NCFC Archives - Page 5 of 7

East and West Coast NCFC Members Testify on Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization at Senate Hearing

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) — September 12, 2017 — Two members of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities (NCFC) testified before a key Senate Subcommittee today on the reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

The hearing was convened by Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard, and was the third in a series of hearings on the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

Lori Steele, Executive Director of the West Coast Seafood Processors Association

Lori Steele, Executive Director of the West Coast Seafood Processors Association based out of Oregon, and Greg DiDomenico, Executive Director of the Garden State Seafood Association based out of New Jersey, discussed the state of U.S. fishery laws and the needs of commercial fishermen.

In written testimony submitted to the Subcommittee, Ms. Steele said in part:

“Based on my prior experience with the New England Council and currently with the seafood industry on the West Coast, I feel confident the next MSA reauthorization can build on lessons learned from our past experiences in order to truly fulfill one of the fundamental and original goals of the MSA, emphasized in National Standard 1, the Act’s guiding principle – to prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum yield from each fishery. From its beginning, the MSA has conserved, protected, rebuilt, and sustained marine resources in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). As we move forward with this next reauthorization, we have an opportunity to better conserve, protect, and sustain the people, the economies, the culture, and the communities that rely upon healthy and abundant fisheries.”

Read Ms. Steele’s full testimony here

In written testimony submitted to the Subcommittee, Mr. DiDomenico said in part:

“We believe there are four main threats to the domestic fishing industry that are consistent with the concerns of this Subcommittee. They are as follows: (1) the status of the implementation of the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), specifically the 2006 Amendments which were interpreted to be overly precautionary and limit management flexibility; (2) the growing efforts of the environmental industry to curtail commercial fishing access via use of the Antiquities Act, National Marine Sanctuary designations, and marine planning created pursuant to the National Ocean Policy; (3) the chronic inability to estimate and manage recreational fishing mortality; and (4) the potential for unfair implementation of catch shares.”

Read Mr. DiDomenico’s full testimony here

NCFC Members View Interior Department Review of National Monuments As Step In the Right Direction

Responsibly and sustainably caught Atlantic red crab, harvested from the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Monument region, and landed in New Bedford, Massachusetts, being served at Luke’s Lobster in Washington, D.C.

August 24, 2017 — WASHINGTON — The following was released by Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities (NCFC):

This afternoon, Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke delivered his recommendations to President Trump on changes to existing national monuments. While the details of the Secretary’s recommendations have not been made public, the AP reported today that they pertain to a “handful” of monuments, and include boundary adjustments and restoration of public access for uses such as fishing.

In March, Mayor Jon Mitchell of New Bedford, Massachusetts, the nation’s top-grossing commercial fishing port, submitted testimony to Congress on behalf of the NCFC expressing concern over marine monuments. The mayor released the following statement in light of Secretary Zinke’s findings and recommendations today on national monuments:

“The fisheries management process under the existing Magnuson Act is far from perfect but its great strength is that it has afforded ample structured opportunities for all stakeholders to study and comment on policy decisions and for peer review of the scientific basis for those decisions. The marine monument designation process may have been well intended, but it has simply lacked a comparable level of industry input, scientific rigor, and deliberation. That is why I think the decision to step back and reassess how best to proceed on marine monument designations ought to be welcomed no matter where one stands in the current fisheries debates. We are now presented with an opportunity to integrate the monument designation process with the proven processes established under Magnuson, and that will lead to better policy and better outcomes for all stakeholders.”

Robert Vanasse, Executive Director of Saving Seafood and the NCFC, released the following statement:

“We appreciate Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke’s comments to the Associated Press regarding his report to the President on the review of national monuments created by prior administrations. We are encouraged by his statement that in certain national monuments, public access for uses including fishing would be maintained or restored. We agree with the Secretary that regions inside monuments can be protected ‘by keeping public access to traditional uses.’ The Secretary’s review has been professional, open, and transparent. The Secretary and his staff have been respectful and courteous. They have listened and paid attention to the concerns of our members whose interests were damaged by actions of previous administrations. The vitriol aimed at the Secretary and his staff, and the inaccurate mass e-mail campaigns from numerous groups who oppose a thoughtful review of these monuments has been unfortunate. We look forward to seeing the Secretary’s recommendations in full after they are reviewed by the White House, and we are hopeful for a return to the management of fisheries under the Magnuson-Stevens Act in the regions contained in these marine monuments.”

