Saving Seafood

Tom Davis to Congress: ‘Oil and water should not mix’

January 17, 2018 — Below is the text of testimony state Sen. Tom Davis, R-Beaufort, plans to deliver Friday, Jan. 19, before the U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources’ Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.

The hearing is titled “Deficiencies in the Permitting Process for Offshore Seismic Research.”

Davis provided the text to The Island Packet and The Beaufort Gazette on Wednesday.

1. Impact of seismic testing:

Seismic testing involves firing loud sonic guns into the ocean floor every 16 seconds to read echoes from the bottom geology, with the tests taking place over miles of ocean for months at a time. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) confirms that the sound from the sonic guns can be recorded from sites more than 1,860 miles away.

Scientists disagree on whether these underwater noises are lethal, but most do agree the blasts could alter sea mammals’ behavior, affecting their migration patterns, mating habits and how they communicate with each other. Most animals in the ocean use sound the way animals on land use eyesight; saturating their environment with noise will have an impact. ExxonMobil had to suspend seismic-blasts near Madagascar after more than 100 whales beached themselves. NOAA estimates that 138,000 marine animals could be injured, and 13.6 million could have their migration, feeding, or other behavioral patterns disrupted.

Seismic testing also affects commercial and recreational fishing — sonic blasts can decrease catch rates of commercial fish species by an average of 50 percent over thousands of square miles. Seismic blasting will affect fish that spawn in the rivers and estuaries all along the East Coast. A 2014 study cited by Congressmen John Rutherford (R-FL) and Don Beyer (D-VA) that found reef fish off North Carolina declined by 78 percent during seismic testing compared with peak hours when tests weren’t being conducted.

2. Results of seismic tests would be proprietary to private companies.

Proponents for testing and drilling often argue that seismic tests are necessary in order to provide coastal communities with data about oil and gas deposits off their shores that is necessary in order to assess whether it makes economic sense to move forward with drilling for those resources. But that information is considered proprietary by the private companies conducting them. Local decision makers won’t have access to it, nor will the public. Not even members of Congress can get their hands on it.

3. Damages associated with drilling.

Accidents happen in a world where human error, mechanical imperfections and coastal hurricanes all play unexpected roles. When you drill, you spill. It is inevitable. The oil industry touts a 99 percent safety record, but that 1 percent is pretty horrific for people living in the vicinity of a spill when it occurs. The federal Mineral Management Service predicts at least one oil spill a year for every 1,000 barrels in the Gulf of Mexico over the next 40 years — a spill of 10,000 barrels or more every three to four years.

We saw what happened in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 when the BP Deepwater Horizon rig spilled millions of barrels of oil into the gulf. It was a disaster, but thankfully the Gulf’s bowl-like shape contained the spill in that region. A similar spill off the Atlantic Coast would be a disaster of epic proportions. If oil entered the Gulf Stream it would be forced up into the Chesapeake Bay, the Hudson River Valley, the Gulf of Maine, the Grand Banks (some of the richest fishing grounds in the world).

The Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Horizon blowout showed that oil cannot be removed from salt marshes and other wetland systems. It can remain in the sediments for decades, as was seen in marshes in Massachusetts. Coastal salt marshes in South Carolina are among the most productive ecosystems in the world, and nursery grounds for many estuarine and marine species. Toxic substances from oil spills, both chronic and acute, will put all of these organisms at risk.

Even if a spill never occurs — and both the oil industry and the federal government admit that spills are inevitable – there’s still an adverse impact to South Carolina’s coast in that the land-based infrastructure necessary to support offshore drilling is dirty and highly industrial. Also, the infrastructure required to transport offshore oil is devastating, e.g., a series of canals built across Louisiana wetlands to transport oil has led to vast destruction of marshlands. Healthy marshlands are a critical component of our ecosystem.

Read the rest of Davis’ future testimony at the Island Packet

 

Maine Fisheries Officials Oppose New Lobster Catch Data Requirements

January 17, 2018 — ELLSWORTH, Maine — SEAFOOD NEWS: The state’s top fisheries official says Maine lobstermen should not be subjected to stricter requirements for reporting their catch to federal regulators.

Patrick Keliher, commissioner of Maine Department of Marine Resources, also said he is confident he can convince the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission to drop the idea.

