Saving Seafood

New Jersey: Trump Saves Florida, Not Jersey Shore, From Offshore Oil Drilling

January 10, 2018 — The Trump administration exempted Florida from its plans to open the Atlantic and Pacific coasts to oil and gas drilling. But the Jersey Shore and its tourism industry won’t get the same break.

The U.S. Interior Department announced this week that it would exclude Florida and cited the potential impact on the Sunshine State’s tourism industry. Despite tourism have impact on the entire coast’s economy, however, the decision left the rest of nearly all U.S. waters, including the Atlantic, open to offshore drilling.

In a statement, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke said President Trump, who owns the Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, directed him to rebuild the offshore oil and gas program “in a manner that supports our national energy policy and also takes into consideration the local and state voice.”

“Florida is unique and its coast is heavily reliant on tourism as an economic driver,” Zinke said. “As a result of today’s discussion and Gov. (Rick) Scott’s leadership, I am removing Florida from consideration for any new oil and gas platforms.”

The decision drew criticism from New Jersey leaders, all of whom – Republican and Democrat – universally oppose drilling off the Jersey Shore. Coastal leaders and environmentalists believe a spill anywhere in the Atlantic Ocean would cause environmental damage all along the coast.

Read the full story at the Toms River Patch

 

Doug Clark: North Carolina deserves the same protection as Florida

January 10, 2018 — North Carolina deserves the same consideration as Florida when it comes to offshore oil and gas drilling.

The Trump administration said Tuesday it will remove the Florida coast from its plan to open virtually all U.S. offshore waters to fossil fuel development.

“I support the governor’s position that Florida is unique and its coast is heavily reliant on tourism as an economic driver,” Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke said, according to a news release from Florida Gov. Rick Scott’s office.

Florida’s coast certainly is “heavily reliant on tourism as an economic driver,” but it is not unique in that.

So is North Carolina’s coast, a point made by N.C. Gov. Roy Cooper last week:

“Offshore drilling represents a critical threat to our coastal economy. Protecting North Carolina families and businesses is my top priority, and we will pursue every option to prevent oil drilling near North Carolina’s beaches, coastal communities, and fishing waters.”

In his statement, Zinke noted:

“President Trump has directed me to rebuild our offshore oil and gas program in a manner that supports our national energy policy and also takes into consideration the local and state voice.”

That voice, as represented by North Carolina’s governor and the elected leaders of many coastal communities, says don’t drill. The North Carolina voice also deserves to be heard in Washington.

Read the full opinion piece at the Greensboro News & Record

 

Maine senators: Trump’s drilling plan threatens lobsters

January 9, 2018 — Both of Maine’s senators are warning that the Trump administration’s plan to open offshore drilling along the coast of their state threatens the state’s huge lobster industry.

“We oppose any effort to open waters off the coast of Maine or any proximate area to offshore drilling, which could negatively affect the health of Maine’s fisheries and other coastal resources, threatening to harm not only the environment but the state’s economy as well,” wrote Republican Sen. Susan Collins and Independent Sen. Angus King wrote to Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke on Monday. “Maine’s economic stability — and countless Mainers’ livelihoods — has always depended on the health of the ocean.”

The lawmakers wrote that lobster alone is a $1.7 billion annual industry for the state.

“These critical industries are dependent on Maine’s pristine waters, and even a minor spill could damage irreparably the ecosystem in the Gulf of Maine, including the lobster larvae and adult lobster populations therein,” the lawmakers wrote.

Read the full story at the Washington Examiner

 

Ed Markey: Plan will spur ‘huge fight’ over offshore energy drilling

January 9, 2018 — BOSTON — The state’s environment, tourism and fishing industry could be threatened by President Donald Trump’s plan to open up more coastal areas to offshore drilling, according to U.S. Sen. Ed Markey, who said the proposal puts “nearly every single mile of coastline in the United States in the crosshairs of an oil spill.”

“Nothing is sacred,” Markey told reporters from the Kennedy Federal Building. “All of the United States is going to be open for the oil industry to be able to drill. That is something that the American people will want to have resolved on the floor of the House and Senate, and that is something that I am going to guarantee him that he will see. This is going to be a huge fight across our country.”

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke on Thursday announced a proposal that would make more than 90 percent of the national outer continental shelf available for oil and gas exploration. Currently, 94 percent of federal offshore acreage is off-limits, according to the American Petroleum Institute.

The 380-page draft plan includes a note that Gov. Charlie Baker does not “support inclusion of areas adjacent to Massachusetts,” and Attorney General Maura Healey “strongly opposes opening up any of the Atlantic or any other new areas to oil and gas leasing.”