The following members of our National Coalition for Fishing Communities will comment upon the release of the Secretary’s full recommendations:

Atlantic Offshore Lobstermen’s Association
Destin Charter Boat Association
Fisheries Survival Fund
Garden State Seafood Association
Hawaii Longline Association
Long Island Commercial Fishing Association
North Carolina Fisheries Association
Seafreeze Shoreside
Southeastern Fisheries Association
Western Fishboat Owners Association
West Coast Seafood Processors Association

National Coalition for Fishing Communities Members Testify on Magnuson-Stevens Act

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) – June 19, 2017 – Two members of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities testified at the hearing, “Exploring the Successes and Challenges of the Magnuson-Stevens Act,” held by the Water, Power and Oceans Subcommittee of the House Natural Resources Committee.

Mr. Jeff Kaelin, head of Government Relations at Lund’s Fisheries, Inc. in Cape May, New Jersey and a member of the Garden State Seafood Association, and Mr. Sean Martin, President of the Hawaii Longline Association in Honolulu, Hawaii, offered testimony.

Mr. Nick Wiley, Executive Director of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission in Tallahassee, Florida, was the third witness for the Republican majority.

Mr. Charles Witek, a Recreational Angler and Outdoor Writer from West Babylon, New York, tesitfied at the invitation of the Democratic minority.

In March, New Bedford, Massachusetts Mayor Jon Mitchell delivered written testimony to the Subcommittee on behalf of the NCFC, expressing concerns over the increasing use of marine monuments to manage fisheries in place of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA). According to the mayor and NCFC members, this has undermined the more transparent and collaborative management process established by the MSA.

The following additional information was provided by the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans:

On Wednesday, July 19, 2017, at 2:00 p.m. in 1324 Longworth House Office Building, the Water, Power and Oceans Subcommittee will hold an oversight hearing on “Exploring the Successes and Challenges of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.”

Policy Overview:

Recreational and commercial fishing industries are significant drivers of the U.S. economy. Together, the U.S. seafood industry and the recreational fishing industry generate $208 billion in sales impacts and contribute $97 billion to the U.S. gross domestic product. Additionally, these industries support upwards of 1.6 million U.S. jobs.
Unfortunately, in recent years, access for commercial and recreational fishing has eroded due to poor science, overbearing regulations, and abuse of Marine Protected Areas – such as Marine National Monuments and Marine Sanctuaries – that often prohibit various fishing activities.
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), nearly 90 percent of federally managed fisheries that our commercial and recreational fishermen are not being allowed to harvest at maximum sustainable levels.
This hearing will begin to explore issues facing a number of federally managed recreational and commercial fisheries and identify possible solutions, including potential areas to update the federal fisheries framework via reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

Read the Subcommittee’s full memo here

Ray Hilborn study disputes previous findings on forage fish

April 3, 2017 — A new study has been published today by a scientific group led by University of Washington fisheries researcher Ray Hilborn that disputes previous findings on the impact of human and natural predation on forage fish such as anchovies, sardines and herring.

The study, published in the scientific journal Fisheries Research, found that human fishing for forage fish does not have as great an impact on the food chain as previously thought, given that humans typically catch fish of much larger size than those typically hunted and eaten by non-human species. The study also decouples the link between the size of forage fish populations and the populations of species that predate on forage fish.

“What we found is that there is essentially no relationship between how many forage fish there are in the ocean and how well predators do in terms of whether the populations increase or decrease,” Hilborn said in a video explaining the study’s findings.

The study was co-authored by the University of Washington’s Ricardo O. Amoroso and Eugenia Bogazzi, Olaf P. Jensen of Rutgers University, Ana M. Parma of the Centro Nacional Patagónico, Cody Szuwalski of the University of California Santa-Barbara and Carl J. Walters of the University of British Columbia. It was funded in part by the National Coalition for Fishing Communities and was supported by the IFFO, the marine ingredients trade group.

It takes particular fault with the methods used by a 2012 study on forage fish by the Lenfest Ocean Program, which is managed by the Pew Charitable Trusts.

“The Lenfest conclusion that predators rise and fall with their prey populations is simply not true. It’s not empirically true,” Walters, one of the authors of the original Lenfest study, said. “One of the things we did in this study was collect together a lot of time-series patterns of predator abundances and forage-fish abundances, and we just didn’t see the correlation, nor have other scientists who have looked at this objectively.”