The interstate fisheries commission is considering a proposal that would require all Maine lobstermen to file daily summaries of how much lobster they catch, how their fishing gear was configured, and where it was set, among other details. Now, each year Maine randomly selects 10 percent of all licensed lobstermen — roughly between 700 and 800 — to report much of the same information. But in addition to 100 percent reporting, the commission also is leaning toward requiring more specific data about where lobster gear is set, which many lobstermen consider a confidential trade secret.

The data help regulators estimate how many lobster are off the East Coast, how much gear is involved in the fishery, where and how often it is used, and how lobster fishing might overlap with other marine activities or otherwise impact the marine environment. The commission feels Maine’s data is insufficient and that its policy is unfair to other states, which require all of their lobstermen to file such reports.

Maine lobstermen, who like other fishermen generally distrust government oversight, overwhelmingly dislike the idea.

At a meeting on the topic Thursday night at the local high school, Keliher asked approximately 50 fishermen to raise their hands if they supported the proposal. None of them did.

Keliher said he understands their trepidation.

For one, the change would cost the state hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to implement, he said. Plus, the data that Maine already collects can be adjusted to give regulators the kind of broad information they want.

He told the group that he will recommend to the commission that Maine instead continue its current practice for catch reports.

“That’s what I’m going to argue for when I go down to D.C.,” next month, he said at the meeting.

At a meeting on the topic Thursday night at the local high school, Keliher asked approximately 50 fishermen to raise their hands if they supported the proposal. None of them did.

Keliher said he understands their trepidation.

For one, the change would cost the state hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to implement, he said. Plus, the data that Maine already collects can be adjusted to give regulators the kind of broad information they want.

He told the group that he will recommend to the commission that Maine instead continue its current practice for catch reports.

Many also see a mounting need for documenting the impact of lobster fishing along the East Coast, especially in federal waters, where more and more of the ocean is being eyed for various uses. Both trans-Atlantic shipping and cruise ship traffic in the Northeast have expanded significantly in recent decades. More recently, interest has soared in ocean energy development projects such as offshore wind farms, liquefied natural gas terminals and possibly oil drilling. Conservation measures to protect whales, corals, declining fish populations and marine habitat also have risen.

Many fishermen acknowledge that increased scrutiny and interest in both marine activities and conservation means they will have little choice but to provide fishing data to regulators. But some argue that better information, rather than just more, can address the need for reliable data without placing undue burdens on Maine fishermen or on the state.

“If you don’t have information, you can’t make good decisions,” said Trescott lobsterman Bill Anderson.

Maine also should try to increase the amount of data it collects on lobster fishing in federal waters, roughly more than three miles out, because that is where the overlap in designated marine uses is increasing the most, he added.

Keliher agreed with Anderson’s points. He said Maine would stop collecting reports from inactive license holders who have no worthwhile data to share and from non-commercial license holders, who fish far fewer traps and less often than commercial fishermen.

The commission is accepting public comment on the proposal until 5 p.m. Monday, Jan. 22. It has not set a timeline for implementing the changes.

This story originally appeared on Seafoodnews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.

 

Gloucester Times: United against offshore drilling

January 12, 2018 — If President Trump truly wants to open the nation’s coastline to drilling for oil and gas, he’ll have a battle on his hands. And in a rare moment of political unity, he’ll have to fight both Democrats and Republicans.

The administration’s plan, announced last week by Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, would open 90 percent of the nation’s coastal waters to development by private companies.

Such a free-for-all could prove disastrous for the marine environment and the industries that rely on it, such as tourism and fishing. Those economies on the Gulf Coast are still struggling to recover after the Deepwater Horizon spill of 2010, the largest in American history.

Locally, the president’s proposal has once again made a target of Gloucester’s fishing industry.

America’s oldest fishing port has spent the better part of four decades fighting off attempts to turn Georges Bank into a de facto oil field, and for good reason: It’s a spectacularly bad idea.

Located about 100 miles off the coast of Cape Ann, Georges Bank, home to species ranging from cod and haddock to lobster and scallops, has long been one of the world’s richest fishing grounds. Generations of Gloucestermen have worked the waters, a tradition that continues even today in the face of heavy regulation. Georges is as much a part of Gloucester as Main Street.

Read the full editorial at the Gloucester Times

 

Massachusetts: Fed’s offshore oil plan raises local concerns

January 12, 2018 — The possibility of having an offshore oil rig a handful of miles from Cape beaches is drawing concern from elected officials and preservation groups.

