March 5, 2021 — Justice Amy Coney Barrett issued her first signed majority opinion for the Supreme Court on Thursday, siding with the government over an environmental group seeking draft agenda reports about potential harm to endangered species.
Some worry N.J. offshore wind project will affect views, fishing, and tourism
February 16, 2021 — A half-dozen people stood on an oceanfront deck with a million-dollar view, asking a hundred questions about what’s on the horizon. On this clear, winter afternoon, it was the Atlantic as far as the eye can see.
By 2024, nearly 100 of the world’s largest, most powerful wind turbines could be spinning 15 miles off the coast. With blades attached, the windmills could reach as high and wide as 850 feet, and simulations created by Orsted, the Danish-based power company behind the Ocean Wind project, show the turbines are visible, faintly, from beaches in Brigantine, Avalon, Stone Harbor, and Joe and Tricia Conte’s deck in Ocean City.
“Some of those pictures are deceptive, though, because they were taken on a cloudy day,” Joe Conte said. “The pictures they have of a clear day give you a much more vivid view of what it’s really going to look like.”
The project will power a half-million homes in New Jersey and, according to Orsted, create thousands of jobs, both offshore and on during the initial construction process, which could begin this year. It has the support of both Gov. Phil Murphy, who has actively pushed for alternative energy in the state, and President Joe Biden.
Murphy’s office did not return a request for comment for this story, but Jeff Tittel, director of the Sierra Club’s New Jersey chapter, said there was talk of offshore oil wells under past administrations.
Lawsuit: Pipeline could push 2 fish species to extinction
October 29, 2020 — Environmental groups have filed a legal challenge against the Mountain Valley Pipeline that says the project could push two endangered species of fish to extinction.
The Roanoke Times reports that the legal challenge was filed Tuesday in the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond. It involves the Roanoke logperch and the candy darter species of fish.
The route of the 300-mile long pipeline would go from northern West Virginia to southwestern Virginia and connect with an existing pipeline in North Carolina.
The coalition of environmental groups also asked the federal appeals court to review a recent biological opinion from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The agency had found that construction of the pipeline is not likely to jeopardize protected fish, bats and mussels.
Lawsuit claims Gulf of Mexico drilling permits violate Endangered Species Act
October 23, 2020 — Environmental groups went to federal court Oct. 21 with a lawsuit claiming the Trump administration is violating the Endangered Species Act by an inadequate interagency consultation on oil and gas operations in the Gulf of Mexico.
The San Francisco-based legal foundation Earthjustice filed the action on behalf of the Sierra Club, the Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth and Turtle Island Restoration Network. The lawsuit attacks an assessment of the hazards that offshore oil and gas drilling and production pose to endangered marine species, issued in March by the National Marine Fisheries Service.
In an earlier 2018 lawsuit filed in a federal court in Florida, Earthjustice and other groups complained NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had unreasonably delayed developing a new biological opinion – or “BiOp” in the argot of federal bureaucracy – to evaluate impacts as required by the Endangered Species Act.
The law requires certification that government actions – such as permitting offshore drilling – won’t harm endangered species. The last biological opinion was issued in 2007; BP’s Deepwater Horizon accident and oil spill in 2010, with its sweeping environmental impacts and losses of marine life, triggered the process for a reassessment of the dangers.
Supreme Court to Review Endangered Species FOIA Case
March 3, 2020 — The Supreme Court is taking up the Trump administration’s legal quest to keep certain Endangered Species Act records from the public eye.
The justices agreed Monday to review a petition from two U.S. agencies trying to reverse a court order to release draft documents from a controversial species consultation process. The Freedom of Information Act case could have broad ramifications for agency disclosure in other contexts.
Government lawyers warned in their petition that allowing the order to stand would undermine a FOIA exemption that allows for “candid” communication between agencies during decision-making processes. But the Sierra Club, which filed the underlying case, says FOIA doesn’t allow agencies to shield important records simply by labeling them drafts.
“If an agency makes a decision that alters the course of either another agency’s decision-making or affects the public, it doesn’t get to just stamp that document ‘draft’ or ‘secret’ or ‘for our eyes only’ or anything else,” Sierra Club attorney Sanjay Narayan told Bloomberg Law.
Some legal analysts predict that the court’s decision to take the case means the justices will side with the government.
