Law

NEW BEDFORD — The city's attorneys will oppose a request by U.S. Commerce Department lawyers to delay proceedings on the city's lawsuit challenging the new "catch shares" program and fishing industry allocations.

The Department of Justice attorneys on July 2 filed the motion with the U.S. District Court in Boston, arguing that a delay is needed to prevent two other similar cases, one in New Jersey and the other in Washington, D.C., from causing confusion through contradictory rulings.

They want the court to delay until the cases can be consolidated, likely in Boston.

But Pam Lafreniere, who represents New Bedford, said the motion is little more than a stalling tactic designed to play for time until September, at least.

Read the complete story at The South Coast Today [subscription site]

NOTE: The Standard-Times is a subscription site.  Unregistered visitors are able to read three stories per month, and registered visitors may view ten.  For unlimited access, please follow the subscription instructions on the site. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Motion would allow lawyers paid with tax-deductible contributions to oppose industry's effort against Feds

NEW BEDFORD, Mass – July 10, 2010 – The Conservation Law Foundation has filed a motion to intervene as a defendant in the lawsuit brought against the U.S. Commerce Department by New Bedford, Gloucester and a large number of fishing industry representatives.  The foundation would join Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco as defendants.

Secretary Locke and Dr. Lubchenco are being defended by Department of Justice lawyers paid by the Federal Government. If this motion is allowed, lawyers paid by the Foundation will join  Justice Department lawyers in opposing the suit. 

According the the Conservation Law Foundation's website, donations to the group are "fully tax deductible".

If the Conservation Law Foundation's motion is successful, it will mean that all of the attorneys opposing the suit will be paid either through tax collections or tax deductions.  The industry and the cities of New Bedford and Gloucester, however, will need to raise dollars that are not tax deductible in order to pursue their claims against the Federal government.

Gloucester is the is the oldest commercial fishing port in United States, historically connected to the fishing and maritime trade since 1623., Fishing remains a vital part of the city's economy.

New Bedford is the nation's largest fishing port measured in terms of the value of catch landed, The poverty rate in New Bedford in 2007 (22.6%) was more than double the Massachusetts average (9.9%) and the city is reliant on fishing — its most significant industry. 

According to their press office, the Conservation Law Foundation has offices in Brunswick, Maine; Boston, Massachusetts; Concord, New Hampshire; Providence, Rhode Island and Montpelier, Vermont and an annual budget of $5.9 million.

Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, and Congressman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) have announced their intentions to file amicus briefs in support of the industry position in opposition to Obama Administration policy. 

Last month, a national campaign, the American Seafood Defense Fund, was launched to raise funds in support of the lawsuit filed against the federal government by New England's two largest fishing ports – New Bedford and Gloucester, Massachusetts – together with private fishing interests from Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and North Carolina.  The Port of New Bedford, through the city's Harbor Development Commission, will manage the fund.

 

The intentions of the Conservation Law Foundation to try to become a defendant in the lawsuit were reported by Steve Urbon of the Standard-Times. 

Read the complete article in the Standard-Times

NOTE: The Standard-Times is a subscription site.  Unregistered visitors are able to read three stories per month, and registered visitors may view ten.  For unlimited access, please follow the subscription instructions on the site.

 

 

The city's attorneys will oppose a request by U.S. Commerce Department lawyers to delay proceedings on the city's lawsuit challenging the new "catch shares" program and fishing industry allocations.

The Department of Justice attorneys on July 2 filed the motion with the U.S. District Court in Boston, arguing that a delay is needed to prevent two other similar cases, one in New Jersey and the other in Washington, D.C., from causing confusion through contradictory rulings.

They want the court to delay until the cases can be consolidated, likely in Boston.

But Pam Lafreniere, who represents New Bedford, said the motion is little more than a stalling tactic designed to play for time until September, at least.

She said that the Commerce Department and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration must file their answer to the lawsuit within days along with their administrative record in the matter.

Since they will have to do that regardless of what happens in the other courts or whether or not there is a delay, she said that the city intends to insist that they be filed on time.