The Trump administration at the turn of the new year released its draft proposal that would enable energy companies to lease large swaths of ocean and drill for oil and gas in federal waters off both coasts and in the Gulf of Mexico.

Federal waters typically begin three miles from shore.

“Reckless does not begin to describe the Trump Administration’s decision to expand offshore oil and gas drilling coast-to-coast. This unprecedented move ignores concerns expressed by military leaders and the deep and widespread bipartisan opposition voiced by municipal and state representatives,” Rep. William Keating (D-Ninth Congressional District) said in a Jan. 5 statement.

“Allowing this drilling threatens the safety of our waterfront communities, the health of our oceans, and the future of our climate – not to mention the havoc it could wreak on the local economies of coastal communities, like those across New England, who count on fresh fish and clean beaches for their seafood and tourism industries,” he added.

The five-year plan is detailed in a document titled “2019-2024 National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Draft Proposed Program, and is online at boem.gov.

The proposal, a few hundred pages long and broken into geographic territories, shows Massachusetts in the northern Atlantic section. The draft proposes two leases in the north Atlantic.

Read the full story at the Wellfleet Wicked Local

 

North Carolina: Cooper Petitions For Drilling Exemption

January 12, 2018 — RALEIGH, N.C. — Gov. Roy Cooper Wednesday petitioned Interior Department Secretary Ryan Zinke to grant North Carolina an exemption from the draft plan to open U.S. coastal waters to offshore drilling, just as Zinke granted for Florida.

After Zinke’s announcement Jan. 4 that nearly all U.S. coastal waters would be opened up to allow new offshore oil and gas drilling as part of the National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program for 2019-2024– compared to the current program where 94 percent of the waters are off limits — bipartisan governors have spoken out against the plan.

On Tuesday night, Zinke tweeted that after meeting with Gov. Rick Scott, Florida would be exempted from the plan.

Cooper has since requested to discuss with Zinke the risks of seismic testing and drilling off the state’s coast and demand an exemption for North Carolina like Florida received, according to a release from the governor’s office.

“The Trump Administration, through their decision on Florida, has admitted that offshore drilling is a threat to coastal economies and tourism,” Cooper said in a statement. “Offshore drilling holds the same risks for North Carolina as it does for Florida and North Carolina deserves the same exemption. As I said last summer, not off our coast.”

Read the full story at the Coastal Review

 

Maine’s congressional delegation unites against drilling off New England coast

January 12, 2018 — U.S. Reps. Bruce Poliquin and Chellie Pingree of Maine are among the co-sponsors of a bill that would prohibit gas drilling off the coast of New England.

Sens. Susan Collins and Angus King on Thursday signed on to a similar measure introduced in the Senate.

The House bill, which is also supported by representatives from New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Massachusetts and Connecticut, comes in response to a plan announced by President Donald Trump’s administration last week to expand drilling in U.S. coastal waters.

“I am opposed to oil drilling off the coast of our state of Maine,” said Poliquin in a written statement. “So much of our state’s economy and tens of thousands of Maine jobs along our coast depend on our marine and tourism industries. I am committed to protecting Maine’s unique natural resources.”

Pingree has also vowed to fight the president’s policy.

“President Trump’s offshore drilling plan is unprecedented and will face major opposition from Mainers,” Pingree said in a statement last week.

The House bill was introduced Thursday with Rep. David N. Cicilline, R-Rhode Island, as the lead sponsor. U.S. Sens. Susan Collins and Angus King have also announced their opposition to Trump’s plan and wrote a letter to that effect to Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke earlier this week.

“With our environment so closely tied to the vitality of Maine’s economy, we cannot risk the health of our ocean on a shortsighted proposal that could impact Maine people for generations,” Collins and King said in a joint statement.

Read the full story at the Bangor Daily News

 

New England reps’ bill would prohibit offshore drilling

January 12, 2018 — CONCORD, N.H. — Bipartisan members of New England’s congressional delegations have introduced a bill to prohibit oil and gas drilling off the New England coast.

The New England Coastline Protection Act would prohibit oil and gas extraction activities in New Hampshire, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts and Rhode Island.

It’s a response to the Trump administration’s plan to open nearly all U.S. coastlines to offshore oil and gas drilling.