Predators “have developed some strategy of how to cope with the natural variability” of forage fish populations, according to Amoroso, the study’s second author.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Predators may be less affected by catch of small fish than previously thought, new study says

April 3, 2017 — WASHINGTON — The following was released by the National Coalition for Fishing Communities and IFFO:

New research published today in the journal Fisheries Research finds that fishing of forage species likely has a lower impact on predators than previously thought, challenging previous studies that argued forage fish are more valuable left in the ocean.

A team of seven respected fisheries scientists, led by Prof. Ray Hilborn, Ph.D., of the University of Washington, found that predator populations are less dependent on specific forage fish species than assumed in previous studies, most prominently in a 2012 study commissioned by the Lenfest Ocean Program, which is managed by The Pew Charitable Trusts. The Lenfest Forage Fish Task Force argued that forage fish are twice as valuable when left in the water to be eaten by predators, and recommended slashing forage fish catch rates by 50 to 80 percent.

For fisheries management, such a precautionary approach would have a large impact on the productivity of forage fisheries. As groups such as IFFO (The Marine Ingredients Organisation) have noted, these stocks contribute strongly to global food security, as well as local and regional social and economic sustainability.

However, the new research found multiple omissions in the methodology of the Lenfest study. “When you review the actual models that were used [by Lenfest], there are a few key elements on the biology of these animals that were not represented,” said Dr. Ricardo Amoroso, one of the study’s co-authors. He added that one of the authors’ approaches was to “look for empirical evidence of what is actually happening in the field.” Previous studies relied on models which took for granted that there should be a strong link between predators and prey.

Specifically, the Lenfest study and another study using ecosystem models ignored the natural variability of forage fish, which often fluctuate greatly in abundance from year to year. It also failed to account for the fact that predators tend to eat smaller forage fish that are largely untouched by fishermen. Because of these oversights, the new study concluded that the Lenfest recommendations were overly broad, and that fisheries managers should consider forage species on a case-by-case basis to ensure sound management.

“It is vital that we manage our fisheries to balance the needs of the ecosystem, human nutrition and coastal communities,” said Andrew Mallison, IFFO Director General. “These findings give fishery managers guidance based on science, and update some of the inaccurate conclusions of previous reports.”

The Lenfest findings were largely based on a model called EcoSim, developed by Dr. Carl J. Walters, one of the co-authors of the new paper. Dr. Walters found that the EcoSim models used in earlier studies had omitted important factors, including natural variability, recruitment limitations and efficient foraging of predators.

Dr. Walters noted that there were “very specific” issues with previous uses of the EcoSim model. “It was predicting much higher sensitivity of creatures at the top of the food webs to fishing down at the bottom than we could see in historical data,” he said.

This is not the first time ecosystem models used in earlier studies have been questioned. One year after the Lenfest study was completed, two of its authors, Dr. Tim Essington and Dr. Éva Plagányi, published a paper in the ICES Journal of Marine Science where they said, “We find that the depth and breadth with which predator species are represented are commonly insufficient for evaluating sensitivities of predator populations to forage fish depletion.” The new study reaffirmed this finding, noting “several reasons to concur with the conclusion that the models used in previous analysis were insufficient.”

In addition to its critiques of previous research, the researchers found further evidence of the lack of fishing impact on forage fish. Their research indicated that environmental factors are often much more important drivers of forage fish abundance. They also found that the distribution of forage fish has a greater impact on predators than simply the raw abundance of forage fish.

The authors concluded by noting the importance of forage fish as a part of human food supply chains, praising their high nutritional value, both through direct human consumption and as food in aquaculture, as well as the low environmental impact of forage fishing. Cutting forage fishing, as recommended by the Lenfest group, would force people to look elsewhere for the healthy protein and micronutrients provided by forage fish – likely at much greater environmental cost, the authors wrote.

“Forage fish provide some of the lowest environmental cost food in the world – low carbon footprint, no water use,” Dr. Hilborn said. “[There are] lots of reasons that forage fish are a really environmentally friendly form of food.”

It is also well-established that forage fisheries provide substantial health benefits to human populations through the supply of long chain omega-3 fatty acids, both directly through consumption in the form of fish oil capsules, and indirectly through animal feed for farmed fish and land animals.

The paper was authored by Dr. Ray Hilborn, Dr. Ricardo O. Amoroso, and Dr. Eugenia Bogazzi from the University of Washington; Dr. Olaf P. Jensen from Rutgers University; Dr. Ana M. Parma from Center for the Study of Marine Systems -CONICET, Argentina; Dr. Cody Szuwalski from the University of California Santa Barbara; and Dr. Carl J. Walters from the University of British Columbia.