Congressmen Van Drew and Rutherford Introduce ACEPA
February 11, 2019 — The following was released by the office of Congressman Jefferson Van Drew:
In response to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) issuing five Incidental Harassment Authorizations (IHAs) which would advance permit applications for seismic air gun blasting off the Atlantic Coast, Congressmen Jeff Van Drew and John Rutherford have introduced the bipartisan Atlantic Coastal Economies Protection Act to prohibit or stop seismic air gun testing in the Atlantic Ocean. Seismic air gun testing is the first step towards offshore oil and gas exploration and a direct threat to the coastal fishing and tourism economies dependent on healthy ocean ecosystems.
Congressman Jeff Van Drew has a history of working to protect the coastal economy and environment. In 2018 during his time in the New Jersey state legislature, he introduced and passed Senate Bill No. 258 which prohibited offshore oil or natural gas exploration, development, and production in state waters. “Our local economy is dependent on fishing, tourism and wildlife watching – the bottom line is offshore oil and gas drilling isn’t worth the risk,” said Van Drew.
“The waters off the East Coast are home to vulnerable mammal populations, military operations, tourist destinations, and a vibrant maritime economy. Allowing seismic testing in the Atlantic is unnecessary and potentially hazardous to the coastal communities that rely on a healthy ecosystem. The U.S. should not jeopardize our coastal economy by expanding seismic testing and offshore drilling, particularly when our energy needs continue to be met,” said Congressman John Rutherford.
Van Drew and Rutherford were joined in the effort by Representatives Chris Smith (R-NJ), Joe Cunningham (D-SC), Brian Mast (R-FL), and Donna Shalala (D-FL). The bill was also endorsed by a variety of stakeholders ranging from local chambers of commerce and fisheries organizations to conservation and environmental groups.
Endorsements: Oceana, League of Conservation Voters, Surfrider Foundation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, Environment America, Earthjustice, Conservatives for Responsible Stewardship, Hands Across the Sand, American Littoral Society, Ocean Conservation Research, Recreational Fishing Alliance, American Sportfishing Association, International Game Fish Association, Center for Sportfishing Policy
Federal appeals court orders halt to work on Atlantic Coast Pipeline
May 17, 2018 — A federal appeals court has nullified a key permit for Dominion Energy’s Atlantic Coast Pipeline, finding that restrictions against harming wildlife are inadequate and halting some work on the controversial 600-mile natural gas project.
Three judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit said in a ruling issued late Tuesday that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had failed to set clear limits for impact on threatened or endangered species.
The judges said that “the limits set by the agency are so indeterminate that they undermine . . . the enforcement and monitoring function under the Endangered Species Act.” The decision came in a brief unsigned order after being reviewed by Chief Judge Roger L. Gregory and judges Stephanie D. Thacker and James A. Wynn Jr.
The case was brought against the pipeline by the Southern Environmental Law Center on behalf of the Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife and the Virginia Wilderness Committee.
Read the full story at the Washington Post
Not Too Late To Save Critically Endangered Orcas Say State Leaders And Feds
March 15, 2018 — The Pacific Northwest’s beloved orcas will not survive unless humans do more to ensure adequate food and cleaner, quieter waters. That was one of the messages at a crowded signing ceremony in Seattle convened by Washington Gov. Jay Inslee.
The population of genetically-distinct resident orcas has dwindled to a critically low level. Deaths outpace births. Only 76 remain as of the last count.
“This is a dangerously low number for a species that is already endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act,” Jeff Parsons of the Puget Sound Partnership said at a legislative hearing in Olympia earlier this month.
”We’re at a critical juncture with orcas and we need to act now if we’re to save the species,” added Bruce Wishart, a Sierra Club lobbyist.
The resident killer whales face three main threats topped by lack of prey. Their favorite food is Chinook salmon, which is also dwindling. Then there’s disturbance from vessels and underwater noise. A third threat is toxic pollution in the water and marine food chain.
“If they’re not getting enough food, they’re going to use their blubber where contaminants can often be stored,” said Lynne Barre, the federal orca recovery coordinator at NOAA Fisheries. . “But once they’re using that blubber and they circulate, it can cause immune dysfunction and that may be affecting reproduction as well.”
So is this dwindling population doomed?
“I don’t think it’s doomed,” Barre said. “We have seen the whales be at an even lower level in the past but that was following removals for public display and aquariums. So following those removals and low numbers we’ve seen in the past, we have seen this population be resilient and be able to grow—and even at a pretty high rate of two percent or more per year.”
