Saving Seafood

Magnuson-Stevens Act at 50: Charting a Course to Sustainable Fisheries

May 8, 2026 — In April, we celebrated the 50 years since the United States signed the Magnuson-Stevens Act. This landmark law set the United States on a course toward sustainably and cooperatively managed marine resources. But in order to appreciate how far we’ve ventured, it helps to understand why we embarked.

Vacuuming the Seas

The mid-20th century was a boom time for fishing around the world. Technological advances changed how people harvested, transported, and consumed seafood. More fish were being harvested off the coasts of the United States, but not necessarily by American fishermen.

Between 1965 and 1975, the volume of fish caught by foreign fishing vessels in the United States exceeded the catch of domestic harvesters. The newer, larger, far-ranging factory trawlers of the foreign fleets would anchor just beyond the 3-nautical-mile U.S. territorial limit. As Senator Warren Magnuson (D-Washington) recalled, the fleets were “virtually vacuuming the seas” of valuable marine life—and economic opportunity. When they depleted one stock, they simply moved on to the next. In many cases, they sold their harvest back to American consumers after

“If the U.S. is to maintain world prominence,” warned Magnuson, “we must learn to steward our declining resources.” He partnered with Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Representative Don Young (R-Alaska) and Representative Gerry Studds (D-Massachusetts) to push for action through extensive deliberations in both chambers of Congress.

Lawmakers agreed that a serious problem existed, but they debated how to solve it. The 94th Congress considered dozens of proposals before combining ideas into one law. On April 13, 1976, they passed what is now known as the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

Read the full article at NOAA Fisheries

Landmark US Magnuson-Stevens fisheries law turns 50 amid budget cut concerns

April 17, 2026 — April 13 marked the 50th anniversary of the U.S. Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA), a landmark conservation law credited with saving numerous U.S. fisheries from collapse and protecting vital ocean habitats. Despite decades of success, conservationists warn that recent federal funding cuts could undermine those gains.

The MSA was passed in 1976, in the same decade the Environmental Protection Agency was established, and half a dozen bedrock environmental laws like the Clean Air and Clean Water acts were enacted. It was a time of widespread environmental degradation: Ohio’s Cuyahoga River frequently caught fire and smog choked cities like Los Angeles.

U.S. fisheries were in a similarly dire state. “Fishing off the U.S. coast was a free-for-all, with vessels from both the U.S. and other nations racing to catch as many fish as they could,” Gib Brogan, fisheries campaign director at the advocacy organization Oceana, told Mongabay in an email.

Before the MSA was enacted, international waters began just 19 kilometers (12 miles) from shore. Beyond that, both American and international fishing fleets could operate with very few regulations. It was a classic example of the tragedy of the commons; fishers were incentivized to capture as many fish as they possibly could before the fish were gone.

Read the full article at Mongabay

Magnuson-Stevens turns 50 as NOAA cuts raise concern

April 14, 2026 —  The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) turns 50 today, marking a milestone for a law that has shaped nearly every aspect of modern U.S. commercial fishing.

Signed into law on April 13, 1976, by President Gerald Ford, the MSA laid the groundwork for federal fisheries management at a time when foreign fleets were working just off U.S. shores and domestic stocks were in steep decline. For many fishermen, the law’s legacy is tangible: rebuilt fisheries, more stable quotas, and a system that—while often debated—has brought a level of structure to an industry once defined by a race for fish.

Since its passage, dozens of previously depleted fish stocks have rebounded under management measures tied to the act. By 2000, more than 50 stocks had been rebuilt, and today fisheries like Atlantic sea scallops and Pacific widow rockfish stand as examples of how science-based management can restore both abundance and opportunity on the water.

Read the full article at the National Fisherman

SSC Reviews Science Priorities as NOAA Funding Tightens

March 19, 2026 — The following was released by the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council:

At its meeting yesterday, the Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) of the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council reviewed a preliminary National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) risk/value matrix intended to align science and management priorities under reduced funding and staffing, while continuing to meet Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) mandates.