The legislation introduced Thursday is co-sponsored by every senator and member of congress from the coastal New England states. They say the plan threatens coastal communities, fisheries and the economy.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the Tacoma News Tribune 

 

Senators from 12 states seek offshore drilling exemptions like Florida’s

January 12, 2018 — WASHINGTON — Twenty-two Democratic U.S. senators from 12 states on Thursday joined the chorus of local representatives seeking exemptions from Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke’s newly proposed offshore drilling plan, after his surprise move on Tuesday to shield Florida.

Zinke surprised lawmakers, governors, and industry groups on Tuesday night by announcing that Florida would be removed from the Interior Department’s proposal to open up over 90 percent of federal waters to oil and gas leasing.

Zinke had met in Tallahasee, Florida’s capital, with Republican Governor Rick Scott, who told the Interior chief that drilling puts his state’s coastal tourism economy at risk. Scott is widely expected to challenge Democratic Senator Bill Nelson, who is up for re-election this year.

The White House dismissed suggestions that Florida’s exemption was a political favor to Scott. “I am not aware of any political favor that that would have been part of,” spokeswoman Sarah Sanders told reporters.

“Just like Florida, our states are unique with vibrant coastal economies,” wrote the 22 senators, who include Jack Reed of Rhode Island, Cory Booker of New Jersey and Kamala Harris of California. “Providing all of our states with the same exemption from dangerous offshore oil and gas drilling would ensure that vital industries from tourism to recreation to fishing are not needlessly placed in harm’s way,” they wrote.

Interior Department spokeswoman Heather Swift said Zinke intends to meet with every coastal governor affected by the agency’s proposed offshore drilling plan, a process that could take a year.

Democrats are not alone in pressuring Zinke to exempt their states from drilling. South Carolina’s Republican Governor Henry McMaster asked Zinke for an exemption, citing the value of his state’s coastal tourist economy.

Read the full story at Reuters

 

Portland Press Herald: Offshore drilling threatens important Maine industries

January 12, 2018 — The Trump administration Tuesday removed the waters off Florida – and only Florida – from the list of areas newly open to offshore drilling, and in doing so made a compelling case that the Maine coast should be removed as well.

After opposition from Republican Gov. Rick Scott, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke said Florida would not be part of a plan to make more than 90 percent of the outer continental shelf available by lease to energy extraction companies. Florida, Zinke said, was “unique,” with its coasts “heavily reliant on tourism as an economic driver.”

Sound familiar?

Not only is Maine’s $6 billion-a-year tourism industry largely dependent on a clean and picturesque coastline, so too is the $1.7 billion-a-year lobster industry. Together, they have an economic impact far greater than the fossil fuel industry ever could here.

It should go without saying that a spill on par with the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster, which pumped 215 million gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, causing $17 billion in damages and effects on wildlife and coastal areas that are still seen today, would be catastrophic for the state. But even routine seismic testing and the everyday extraction of oil and gas could affect the fishery and degrade the coastline.

Read the full editorial at the Portland Press Herald

 

Massachusetts congressional delegation urges Gov. Charlie Baker to reject Trump administration’s offshore drilling plan

January 11, 2018 — Massachusetts congressional lawmakers called on Gov. Charlie Baker Wednesday to formally oppose the Trump administration’s plan to expand oil and gas drilling off the East Coast.

All 11 members of the state’s delegation penned a letter to Baker urging him to join other states’ governors in officially rejecting the Interior Department’s newly unveiled five-year drilling plan, which seeks to open federal waters off the California coast and areas from Florida to Maine for oil and gas exploration purposes.

The lawmakers, who have been critical of efforts to expand offshore drilling, contended that opening areas off the East Coast for such purposes “would pose a serious threat to our oceans and the economic viability of the Commonwealth’s coastal communities, tourism and shore-side businesses that rely on healthy marine resources.”

Pointing to maritime industries’ impact on Massachusetts’ economy, the delegation noted that the commercial fishing supported 83,000 jobs in the state and generated $1.9 billion income, as well as $7.3 billion in sales in 2015.

Marine-related tourism, meanwhile, generates tens of billion of dollars in economic value each yeah and supports more than 100,000 jobs in Massachusetts, they wrote.

“The economic effects of our ocean community are extensive, providing a source of income and jobs for commercial and recreational fishermen, vessel manufacturers, restaurants and other businesses throughout Massachusetts, all of which would be threatened by allowing offshore drilling and the risk of an oil spill off our coast,” the letter stated.

Read the full story at MassLive