Read the full study here

Watch a video about the study here

Read an infographic about the study here

About the NCFC

The National Coalition for Fishing Communities provides a national voice and a consistent, reliable presence for fisheries in the nation’s capital and in national media. Comprised of fishing organizations, associations, and businesses from around the country, the NCFC helps ensure sound fisheries policies by integrating community needs with conservation values, leading with the best science, and connecting coalition members to issues and events of importance. For more, visit www.fisheriescoalition.org.

About IFFO

IFFO represents the marine ingredients industry worldwide. IFFO’s members reside in more than 50 countries, account for over 50% of world production and 75% of the fishmeal and fish oil traded worldwide. Approximately 5 million tonnes of fishmeal are produced each year globally, together with 1 million tonnes of fish oil. IFFO’s headquarters are located in London in the United Kingdom and it also has offices in Lima, Peru, and in Beijing, China. IFFO is an accredited Observer to the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). To find out more, visit www.iffo.net.

PRESS CONTACT

Robert Vanasse

National Coalition for Fishing Communities

Washington

+1 (202) 333-2628

bob@savingseafood.org

Georgie Harris

IFFO, The Marine Ingredients Organisation

London

+44 (0) 2030 539 195

gharris@iffo.net

Fishermen Nationwide Sign Letter of Support for Commerce Secretary’s Fishery Goals

WASHINGTON — March 22, 2017 – The following was released by the National Coalition for Fishing Communities:

Earlier this month, shortly after being confirmed as Secretary of Commerce, Wilbur Ross addressed Commerce Department staff and outlined his priorities for the Department. Among the top priorities listed was “obtaining maximum sustainable yield for our fisheries.”

The Secretary had previously expressed his desire to boost domestic seafood production prior to his confirmation. In a February story featured in Politico, Secretary Ross is quoted as emphasizing the need to “figure out how we can become more self-sufficient in fishing and perhaps even an net exporter.”

In response to Secretary Ross’ early interest in working with U.S. fisheries, the National Coalition for Fishing Communities (NCFC) organized a letter of support for the Secretary’s goals. The letter was signed by over 350 members of the fishing industry from across the country. The NCFC would like to thank Commerce Secretary Ross for pledging to support the nation’s fishing communities.

The full text of the letter is below:

Dear Secretary Ross,

As members of our nation’s fishing communities, we want to express our gratitude for making the attainment of maximum sustainable yield in our fisheries a priority for the Commerce Department. We are also most appreciative of your publicly stated goal to increase domestic seafood production, which is a priority of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities.

It is most encouraging that we have a Secretary of Commerce who understands the importance of sustainably harvested seafood. As you know, the U.S. fishing industry is a multi-billion dollar industry, and is a vital economic engine for our coastal communities. The industry is ready and willing to work with you and your department to achieve the goals you have set forth for American fisheries, and we want to build a successful relationship between the Commerce Department and commercial fishermen.

We know it is within our means to sustainably increase harvests and achieve maximum sustainable yield. A vibrant fishing industry will pay dividends not only to the coastal communities, but also to the millions of consumers who rely on the nutritional benefits of domestic sustainable seafood.

Read the letter here

New Bedford Mayor Jon Mitchell Voices Coalition Concern Over Marine Monuments at House Hearing

WASHINGTON – March 15, 2017 – The following was released by the National Coalition for Fishing Communities:

Today, New Bedford, Mass. Mayor Jon Mitchell delivered written testimony to the House Natural Resources Committee on behalf of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities. His testimony expressed serious concerns about the impacts of marine monuments, designated using executive authority under the Antiquities Act, on fishermen and coastal communities.

Mayor Mitchell had planned to testify in person before the Subcommittee on Water, Power, and Oceans as a representative of the NCFC, but was unable to attend the hearing in Washington due to snow and severe weather conditions in the Northeast.

In his testimony, Mayor Mitchell questioned both the “poorly conceived terms of particular monument designations,” as well as “more fundamental concerns with the process itself.” Mayor Mitchell also delivered a letter to the committee signed by eleven NCFC member organizations further detailing their concerns with the monument process and how fishing communities across the country are affected by monument designations.

The letter was signed by the Atlantic Offshore Lobstermen’s Association, the California Wetfish Producers Association, the Fisheries Survival Fund, the Garden State Seafood Association, the Hawaii Longline Association, the Long Island Commercial Fishing Association, the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition, the North Carolina Fisheries Association, the Southeastern Fisheries Association, the West Coast Seafood Processors Association, and the Western Fishboat Owners Association.

