asks for details in fish monitoring suit

June 15, 2016 — The final judgment in New Hampshire fisherman David Goethel’s federal lawsuit against NOAA Fisheries concerning at-sea monitoring will be further delayed after the judge in the case requested additional briefs and memoranda from both sides.

“In consideration of the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment and conducting the attending legal research, the court has identified points, authorities and (to some extent) arguments that were unfortunately not cited or raised by the parties’ legal memoranda,” U.S. District Court Judge Joseph Laplante wrote in his procedural order.

Prior to ordering the supplemental filings, Laplante, who sits in U.S. District Court in Concord, New Hampshire, held a June 9 conference call with attorneys to discuss “whether, and the extent to which, any delay caused by additional briefing would increase, extend or intensify any claimed economic hardship” from the federal mandate shifting the costs of at-sea monitoring to the industry.

“Counsel assured the court that neither party had objections or reservations in this regard with respect to additional briefing,” Laplante wrote in the order issued June 10. “The court therefore orders counsel to supplement their arguments in support of their summary judgment motions.”

Read the full story at the Gloucester Daily Times

Federal judge orders more briefs in Goethel lawsuit

June 14, 2016 — The final judgment in New Hampshire fisherman David Goethel’s federal lawsuit over at-sea monitoring will be further delayed after the judge in the case requested additional briefs from both sides.

“In consideration of the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment and conducting the attending legal research, the court has identified points, authorities and (to some extent) arguments that were unfortunately not cited or raised by the parties’ legal memoranda,” U.S. District Court Judge Joseph N. Laplante wrote in his procedural order.

Prior to ordering the new briefs, Laplante, who sits in U.S. District Court in Concord, New Hampshire, held a June 9 conference call with attorneys to discuss “whether, and the extent to which, any delay caused by additional briefing would increase, extend or intensify any claimed economic hardship” from the federal mandate shifting the costs of at-sea monitoring to the industry.

“Counsel assured the court that neither party had objections or reservations in this regard with respect to additional briefing,” Laplante wrote in the order issued June 10. “The court therefore orders counsel to supplement their arguments in support of their summary judgment motions.”

Read the full story at the Gloucester Daily Times

Court battle continues over at-sea monitoring

February 10, 2016 — The federal lawsuit filed by a New Hampshire fisherman to block NOAA Fisheries’ plan to shift the cost of at-sea monitoring to groundfish permit holders has devolved, at least for now, into a paper fight.

Lawyers for plaintiff David Goethel, captain of the Ellen Diane out of Hampton, N.H., have filed a motion asking U.S. District Judge Joseph J. Laplante for an expedited hearing on the merits of the case. Federal lawyers have countered with a motion to dismiss the case outright.

Laplante, sitting in Concord, N.H., has yet to rule on either motion.

In late January, Laplante denied a motion by Goethel’s lawyers for a preliminary injunction that would have immediately halted federal plans to shift the costs of at-sea monitoring to the groundfish boats, thereby helping stave off the impending economic carnage the shift is expected to visit on the already reeling fleet.

“Given that preliminary injunctive relief is not available, plaintiffs request that the court proceed to the merits at its earliest convenience,” Goethel’s lawyers wrote in their motion. “This case remains urgent, with a ‘substantial, largely unrebutted’ risk of ‘potentially disastrous financial impact’ impending in a matter of weeks.”

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said it expects to run out of money for the at-sea monitoring around March 1. Groundfish fishing sectors have been instructed to begin negotiating with monitoring contractors to directly provide the service for the remainder of the 2015 fishing season and the 2016 fishing season that is set to begin May 1.

The question, however, is at what cost. The currently accepted estimate for the cost of groundfish monitors is about $710 per day per vessel, though some fishing sectors around New Bedford have said they were able to negotiate a better price from observer contractors.

Gloucester-based fishing sectors have declined to give specifics about their negotiations with the providers of observer coverage.

Read the full story at the Gloucester Times

Recent Headlines

  • MAINE: Maine legislative panel votes down aquaculture regulation bill
  • MASSACHUSETTS: SouthCoast Wind Environmental Report Draws Divergent Views
  • Tuna longline fishing needs to do more to protect endangered species
  • Lobsters may weather warmer waters better than expected, study finds
  • Inside the making of the Global Seafood Alliance, Responsible Fisheries Management partnership
  • MAINE: Winds of Change, Pt. 2: Maine fishermen share concerns with proposed offshore wind farms
  • MASSACHUSETTS: Offshore wind in New Bedford: A guide to what you need to know
  • MAINE: Maine lawmakers consider bill to keep funding lobster legal defense

Most Popular Topics

Alaska Aquaculture ASMFC Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission BOEM California Climate change Coronavirus COVID-19 Donald Trump groundfish Gulf of Maine Gulf of Mexico Illegal fishing IUU fishing Lobster Maine Massachusetts Mid-Atlantic National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NEFMC New Bedford New England New England Fishery Management Council New Jersey New York NMFS NOAA NOAA Fisheries North Atlantic right whales North Carolina North Pacific offshore energy Offshore wind Pacific right whales Salmon Scallops South Atlantic Tuna Western Pacific Whales wind energy Wind Farms

Daily Updates & Alerts

Enter your email address to receive daily updates and alerts:
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Tweets by @savingseafood

Copyright © 2023 Saving Seafood · WordPress Web Design by Jessee Productions