The regional fishery management councils and associated science centers and regional offices are asked to identify fisheries that may require a narrower science and management focus. Considerations are to be given to operational or management changes and actions needed to implement them. The matrix is intended to guide resource allocation for fiscal year 2027 and beyond for future survey, assessment and analysis cycles. In the Western Pacific, Council and NMFS staffs are developing a regional application of the framework, with a final proposal expected at the June Council meeting.

SSC members noted differences between the Council and NMFS on where certain fisheries fall within the matrix, reflecting differing views of risk and value as well as ambiguity in the guidelines. 

“The current matrix is still insufficient to support prioritization of funding for species-specific stock assessments,” said SSC member Shelton Harley.

Members said that criteria for cultural value and ecosystem importance are not captured for fisheries such as Hawai‘i Kona crab, deepsea shrimp and precious corals. Comparing each fishery’s data collection and analytical needs would improve the framework. Although Western Pacific fisheries like bottomfish and Kona crab are underutilized, their price per pound, contribution to island food security and cultural relevance make their overall value significant. NOAA’s current risk guidance also does not account for economic vulnerability.

Council obligations under the MSA remain unchanged despite any reduction in resources. Regional councils are responsible to manage fisheries for optimum yield and comply with the MSA’s National Standards, which include annual catch limits and accountability measures. Complete, transparent information, including funding, is needed to realistically align and prioritize management and science in this region. Applying the matrix could lead to management changes such as extending stock assessment or annual catch limit cycles, or reclassifying certain stocks as ecosystem component species.

The SSC formed two new working groups of members, Council staff and Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center staff – one to develop research priorities in light of budget constraints and help avoid interruptions in critical data streams, and another on “social valuation” to quantify the sociocultural and economic value of fisheries.

The SSC also reviewed the scientific basis for Guam’s draft territorial reef fish fishery management plan (FMP), following a request from the Guam Department of Agriculture for an independent evaluation of the data and assessment reports informing the plan. University of Guam Marine Laboratory researchers presented a weight-of-evidence approach using multiple datasets and methods to assess reef fish species. SSC members broadly supported the work as informative for the FMP and highlighted the importance of practical, enforceable measures, clear communication of uncertainty, and the use of local and fisher knowledge, especially for data-poor species.

 Tomorrow, the SSC will finalize their recommendations to the Council for fishing in the Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument and protected species issues, among others (https://tinyurl.com/159SSCMtg).

MARYLAND: Md. officials seek disaster declaration for oyster fishery

February 17, 2026 — Maryland officials are asking for federal help after what they describe as one of the worst oyster seasons in state history, a collapse they say threatens both watermen and a cornerstone of the Chesapeake Bay economy.

U.S. Rep. Andy Harris, R-Md., last week asked the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to declare an economic fishery disaster under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Such a designation can unlock emergency federal assistance for fisheries.

“Severe weather this year, combined with shrinking market access and increased competition, left many crews effectively tied to the dock, with watermen able to fish for just one or two days all season,” Harris said in a statement. He said immediate relief is needed to offset financial losses.

Read the full article at The Columbian

Trump Restores Commercial Fishing Access to Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument

“By reopening the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts to commercial fishing, fairness, transparency, and science-based governance has been restored to the affected fisheries.” — Bob Vanasse, Executive Director of Saving Seafood

February 6, 2026 — WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) — Statement from Bob Vanasse, Executive Director of Saving Seafood, on President Trump’s Action to Restore Commercial Fishing Access to the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument:

This afternoon, President Trump revoked President Biden’s Proclamation 10287 and removed the restrictions on commercial fishing within the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument.

This decision reflects a clear understanding of a simple truth: commercial fishing in the United States is already governed by the most comprehensive, science-based, and publicly accountable regulatory system in the world. Under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, fishing activities in federal waters must meet strict sustainability standards, undergo rigorous scientific review, and follow a transparent process that includes stakeholder input and council oversight. Restoring access to the monument area under this framework reaffirms—not undermines—our commitment to conservation.