That’s what Barre is hoping happens again now that the federal and state governments have complementary recovery plans. Inslee on Wednesday signed an executive order directing seven state agencies to take a wide variety of short and long-term actions.
Read the full story at NW News Network
Massachusetts: Trump’s offshore drilling plan panned at hearing
March 1, 2018 — Opponents of offshore drilling on Tuesday blasted President Donald Trump’s proposal to open up the New England coast to oil and gas exploration, saying the plan threatens the state’s fishing industry, coastal economies, public health and delicate marine life.
Officials from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management held a informational event about Trump’s plans in the Sheraton Hotel in Boston on Tuesday, but they only took written testimony from the public. They set up booths with experts to answer questions and a broadcast a video with information about the proposal.
Opponents staged a protest in another function room. Some wore lobster and shark costumes. Others held signs that read “Drilling is Killing.” A giant inflatable whale was displayed.
“Opening up our coast to offshore drilling would be terrible for Massachusetts,” Emily Norton, chapter director of the Massachusetts Sierra Club, told a packed room of opponents. “We will be fighting this with everything we’ve got, in the courts, on the streets and at the ballot box.”
Democratic attorneys general from a dozen coastal states — including Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey — have written Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke protesting the drilling plan. Tuesday’s hearing was one of dozens scheduled across the country through the end of March.
Democratic governors along both coasts unanimously oppose drilling, as do a number of Republican governors, including Massachusetts Gov. Charles Baker. Baker is scheduled to meet with Zinke on Sunday to discuss offshore drilling while he’s in Washington for the National Governors Association’s winter meeting.
Baker wrote to Zinke last year expressing concerns about the impact of oil exploration along the outer continental shelf on the state’s fishing industry and marine resources and ecosystems. He also noted the state’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and develop offshore wind resources.
Read the full story at the Gloucester Times
Gloucester Times: Government must listen on ocean drilling
March 1, 2018 — Opponents of drilling for oil and gas in the offshore waters of New England are legion, and they have plenty to say.
If only they could find a way to get their government to listen.
What was touted earlier this year as a public hearing on the proposal by the Bureau Ocean Energy Management was anything but Tuesday. The event, which had been postponed and seen its location shift a handful of times, could be better described as an infomercial. There were business expo-style booths aplenty at the Sheraton Hotel in Boston, and even a promotional video touting the plan.
But if you wanted to let government leaders know in person how you felt about drilling into the seabed, you were out of luck — the bureau was accepting written comments only. It’s a common tactic used by officials to stifle public debate. By accepting written comments, you can pretend you’ve listened to the people without having to actually face them in an open, public and often messy forum.
And folks in these parts are demanding to be heard on the Trump administration’s plan to open 90 percent of the nation’s offshore waters to oil and gas exploration. When it was announced a few months ago, the proposal garnered immediate praise from the giant energy conglomerates who seem to have the president’s ear on issues ranging from the Keystone XL pipeline to so-called “clean coal.” Every other interest, meanwhile, came out against the plan. Republicans and Democrats — including Gov. Charlie Baker and Attorney General Maura Healey — are united in bipartisan opposition. The commercial fishing industry and the environmental lobby, which have been bitterly at odds over the last 30 years, are standing side-by-side.
“Opening up our coast to offshore drilling would be terrible for Massachusetts,” Emily Norton of the Massachusetts Sierra Club said Tuesday. “We will be fighting this with everything we’ve got, in the courts, on the streets and at the ballot box.”
Gloucester Mayor Sefatia Romeo Theken, who cut her political teeth opposing drilling as a member of the Gloucester Fishermen’s Wives Association (she is still the group’s vice president), noted a single leak from an oil well in an offshore fishing area “could devastate us all.”
She’s right. It would be the end of New England commercial fishing, which is less an “industry” like the oil and gas behemoths and more a loose confederation of small businesses ranging from shoreside bait and ice providers to marine repair yards to the boats themselves, the oceangoing equivalent of a mom-and-pop store. Together, however, they comprise a $7 billion-a-year piece of the economy.”
And that’s not taking into account Massachusetts’ recreational fishing and tourism businesses, which rely on clean water and pristine beaches to attract visitors.
Read the full story at the Gloucester Times