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

LYDIA BLUME AND SARAH PEBWORTH: Maine needs to better prepare for changing climate – and we can’t do it alone

July 9, 2021 — Protecting the health and safety of our community members is of primary concern. As leaders of districts along the coast of Maine, this includes dealing with the impacts of climate change and planning for a prosperous future with these changes in mind.

Maine’s coastline will feel the effects of climate change for generations, which means communities along our rugged shores will feel these effects, too. Rising seas and increasingly dangerous storm surge events threaten our local infrastructure and economies. One of the best ways to protect us from the effects of climate change is to invest in coastal restoration and resilience projects like shoreline stabilization and wetland restoration. Both offer environmental and economic benefits that can help our communities plan for the future.

As we grapple in our districts with the tremendous scope and cost of the coming changes, we are relieved to see the promises of coastal restoration and resilience investments at the federal level. Restoration and resilience programs can and should play a key role in President Biden’s Build Back Better agenda and for several good reasons: These projects will improve community resilience, provide opportunities for job growth and increase economic vitality. Additionally, recent pieces of federal legislation – the Moving Forward Act; Shovel Ready Restoration Grants for Coastline and Fisheries Act of 2020; the Ocean Based Climate Solutions Act, and others – have included coastal and ocean restoration programs. To build on what is in place already, it is important that this funding be appropriated as a new grant program in order to enhance equity and address environmental justice needs. When Congress and the administration consider economic stimulus and infrastructure funding to restore the nation’s economy and address climate change, a $10 billion coastal and ocean restoration program under the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration must be part of that package.

Read the full opinion piece at the Portland Press Herald

Biden’s 30×30 plan gives hope, but also uncertainy

June 16, 2021 — On May 6th, the Biden administration released the “Conserving and Restoring America the Beautiful” report that instructed NOAA to expand the National Marine Sanctuaries System, the National Estuarine Research Reserve System, to “help restore fish populations and better protect threatened and endangered species.” This report is considered the administration’s plan to meet the 30% of land and water protected by 2030 or “30 by 30” initiative put forth by executive order (E.O. 14008) in January 2021.

Before getting into the specifics of this report, it is worth reviewing the history of the “30×30” planning process and some of the initial responses from stakeholders:

  • October 2015 – Jane Lubchenco and Kirsten Grorud-Colvert publish a paper in Science Magazine titled: “Making waves: The science and politics of ocean protection”. This paper is credited for introducing the 30% global marine protected area (MPA) target.
  • September 2016 – The World Conservation Congress voted to support increasing the portion of the ocean that is highly protected to at least 30% to help effectively conserve biodiversity.
  • November 2020 – U.S. Representative Raul Grijalva introduced the Ocean-Based Climate Solutions Act. Title II of this act called for expanding marine protected areas (MPAs) in U.S. waters to equal 30% of the exclusive economic zone (EEZ).
  • November 2020 – Immediately after this introduction, more than 830 seafood industry stakeholders sent a letter to Rep. Grijalva expressing their concern about the proposals under Title II.
  • December 2020 – 28 prominent marine scientists sent a similar letter of opposition to Congress, questioning the justification for 30% MPAs described in Title II.

When the Biden administration introduced the 30×30 initiative in January 2021, various fishing industry stakeholders were upset for similar reasons described in the letters of opposition towards Title II of the Ocean-Based Climate Solutions Act.

Read the full story at Sustainable Fisheries UW

JESSICA HATHAWAY: What you need to know about 30×30

January 29, 2021 — As the Biden administration takes over, I’ve seen quite a bit of hand-wringing among stakeholders in the fishing industry.

Depending on what policies you’re watching closely, that anticipation is coupled with anxiety about what may or may *not* happen next.

While I would never hold my breath for 100 percent buy-in on any policy, I hope we can get a majority speaking in a unified voice around some of the critical pieces of the 30×30 mandates. So here’s my rundown on the key points.

The goal

To commit 30 percent of the nation’s lands and oceans to conservation by 2030, as part of President Biden’s executive order on addressing climate change.

The origin

The way-back machine takes us to a United Nations 2015 Sustainable Development Goal to “conserve at least 10 percent of coastal and marine areas, consistent with national and international law and based on the best available scientific information.”

The 30×30 language got a jump in 2020 as legislation conceived in California, where it failed to pass. It was dusted off, reformatted and expanded to become part of a suite of sweeping Magnuson-Stevens Act reauthorization proposals and introduced in the House last fall, titled the Oceans-Based Climate Solutions Act of 2020.

Now it has become part of the Biden administration’s new climate proposals issued as executive orders. If you haven’t heard, the new administration is prioritizing environmental justice. (Before you roll your eyes, note this can and is designed to work out for everyone. Read on.)

What this could mean for the fishing industry is exactly what so many stakeholders have been asking for — a seat at the table. The primary strategy for implementation of this policy is community engagement.

Read the full opinion piece at National Fisherman

Biden calls to double offshore wind by 2030; Vineyard Wind seeks permit restart

January 28, 2021 — The Biden administration aims to accelerate development of offshore wind energy, with a new goal to double planned renewable energy production at sea by 2030, even as the Department of Interior pauses any new leasing for oil and gas.