In stark contrast, President Obama’s 2016 designation of the monument excluded commercial fishermen from a region they had sustainably fished for generations. It was imposed unilaterally through executive order—without public hearings, without a cost-benefit analysis, and without input from those whose livelihoods were affected. It was a top-down decision that ignored the proven success of the fishery management system already in place. And in a striking display of hypocrisy, while working fishermen were forced out, the uber-wealthy with yachts large enough for spearfishing adventures 130 miles offshore were not banned.

President Trump restored the rights of fishermen once before in 2020. This followed both Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke and Interior Secretary David Bernhardt agreeing to meet with fishing groups in Boston, in meetings I had the honor to chair.

Unfortunately, President Biden repeated the undemocratic actions of President Obama in 2021, reimposing the ban on commercial fishing with no meaningful engagement. Our industry reached out to Interior Secretary Deb Haaland in good faith—we wrote letters, made phone calls, and requested meetings. We received no response.

All eight regional fishery management councils formally opposed the Biden administration’s reimposition of the ban. President Biden and Interior Secretary Deb Haaland actively disregarded the voices of the very councils and communities entrusted with managing our marine resources. Their closed-door approach and lack of transparency sent a message: facts and stakeholders were not welcome in their decision-making process. This is not how democratic governance or environmental policy should be conducted. But it is not surprising, as there is a history of monument creation via secretive alliance between certain environmentalists and sympathetic Administration staff, as described in this 2015 E&E News story.

We fully expect the usual environmental advocacy groups to respond as they did in 2020, with misleading rhetoric and predictions of catastrophic overfishing. So let’s be absolutely clear: any fishing that resumes in the monument will remain subject to the full force of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, a law these same groups routinely hail as a global benchmark for sustainable fishery management.

Their objection is not about protecting the ocean—it is about controlling American commercial fishermen and pushing a broader, extremist agenda that seeks to deny citizens the ability to responsibly use our resources, regardless of science or sustainability.

The truth is that America’s commercial fishermen are among the world’s most responsible ocean stewards. Their work is tightly regulated, environmentally conscious, and vital to the economies and food security of coastal communities. When managed through the regional fishery management councils and NOAA Fisheries, commercial fishing supports biodiversity and conservation while feeding the nation.

Lawmakers seek to protect US fishermen from low-priced imports

December 31, 2025 — There may be good news on the horizon for U.S. fishermen if Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., can get legislation passed that would add “economic cause” as a trigger for economic relief for industries affected by low-priced imports.

Currently, under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, fishermen affected by natural or manmade disasters like hurricanes or oil spills are eligible for federal relief. But American shrimp fishermen, whose industry has lost half its value since 2021 due to imports, according to the Southern Shrimp Alliance, have no protection as their livelihoods collapse.

If passed, Mace’s “Protect American Fisheries Act of 2025” would expand NOAA’s Fishery Resource Disaster Assistance Program and allow states to formally request a fishery resource disaster determination in cases such as the U.S. shrimp fishery.

Read the full article at the National Fisherman

Bill lets ‘economic harm’ trigger federal fishery disaster aid

December 29, 2025 — Commercial fishermen who experience unexpected losses from foreign competition would be eligible for federal assistance under a proposal to expand the current relief rules.

The Magnuson-Stevens Act currently provides aid to the seafood industry if is hurt by natural or manmade disasters such as hurricanes or oil spills. A bill from U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., would amend the law to include “economic cause” as an allowable trigger for a disaster declaration when that harm is tied to activities carried out by a foreign person or state.

Mace’s bill targets coastal states where fishermen say they have been undercut by cheap imports and alleged illegal practices abroad. Mace has framed the bill as a way to steer buyers toward domestic seafood and protect the commercial fishing way of life. The bill has eight other cosponsors and bipartisan support.

Read the full article at The Center Square

Judge rules NOAA must release bycatch photos from trawlers

November 4, 2025 — A federal judge in California has ordered NOAA to release photos, videos and other visual data documenting the catch of nontargeted species by the state’s halibut trawl fishery.