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management estimates there are 89.9 billion barrels of oil and 327.5 trillion cubic feet of gas that have yet to be discovered on the outer continental shelf, including 4.6 billion barrels of oil and 38.2 cubic feet in the Atlantic portion of the shelf.

According to the American Petroleum Institute, Atlantic oil and natural gas development could deliver $51 billion in new government revenue, nearly 280,000 jobs and 1.3 billion barrels of oil equivalent per day for domestic energy production by 2035.

Read the full story at the Gloucester Times

 

John Sackton: Trump Order on Offshore Drilling is a Political Stunt More Than a Real Theat to Fisheries

January 5, 2018 — SEAFOOD NEWS — We have been deluged with press releases and new stories this morning reacting to the executive order by President Trump opening up virtually all US coastal waters to oil drilling.

This is something that has been opposed for more than 50 years by both the fisheries and tourism industries, and is opposed by all coastal states except for Alaska, and those in the Gulf of Mexcio where drilling is already taking place.

We doubt this decision will stand.

First of all, the oil markets are not signaling any strong interest in offshore drilling, although they do want the political payoff from the administration of opening up public lands in protected areas within the continental US.

Oil analysts say that current and projected prices simply don’t support expansion of offshore drilling into new expensive areas.  The Shell project to do a test site in the Beaufort Sea off the North Slope of Alaska ended in humiliating failure, as they could not even get the rig into place.  After spending $7 billiion, Shell has withdrawn its interest.

Secondly, drilling has is a long term time horizon.  It will take about 18 months for rules to be in place; then if there were leases, it would take ten years or so for exploration and development.  During this time, the political equation in Washington is very likely to shift back to the consensus that has existed for 40 or 50 years, which is that fisheries and tourism are more important to the US economy than the oil companies.

Third, the US is now on track to produce a record amount of oil, surpassing the previous highest output in 1970.  This is all due to improved technology for land based recovery.  Why oil companies would turn from their successful fracking model that is bringing old wells to life to a far more risky offshore strategy makes no economic sense.

Finally, with the exception of Alaska, Texas, and Louisiana, virtually all other coastal states are vehemently opposed to offshore drilling.  Florida lost billions of dollars in the Deep Water Horizon disaster, and no Florida politician can survive who does not protect that state from offshore drilling.

Likewise, California experienced the Santa Barbara channel spill that turned the entire state against offshore drilling there, and it is highly unlikely that the state would allow the regulatory process to proceed to bring oil ashore.

In Massachusetts, there is a long running international moratorium in drilling on Georges Bank, and again, the local opposition to any oil company attempting to use a lease would be ferocious.

Given the lack of economic return, no oil company is going to take up this fight for any reason other than to gain political points with Trump.  That is not a good position on which to base a long term strategy.

The one state where this might make a difference in Alaska, where the state budget is dependent on oil, and has been hit more than anywhere else by the global oil glut and the turn to natural gas and solar.  Alaska is desperate to gain more drilling, and Sen. Lisa Murkowski succeeded in getting a provision opening ANWR  to oil drilling.  But no matter how much the current state government may want more drilling, the economics dictate where such drilling might take place, and it certainly does not appear to be offshore.

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

 

Coastal governors oppose Trump’s offshore drilling plan

January 5, 2018 — Governors along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts are opposing the Trump administration’s proposal to open almost all U.S. waters to oil and natural gas drilling.

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke announced Thursday a draft proposal that would allow offshore drilling for crude oil and natural gas on the Atlantic Coast and in the Arctic, reversing the Obama’s administration’s block in those areas. It also permits drilling along the Pacific Coast as well as more possibilities in the Gulf of Mexico. Under the plan, spanning the years 2019 to 2024, more than 90 percent of the total acres on the Outer Continental Shelf would be made available for leasing.

Zinke said the Interior Department has identified 47 potential lease sales, including seven in the Pacific and nine off the Atlantic coast. That would mark a dramatic shift in policy, not just from the Obama era. The last offshore lease sale for the East Coast was in 1983 and for the West Coast in 1984.

Florida Gov. Rick Scott, a Republican and ally of President Trump, quickly said no thanks to Zinke’s plan, citing drilling as a threat to the state’s tourism industry.

Read the full story at the Washington Examiner

 

Trump proposes massive expansion of offshore drilling

January 4, 2018 — The Trump administration is proposing to greatly expand the areas available for offshore oil and natural gas drilling, including off the Pacific and Atlantic coasts.