“The Department will immediately begin a review of processes and procedures to date as it re-invests in a rigorous renewable energy program,” according to a statement issued Wednesday as part of President Biden’s latest round of executive orders.

The Jan. 27 announcements on energy policy came two days after developers of the Vineyard Wind project off southern New England announced they are approaching the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management about resuming the permitting process for the 800-megawatt turbine array.

The 30×30 language is included in the Ocean-Based Climate Solutions Act (H.R.8632) proposed in Congress, drawing strong pushback from both fishermen and marine scientists who warn against broad-brush efforts to declare marine sanctuaries.

“Conserving 30 percent of our lands and waters by 2030 is a big deal and we must get it right if it is to be effective. If this initiative is guided by no more than simply what feels good or sounds catchy, we will not get it right,” said Chris Brown, a Rhode Island commercial fisherman and president of the Seafood Harvesters of America in a statement Wednesday. “Much like the Magnuson-Stevens Act, so too must this initiative be rooted in science if it is to be a global gold standard. ‘30×30’ must be science-based, transparent, and stakeholder-driven, while having a watchful eye for fairness, equity, and societal betterment. Our oceans are changing rapidly and we must confront that head on. However, we must allow for science to guide us, not politics.”

Read the full story at National Fisherman

Biden’s “30 by 30” order could close-off 30 percent of US ocean to fishing

January 27, 2021 — The administration of U.S. President Joe Biden announced on 27 January that the president plans to sign an executive order that commits to a “30 by 30” goal first envisioned in the Ocean-Based Climate Solutions Act that was introduced to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2020.

The “30 by 30” plan aims to commit 30 percent of lands and oceans to conservation by 2030, which in the House version of the bill entails a complete ban on “commercial extractive use” in areas of the ocean conserved. The planned executive order, according to a White House statement, is intended to “tackle the climate crisis at home and abroad.”

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Beware ’30×30′ in federal climate bill

January 27, 2021 — 30×30, a major provision in the Ocean-Based Climate Solutions Act that would ban all commercial fishing in at least 30 percent of U.S. oceans by 2030, has drawn widespread opposition by fishermen and fisheries scientists since it was introduced in the House of Representatives last year. In a letter to Congress last November, over 800 participants in the U.S. seafood economy wrote that 30×30 “would undermine our nation’s world-class system of fisheries management.” 

In an open letter to Congress last December, a group of fisheries scientists wrote that 30×30 “is not based on the best scientific information available” and “will decrease flexibility of the fishery management system to adapt to climate change.” 

The following is excerpted from an article by Doreen Leggett, communications officer at the Cape Cod Commercial Fishermen’s Alliance, published by Wicked Local:

Commercial fishermen rely on the sea and are often more aware of the changing ocean environment than anyone else.

Take fisherman Kurt Martin of Orleans. For close to three decades he has kept daily logs of everything from where he fishes to weather conditions, water temperatures and depth.

A few things stand out: Fog that was virtually synonymous with Chatham is becoming a rarity, summer ocean temperatures have increased about 10 degrees and walking around an iced-in Pleasant Bay come Christmas is a distant memory.

Meanwhile, the lobster fishery south of the Cape is much diminished while Canada’s is growing as warmer water pushes north. Martin said the lobster fishery on the Cape is “stable” now.

“But we are basically on the edge of disaster. We can definitely see the trend of the shift being made.”

Climate change has pushed commercial fishermen to change their business plans, the way they fish, what they fish for, even their home ports. But when far-reaching climate legislation was drafted and filed in the House of Representatives last year (by a representative from Arizona), fishermen were shut out of the conversations. They may be shut out of their fishing grounds as well.

There are many positives in the 300-page bill, but one section would harm fishing communities across the nation, hamstring buy-local movements, increase seafood imports, and complicate efforts to combat climate change.

The initiative, dubbed 30×30, a focal point in the House version of the Ocean-Based Climate Solutions Act, would require “protection” of at least 30 percent of U.S. oceans by 2030 by banning “all commercial extractive use” in broad swaths of the ocean, circumventing the country’s sustainable fishery management process. (Specific areas have not yet been identified.)

Read the full article at Wicked Local

LINDA BEHNKEN: Biden administration should steer clear of environmental colonialism

January 26, 2021 — In the next few weeks, the Biden administration is expected to take sweeping climate action as promised. The president has already done so on day one, including laudable actions such as rejoining the Paris Agreement and promulgating systematic review of Trump administration environmental rollbacks.

But very soon, we expect to see an executive order advancing an initiative called “30×30″ (pronounced ‘thirty-by-thirty’) that calls for the protection of 30% of the world’s oceans to commercial extractive use by 2030. For Americans, this could mean sealing off our access to an area of the ocean larger than Texas off the continental U.S. and Alaska. The move is staggering in its scope, and it could do severe harm to fishing communities.