In addition, three NCFC member organizations, the Atlantic Offshore Lobstermen’s Association, the Hawaii Longline Association, and the North Carolina Fisheries Association submitted individual letters outlining in further detail their opposition to marine monuments.

Mayor Mitchell was also critical of the monument designation process, by which a president can close off any federal lands or waters on a permanent basis using executive authority under the Antiquities Act. He instead praised the Fishery Management Council process created by the Magnuson-Stevens Act, which he said affords greater opportunities for input from stakeholders, scientists, and the public.

“The monument designation process has evolved effectively into a parallel, much less robust fishery management apparatus that has been conducted entirely independent of the tried and true Fishery Management Council process,” Mayor Mitchell said. “It lacks sufficient amounts of all the ingredients that good policy-making requires: Scientific rigor, direct industry input, transparency, and a deliberate pace that allows adequate time and space for review.”

Mayor Mitchell used his testimony to call attention to issues affecting fishing communities across the country, including New England fishermen harmed by the recently designated Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument, and Hawaii fishermen harmed by the expansion of the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument. He also expressed the concerns of fishermen in Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Pacific waters in dealing with the monument process.

Mayor Mitchell concluded by calling on Congress to integrate the executive branch’s monument authority with the established processes of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, ensuring that the long-term interests of all stakeholders are accounted for.

“This Congress has an important opportunity to restore the centrality of Magnuson’s Fishery Management Councils to their rightful place as the critical arbiters of fisheries management matters,” Mayor Mitchell said. “Doing so would give fishing communities much more confidence in the way our nation approaches fisheries management. And it could give the marine monument designation process the credibility and acceptance that it regrettably lacks today.”

The mayor spoke at the hearing on behalf of the NCFC. The city of New Bedford, as Mayor Mitchell stated in his testimony, was instrumental in the founding of the Coalition, providing an initial seed grant for its creation.

Read Mayor Mitchell’s full testimony here

Read the NCFC letter here

Read the Atlantic Offshore Lobstermen’s Association letter here

Read the Hawaii Longline Association letter here

Read the North Carolina Fisheries Association letter here

Scallop & Fishing Industry, Municipalities, Sue Feds to Ensure Seafood Interests Are Considered in NY Bight Wind Energy Project

December 8, 2016 — The following was released by the National Coalition for Fishing Communities:

WASHINGTON — December 8, 2016 – The Fisheries Survival Fund (FSF), which represents the majority of the limited access Atlantic scallop fleet, is the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit seeking a preliminary injunction to delay an anticipated lease sale for the development of a 26-mile long wind farm project approximately 11 miles off the coast of Long Island, scheduled for December 15, 2016. The story was broken today by the Associated Press.

The filing alleges that the leasing process for the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) did not adequately consider the impact the proposed New York Wind Energy Area would have on the region’s fishermen. The site chosen for the 127 square mile wind farm is in the waters of the New York Bight on vital, documented scallop and squid fishing grounds, which serves as essential fish habitat and grounds for other commercially important species, including black sea bass and summer flounder. It is also an important foraging area for threatened loggerhead sea turtles and critically endangered North Atlantic right whales.

The lawsuit argues that fishermen’s concerns regarding the location of the lease area received “virtually no attention or analysis” from government officials ahead of the planned December 15 lease sale, despite fishing stakeholders repeatedly making their concerns known. It further states that BOEM failed to identify the proposed wind farm’s environmental, economic, social, and cultural impacts, and failed to “consider alternative sites in an open, collaborative, public forum.”

Several other members of the National Coalition for Fishing Communities (NCFC)—including commercial fishing organizations, businesses, and communities that depend on the sustainable use of Atlantic Ocean resources—have joined the lawsuit. The suit was filed against Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell, BOEM, and BOEM Director Abigail Hopper.

Organizations joining the lawsuit include: the Garden State Seafood Association and the Fishermen’s Dock Co-Operative in New Jersey; the Long Island Commercial Fishing Association in New York; and the Narragansett Chamber of Commerce and Rhode Island Fishermen’s Alliance in Rhode Island.

The City of New Bedford, Massachusetts, the nation’s top-grossing fishing port; the Borough of Barnegat Light, New Jersey; and the Town of Narragansett, Rhode Island have joined as plaintiffs. Also joining are three fishing businesses: SeaFreeze Shoreside, Sea Fresh USA, and The Town Dock.