In a ruling, Judge Josephine Staton of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California told NOAA to release 77 photographs to the environmental group Oceana detailing the bycatch of fish and marine mammals caught up in nets used by bottom trawlers off the California coast.

Oceana had requested the photos in 2022 under a public records request, but NOAA declined to provide them, citing an exemption where the release of documents violates nondisclosure provisions in federal law. NOAA argued that the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act prohibited the release of the photos because doing so could identify the identities of fisheries observers whose identities were to be kept private.

Read the full article at E&E News

Westerman-Golden Bipartisan SPEED Act draws backing from industry groups

October 28, 2025 — A bipartisan proposal to revise federal environmental review procedures is drawing support from technology companies, trade associations, local officials, and utilities, according to statements released by the House Natural Resources Committee.

H.R. 4776, the Standardizing Permitting and Expediting Economic Development (SPEED) Act, was introduced by Chairman Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.) and Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine). The measure targets the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), a procedural statute that set the framework for assessing environmental impacts of major federal actions and created the Council on Environmental Quality. NEPA’s requirements apply broadly to federally linked activities, including construction of roads, bridges, highways, ports, irrigation systems, forest management projects, transmission lines, energy developments, broadband, and water infrastructure.

NEPA was enacted to ensure that federal agencies consider environmental consequences before taking major actions. Over time, the process has become increasingly complex, extending permitting timelines and increasing costs for public and private projects. Critics of the current system argue that it has evolved into a cumbersome process that special interest groups sometimes use to delay or block infrastructure projects through litigation. The SPEED Act seeks to address those concerns by streamlining review procedures and reducing the frequency of lawsuits while maintaining the requirement that environmental impacts be considered.

Supporters from sectors such as advanced computing and data centers point to power and transmission needs; energy producers and public power entities cite grid reliability and long planning horizons; construction and electrical contractors emphasize predictable schedules; and forestry and logging groups link delays to slower forest management and wildfire risk. Commercial space and conservation-policy organizations also register support, citing modernization and clearer processes.

Commercial fisheries are among the sectors affected by NEPA’s procedural requirements. Fishery management actions under the Magnuson–Stevens Act—such as plan amendments, quota specifications, and implementing regulations—are treated as major federal actions and typically require environmental assessments or impact statements. Standardizing timelines and simplifying documentation could reduce uncertainty in the council and agency decision process without altering the substantive conservation standards that govern federal fisheries.

Litigation is another recurring factor in fishery management. NEPA claims are often filed alongside Magnuson–Stevens Act claims when stakeholders challenge plan amendments or annual specifications. Even when agencies prevail, litigation risk can slow implementation and absorb staff resources. The SPEED Act’s provisions to clarify what constitutes a “major federal action,” set limits on judicial review periods, and streamline documentation are presented by supporters as measures that could help agencies move science-based fishery decisions to implementation more predictably.

 The SPEED Act would update NEPA by: 

– Shortening review timelines and reducing litigation frequency.

– Simplifying analyses required in NEPA documents to lessen agency workload.

– Clarifying when NEPA applies by refining the definition of “major federal action.”

– Setting judicial review limits for NEPA claims, including a 150-day filing deadline, a new standard of review, and constraints on procedural maneuvers that can halt projects.

Organizations listed as supporters include Google; OpenAI; the AI Supply Chain Alliance; the American Forest Resource Council; Associated General Contractors of America; Associated Oregon Loggers; the Commercial Space Federation; ConservAmerica; the Huerfano County (Colo.) Board of County Commissioners; the Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil & Gas Association; Minnesota Forest Industries; Missouri River Energy Services (which also backs a related bill, H.R. 4503); the National Electrical Contractors Association and several of its regional chapters; and the Utah Rural Electric Cooperative Association.

Press release: https://naturalresources.house.gov/news/email/show.aspx?ID=BB6YBW3BL6RVCAERSA4FZWNLFQ