In the first major step toward the administration’s promised expansion of offshore drilling, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke said nearly all of the nation’s outer continental shelf is being considered for drilling, including areas off the coasts of Maine, California, Florida and Alaska.

The proposal, which environmentalists immediately panned as an environmental disaster and giveaway to the fossil fuel industry, is far larger than what was envisioned in President Trump’s executive order last year seeking a new plan for the future of auctions of offshore drilling rights. That order asked Zinke to consider drilling expansions in the Atlantic and Arctic oceans.

“This is a start on looking at American energy dominance and looking at our offshore assets and beginning a dialogue of when, how, where and how fast those offshore assets should be, or could be, developed,” Zinke told reporters Thursday.

Read the full story at The Hill

North Carolina asks firms for seismic information

January 2, 2018 — RALEIGH, N.C. — The state Division of Coastal Management (DCM) has asked four companies to submit more information about proposed seismic testing for offshore oil and gas because the original proposals did not consider the latest scientific studies on the harmful effects to marine life.

According to a press release from the division, documentation to show that the companies’ plans are consistent with state coastal management rules were submitted and approved in 2015.

However, the administration of then-President Barack Obama did not approve the testing, and removed waters off North Carolina and the rest of the East Coast from the offshore drilling plan for 2017-22.

Many local governments along the coast, including Emerald Isle, Morehead City, Atlantic Beach and Beaufort, had urged the president not to OK testing and drilling.

Since then, however, President Donald Trump has restarted the process and directed the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management to develop a new offshore drilling plan, expanding the years it would be valid.

According to the DCM release, additional seismic studies have since been conducted and suggest that shipboard seismic airgun arrays can significantly affect marine life.

Spectrum Geo Inc., GX Technology, MCNV Marine North America and TGS-NOPEC Geophysical Co. all want permission to tow arrays of the airguns behind ships, sending pulses to the ocean floor to locate oil and gas deposits.

DCM sent the companies letters requiring more information supporting their position that the plans meet state coastal policies.

Southport resident Randy Sturgill, who helped coordinate local and statewide anti-drilling-and-testing opposition efforts in North Carolina for Oceana, an international conservation group, said Friday it was good to see that the state “has its finger on the pulse,” not only on state residents’ feelings about offshore seismic testing and oil and gas drilling, but also on the latest science about the testing.

Read the full story at the Carteret County News-Times

 

Fishing leaders: Has the Monterey Bay sanctuary kept its promise?

December 22, 2017 — The answer is no, not to fishermen; please let us explain.

Reflect back to 1992 when the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary was proposed. While fishermen and most others agreed that it could help prevent offshore oil development, we had concerns about how sanctuary authority might affect those of us who provide food from ocean resources.

There was also public discussion about how stakeholders would have a say in the new federal bureaucracy. Commercial fishermen and recreational anglers had killed two earlier sanctuary proposals over these concerns.

In response, fishermen heard that the new sanctuary would not threaten our livelihoods or create fishing regulations. It was a broad assurance, and repeated often by both elected and NOAA officials. Based on this, fishing leaders weren’t neutral, they supported it, even traveling to Washington, D.C.

This promise was never a free-pass from fishing regulations. Rather, it acknowledged that fishery laws, such as the Magnuson-Stevens Act, already provided science-based management. Under that law, overfishing has ended on the West Coast, and several thousands of square miles of quality habitat are protected. It also acknowledged that sanctuaries are not intended to manage fisheries.

The promise is written into the sanctuary’s designation document. If any problem arose, the sanctuary would work with us for a solution.

Read the full editorial at the Santa Cruz Sentinel

 

Bill could make drilling off N.C. coast more likely

December 5, 2017 — WASHINGTON — Congress is considering a bill that would expedite seismic testing and create a revenue sharing system for offshore drilling off the coasts of several states, including North Carolina.

The plan, H.R. 4239, dubbed the “SECURE American Energy Act,” has been met with criticism by environmental groups, but is in line with the Trump administration’s stated goals of expediting offshore energy exploration. It has been passed by the House Committee on Natural Resources, but has yet to receive a vote by the full chamber.

Congress would, according to the bill, have the sole power to establish moratoriums on offshore drilling and create National Marine Monuments. In markup documents, the bill is described as helping offshore operators who need significant advance warning help plan their future projects, allowing for more production.

Oceana, which has been involved in anti-drilling and seismic campaigns in Southeastern North Carolina, has criticized the package. The organization has expressed specific concerns about the parts of the bill looking at the Marine Mammal Protection Act.

Read the full story at the Wilmington Star