Let me be clear: Commercial fishermen are on the front lines of climate change, and we have been calling for meaningful climate action for years. We support reductions in carbon emissions globally, and our organization has worked to reduce the Southeast Alaska fleet’s emissions. Nationally, we have led the world in our sustainable fisheries management, including prohibiting bottom trawling in more than 76% of our oceans already, without the need for blanket prohibitions. We proudly provide sustainable high-quality protein to both domestic and foreign markets, and this year provided over 400,000 seafood meals for free to families in need to address regional food insecurity. Despite all this, fisheries stakeholders have had no meaningful opportunities whatsoever to engage in policy discussions around this initiative.

Read the full opinion piece at Anchorage Daily News

DOREEN LEGGETT: The Fishing Life: Beware ’30×30′ in federal climate bill

January 26, 2021 — Commercial fishermen rely on the sea and are often more aware of the changing ocean environment than anyone else.

Take fisherman Kurt Martin of Orleans. For close to three decades he has kept daily logs of everything from where he fishes to weather conditions, water temperatures and depth.

A few things stand out: Fog that was virtually synonymous with Chatham is becoming a rarity, summer ocean temperatures have increased about 10 degrees and walking around an iced-in Pleasant Bay come Christmas is a distant memory.

Meanwhile, the lobster fishery south of the Cape is much diminished while Canada’s is growing as warmer water pushes north. Martin said the lobster fishery on the Cape is “stable” now.

“But we are basically on the edge of disaster. We can definitely see the trend of the shift being made.”

Read the full opinion piece at Wicked Local

Fishing interests fight ocean closures bill

November 20, 2020 — A national coalition of seafood industry and commercial fishery stakeholders is mobilizing against congressional legislation that would exclude commercial fishing from wide swaths of the nation’s fisheries.

The House bill, filed in late October by U.S. Rep. Raul Grivalja of Arizona, seeks to use “marine protected areas” to ban all “commercial extractive use” across 30% of the nation’s exclusive economic zone by 2030. The closures would be part of the so-called “30×30” strategy to conserve 30% of ocean habitat worldwide by the 2030 target date.

In a letter to Grivalja, more than 800 fishing stakeholders, including the Gloucester-based Northeast Seafood Coalition, framed the conservation-fueled proposal as an undermining threat to the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and an assault on the economic viability of fishing communities from New England to Alaska.

“Members are the commercial fishing industry are very concerned about the attempt to undermine the Magnuson Act via these proposed pieces of legislation,” said Jackie Odell, executive director of the Northeast Seafood Coalition.

Read the full story at the Gloucester Daily Times

Dr. Hilborn: No-take MPAs “do nothing to mitigate” problems facing U.S. oceans

November 18, 2020 (Saving Seafood) — WASHINGTON — Yesterday, at a House Natural Resources Committee hearing on the Ocean-Based Climate Solutions Act, respected fisheries scientist Dr. Ray Hilborn criticized the marine protected area (MPA) provision of the bill, which he called “the wrong tool for adapting to climate change.”

The provision, known as the “30 by 30” plan, would require the establishment of MPAs in at least 30 percent of American waters by 2030. In his testimony, Dr. Hilborn, professor of sustainable fisheries at the University of Washington, cited numerous threats facing U.S. oceans, including climate change, ocean acidification, exotic species, land-based runoff, plastics and illegal fishing.

“There are solutions to each of these problems,” Dr. Hilborn said. “But it is not no-take MPAs – they do nothing to mitigate these problems.”

Dr. Hilborn praised current fisheries management under the regional council process, which he called science-based and credible with industry and other stakeholders. He also pointed out that MPAs would simply push fishing pressure outside of the protected area into other parts of the ocean, with no net gain.

“MPA advocates ignore the fact that ‘30 by 30’ would cause 70 percent of U.S. oceans to see increased fishing pressure from the vessels that moved out of the 30 percent closed, and thus potentially be less resilient to climate change. Do we really want to make 70 percent of our oceans less resilient to climate change?” Dr. Hilborn said.

The hearing kicked off with Ranking Member Rob Bishop (R-UT) introducing a letter organized in part by Saving Seafood and signed by over 800 seafood industry members opposing the “30 by 30” plan. Rep. Bishop added that “30 by 30” is “woefully misguided, does not improve fisheries, it undermines the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and even worse, it’s detrimental to Americans, especially American fishermen.”

Read Dr. Hilborn’s written testimony here

Watch the full hearing here

  • 1
  • 2
  • Next Page »

Recent Headlines

  • Trump Withdraws From Agreement With Tribes to Protect Salmon
  • Opponents seek injunction to halt Empire Wind
  • Trump bid to shrink monuments could prompt big legal battle
  • Fishing Group Renews Effort to Stop Empire Wind
  • Charter company that helped extend Atlantic red snapper season says fight not over yet
  • How the Partners of Commercial Fishermen Started a Women’s Movement in the Commercial Fishing Industry
  • Local, regional groups sue to halt Empire Wind project
  • UN High Seas Treaty edges closer to coming into force

Most Popular Topics

Alaska Aquaculture ASMFC Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission BOEM California China Climate change Coronavirus COVID-19 Donald Trump groundfish Gulf of Maine Gulf of Mexico Hawaii 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 South Atlantic 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 © 2025 Saving Seafood · WordPress Web Design by Jessee Productions