Saving Seafood

Maryland oyster restoration project remains stalled by lack of federal funds

November 29, 2018 — Oyster restoration work in Maryland’s Tred Avon River appears likely to remain on hold for at least another year, as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers still has no funding allotted through next September for reef construction in the Chesapeake Bay.

Restoration work in the Eastern Shore river began in 2015 and has so far relied overwhelmingly on federal funds. The Trump administration did not request funding for the project in its budget proposal for fiscal year 2019, but the Corps’ Baltimore District did ask for support through discretionary funds authorized by Congress.

While the Corps decided to provide $13 million in additional funding for various projects in the Bay region, including the use of dredged material to restore two vanishing Bay islands, it did not give the Baltimore District money to continue work in the Tred Avon.

“The District is certainly committed to continuing the program,” said Sarah Lazo, spokeswoman for the Baltimore District. But until funding becomes available, she said, it can’t go forward.

It’s not clear whether the oyster restoration funding request was denied by Corps headquarters or by the White House Office of Management and Budget, which has final say on the Corps’ workplan for spending its discretionary funds. Corps headquarters provided no explanation for why District funding requests were not included in its workplans.

Since 2015, the Corps and its state, federal and nonprofit partners have completed the initial restoration of nearly 81 acres of river bottom in the Tred Avon, at a combined cost of $4.6 million. They have planted a total of 380 million hatchery-spawned seed oysters on reefs that are protected from harvest.

Read the full story at the Bay Journal

Sens. Murkowski and Sullivan say no to Coast Guard cuts proposed by White House

March 13, 2017 — WASHINGTON — Alaska’s Republican senators won’t support proposed major budget cuts for the U.S. Coast Guard, they told the White House Office of Management and Budget in a letter following reports of major cuts in President Donald Trump’s draft budget.

Several national outlets have reported on a draft White House budget request to Congress that includes $1.3 billion cut from the Coast Guard’s $9.1 billion budget. The Coast Guard cut is reportedly aimed at helping pay for a wall on the southern border shared with Mexico.

Alaska Sens. Dan Sullivan and Lisa Murkowski and Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker were the only three Republicans among 23 senators to sign the letter. The rest were Democrats.

Cutting into the Coast Guard budget could mean a far lower chance of bolstering the dwindling U.S. fleet of icebreakers, at a time when shipping traffic is increasing in the Arctic. Senators warned this is not the time to “kick the can down the road” on the Coast Guard’s aging fleet.

“We strongly urge you to refrain from any such cuts. The Coast Guard budget has suffered a steady decline since 2010, which resulted in negative impacts to Coast Guard missions, infrastructure, delays in necessary recapitalization efforts, and has generally constrained Coast Guard operations,” the senators wrote in a letter to OMB Director John Mulvaney.

Sullivan’s office was involved in crafting the letter, which was ultimately released by Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington.

Read the full story at Alaska Dispatch News

Trump budget plan would slam Bay

March 7, 2016 — The Chesapeake Bay Program and other federal initiatives that could impact the Bay have been targeted for steep cuts in preliminary Trump administration budget plans sent to federal agencies, prompting alarm from conservation groups and lawmakers alike.

According to a report in The Washington Post, a budget blueprint for the 2018 federal fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1, would cut the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s budget by nearly a quarter, from $8.2 billion to $6.1 billion, and slash its workforce from 15,000 to 12,000.

Included was a massive 93 percent cut — from $73 million to $5 million — to its Bay Program Office, which coordinates the state-federal partnership. The funding supports research, monitoring and modeling efforts, but the lion’s share — 72 percent — goes to states and local governments to support cleanup efforts.

“The proposed reduction in federal investment in Chesapeake Bay would reverse restoration successes,” said Chesapeake Bay Foundation President Will Baker. “The EPA role in the cleanup of the Chesapeake is nothing less than fundamental. It’s not just important, it’s critical.”

He noted that a bipartisan group of 17 House members from the Bay watershed last month called on the Trump administration to preserve full funding for the EPA’s Bay efforts, and said he hoped the agency’s new administrator, Scott Pruitt, would support the program.

The budget proposal was developed by the White House Office of Management and Budget, without input from agencies.

During his confirmation hearing, Pruitt said the Bay effort was something that should be a “model” for the nation, and that “EPA plays a leadership role in mediating cross-state air and water pollution.”

Besides the Chesapeake Bay, funding for the Great Lakes, the Gulf of Mexico and Puget Sound were also slated for similarly massive cuts of 90 percent or more.

Read the full story at The Bay Journal

OMB Has Been Sitting on USDA Organic Aquaculture Standards for Nearly a Year

August 17, 2016 — SEAFOOD NEWS — Get that organic birthday cake ready! The Agriculture Department’s proposed organic aquaculture standards will hit one year under White House Office of Management and Budget review on Wednesday, double the time officials are supposed to take on the interagency review process. If it’s ever released, the rule will set the first ever standards for the cultivation and production of organic fish and other seafood. Europe and Canada already have organic aquaculture standards, and some other groups have started offering their own standards as the USDA has floundered moving forward.

Why it’s stuck at OMB is unclear. A USDA spokesman tells MA that there is no news on when the rule will be released or what the holdup is, and the White House did not return a request for comment. However, George Lockwood, who chaired an aquaculture taskforce for the National Organic Standards Board, tells MA he thinks the administration is leaning toward only allowing closed-loop systems, such as raising fish in land-based tanks, possibly overriding the recommendations from the NOSB. Such systems often need expensive tanks and other infrastrastructure and aren’t appropriate for all species, Lockwood says, adding that the standards should instead allow a variety of fishing methods. White House and USDA officials asked repeatedly about closed-loop and recirculating systems at an OMB meeting in October, “questions that in retrospect were tipping their hand,” he says.

The delay at OMB is just the continuation of what has been a “tortured” process, says Patty Lovera, assistant director of the advocacy group Food and Water Watch. Given that the organic program was designed for things grown on land, where inputs can largely be controlled, figuring out how best to handle organic aquaculture, where, for example, contaminants can move freely through water, has been difficult. “I think the very slow pace of it shows it’s a tough one to wrap your hands around,” she says.

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