October 29, 2018 — In general, sad to say, commercial fishermen are not well-regarded and struggle for respect. They don’t have powerful lobbyists or image makers and are so independent and competitive by nature that they don’t work well together. As such they are easily defeated politically when opposed by environmental groups with plenty of capital and connections. The headlong rush to deploy wind turbines offshore from here down to Delaware is now gathering momentum. From the deck of a fishing vessel that prospect is akin to a Plains Indian catching a first glimpse of smoke on the horizon, rising from an Iron Horse. “Progress,” they told him. Before long the plains were littered with the carcasses of dead buffalo, shot for fun from train windows and an ancient way of life vanished. In our time, fishermen seem just as likely to be swept from their traditional hunting grounds by this new behemoth.

Here in New England, the fishing industry lost more ground, literally, in another recent battle when a federal judge on Oct. 5 threw out an appeal, led by the Massachusetts Lobstermen’s Association, to overturn the Obama administration’s September 2016 designation of a 5,000 square-mile area offshore as a national monument under the Antiquities Act. Most people probably support the idea of creating sanctuaries but fishermen and their families need some protection as well. The arguments put forth in favor of establishing this sanctuary spoke of it as a pristine area. Well, fishermen have been going out to the canyons for a long time and it remains pristine so apparently their customary fishing practices have had no destructive effect on the environment.

There was also much talk of the need to preserve deep-sea corals from fishing gear. Most mobile-gear fishermen are not going to drag a $60,000 net over coral because of their interest in protecting their investment from the potential damage that corals could inflict on their gear. And fishermen who target migratory species in the water column, such as swordfish, tuna and marlin, generally fish by day, I’m told, and drift at night, since the water is way too deep to anchor, so they are not going to harm corals.

It’s not as though fishing activity was unrestricted prior to the creation of the monument. Commercial fishing in all U.S. waters is highly regulated, by regional fishery councils as well as the Magnuson Stevens Act. But it’s almost all banned now. Lobstermen and the red crab guys can carry on fishing there for seven more years before they too become persona non grata. Recreational fishing is still permitted. The Act prohibits drilling for oil and gas, it should be noted, and that is laudable, but there is room for some compromise on fishing, I believe. The judge, a man named James Boasberg, certainly does not agree and had no hesitation in dismissing the case. Now having read the judgement I will be the first to concede that, on purely legal grounds, the arguments for overturning the designation were not persuasive, particularly to people without knowledge of, or any sympathy for, the commercial fishing industry. However, in issuing his ruling the judge adopted a tone that can, at best, be described as flippant, presumably in an attempt to demonstrate his cleverness. He went to Oxford, don’t you know, and makes a hobby of amateur dramatics.

Read the full opinion piece at the New Bedford Standard-Times