The New York Bight consists of the waters from Cape May Inlet in New Jersey to Montauk Point on the eastern tip of Long Island, and offshore to the outer edge of the Continental Shelf, where the coasts of New York and New Jersey form an upside-down L around shallow waters of the Atlantic Ocean.

The plaintiffs are represented by the law firm of Kelly, Drye & Warren. The case will be heard by Judge Tanya Chutkan in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Case No. 1:16-cv-02409.

Press inquiries should be directed to Bob Vanasse at Stove Boat Communications, 202-333-2628.

Read the full legal filing and declarations from the plaintiffs at atlanticscallops.org

Obama Designates 1st Marine Monument In The Atlantic; Draws Ire of Fishermen

September 15, 2016 — During the Our Ocean conference in Washington, D.C., President Obama announced the creation of the first national marine monument in the Atlantic Ocean.

“We’re protecting fragile ecosystems off the coast of New England, including pristine underseas canyons and seamounts,” Obama said during his remarks. “We’re helping make the oceans more resilient to climate change … and we’re doing it in a way that respects the fishing industry’s unique role in New England’s economy and history.”

Opponents are already challenging the move, calling it an illegal use of presidential authority.

“We don’t normally create laws in this country by the stroke of an imperial pen,” says Bob Vanasse, a spokesman for the National Coalition for Fishing Communities.

He adds, “This is not only an end-run around Congress, it’s an end-run around the entire system the Congress created to protect these ocean resources.”

Vanasse says the move will seriously hurt the fishing industry: “We anticipate the offshore lobster industry will be affected to the tune of about $10 million per year. On top of that one of most affected industries is going to be the Atlantic red crab industry. It is going to be very significantly impacted.”

Senior administration officials say to mitigate the financial harm, they’re designating a smaller area than planned, and lobster and red crab fisheries have been given a seven-year grace period before they have to comply.

Jon Williams, president of the Atlantic Red Crab Company in Massachusetts, says his company will survive, but he tells The Associated Press, “It’s a big blow to us.”

Read and listen to the full story at NPR

Northeast Fishing Groups Question Legality of Antiquities Act in Monument Designation

September 14, 2016 (NCFC) — In a letter today to Christy Goldfuss, Managing Director of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, representatives of the Atlantic offshore lobster, red crab, squid, and whiting fisheries challenged the legality of the use of the Antiquities Act in the declaration of a new marine monument off the coast of New England.

I. THE ANTIQUITIES ACT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR MARINE MONUMENT DESIGNATION IN THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE

The letter, which was authored by attorneys from law firm Kelley Drye & Warren, representing the fisheries, argued the President’s use of the Antiquities Act to declare new marine monuments in the United States’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ) is “an illegal and illegitimate use of presidential authority.” The letter specifically notes the legal contradiction between the applicability of the Antiquities Act – passed in 1906 – and the EEZ, which was not established until 1976.

“The Antiquities Act did not apply to areas to which Congress staked its MSA [Magnuson-Stevens Act]-based claims, moreover, because the United States had never claimed any right or authority to manage the area for fisheries, natural resource protection, or anything else, prior to 1976”, the letter states. “Indeed, the MSA provides that it is “to maintain without change the existing territorial or other ocean jurisdiction of the United States for all purposes other than the conservation and management of fishery resources.”

II. FISHERIES ARE BEST MANAGED UNDER THE MSA

According to the letter, fisheries should instead be managed under the process established by the Magnuson-Stevens Act, particularly the successful marine conservation efforts undertaken by the New England and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Councils. The councils are required to operate according to science-based management.

“The MSA requires decisions to be made based on the best scientific information available,” the letter states. “In complete and total contrast, the monument ultimately designated in the Atlantic was largely the result of a series of political compromises layered with a thin veneer of public outreach.”

III. THE PROPOSAL IS NOT NARROWLY TAILORED AS REQUIRED UNDER THE ANTIQUITIES ACT

Finally, existing federal law requires monuments to be as tightly confined to the area necessary to accomplish their objectives as possible. The letter states this is not the case for the proposed monument in the Atlantic.
“The proposal for a monument designation in the Northwest Atlantic canyons is not narrowly tailored to achieve its objectives,” the attorneys wrote. “Unlike the deliberative, scientifically- based fishery management council activities to protect habitat based on the presence of or suitability for corals, a restricted fishing area based solely on geographic location and depth contour is neither narrowly tailored, nor practically defensible.”

For further information or to arrange interviews with any of the fishermen mentioned in the letter, please contact NCFC Executive Director Bob Vanasse at bob@savingseafood.org.

Read the full letter here