New Bedford, Gloucester and the various fishing industry parties who joined the lawsuit have asked the court for an expedited process because of the immediate impact that the fishing restrictions and reorganization are having on the fishing industry.

Read the complete story from the South Coast Today.

 

 

 

 

SEAFOOD.COM NEWS [seafoodnews.com] June 23, 2010 – NOAA has only made one legal change so far in response to the ongoing investigations into NOAA law enforcement of fisheries issues.

Today NOAA published changes to its regulations in the federal register that make it easier for Judges to reject fines and penalties proposed by NOAA prosecutors. Previously, the legal requirement was that a judge had to have a 'good reason' for departing from the civil penalty or permit sanction, condition, revocation, or denial of permit application (collectively, ÔÔcivil penalty or permit sanction'') assessed by NOAA in its charging document. The effect was to strongly weight the proceeding in favor of NOA's penalties.

The new regulation removes this language, and instead requires that NOAA justify at a hearing that its proposed penalty or permit sanction is appropriate, taking into account all the factors required by applicable law, giving respondents have a full and fair opportunity to challenge the proposed Agency action.

Critics of NOAA law enforcement welcomed this change, but said it did not go far enough. Other changes in NOAA law enforcement procedures may still be forthcoming.

An anti-trust lawsuit, naming The Pacific Group as defendants, was filed in Federal court. A copy of the complaint is made available here.

Fund-raising has begun in earnest to support the federal lawsuit filed last month on behalf of fishing interests throughout New England and the Middle Atlantic states — all challenging the constitutionality of Amendment 16, the new management system for the New England groundfishery.

The Port of New Bedford through the city's Harbor Development Commission will manage the American Seafood Defense Fund, according to an announcement made Wednesday.

At least "$50,000 to $60,000" will be needed assuming the plaintiffs win at the U.S. District Court level, according to Pamela Lafreniere, a New Bedford lawyer who is co-counseling the lawsuit with Gloucester's Stephen Ouellette.

Lefreniere said the legal defense fund had about half the needed base.

Read the complete story at The Gloucester Daily Times.

 

 

 

 

 

A national campaign to raise funds to support the fight against commercial fisheries sector management and catch shares has been launched and will be overseen by the port of New Bedford, the city announced today.

The newly created American Seafood Defense Fund will support a federal lawsuit filed last month by New Bedford and Gloucester, the state’s two largest fishing ports, together with private fishing interests from Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and North Carolina. The suit challenges regulations that came into effect on May 1, and names the Administrator of NOAA and the Secretary of Commerce as defendants.

The newly created fund will be managed by New Bedford’s Harbor Development Commission with the commision’s executive director, Kristin Decas, leading fund-raising efforts.

The lawsuit opposes sector management, a version of NOAA’s “catch share” national management initiative, which fishing officials say could force commercial boat owners out of business and shrink the city’s fleet from 600 active vessels down to as few as 100 to 200.

Read the complete story at The South Coast Today [subscription site]

NOTE: The Standard-Times is a subscription site.  Unregistered visitors are able to read three stories per month, and registered visitors may view ten.  For unlimited access, please follow the subscription instructions on the site.

 

 

 

 

 

Legal issues linger around the Bering Sea Aleutian Islands crab rationalization program, touching on federal standards for allocation of fishing privileges and two major components that have yet to be implemented in any of the other 14 catch share programs around the nation.

Both components — processor quota shares and binding price arbitration — drew questions from the U.S. Department of Justice's antitrust division, which recommended in 2003 and in 2004 that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration not adopt either measure for the Alaska crab fishery.

Captains and crew who received about 36 percent of the vessel catch pre-rationalization feel they were disenfranchised in the initial allocation process and say the council's share distribution of 97 percent to vessel owners, 3 percent to captains and nothing to the crew did not recognize their historical participation in the crab fishery and violate the Magnuson-Stevens Act requirement that any quota allocation must be "fair and equitable."

Read the Alaska Journal of Commerce story in full

 

 

NEW BEDFORD — The New Bedford Area Chamber of Commerce is endorsing the federal lawsuit that challenges new fishing regulations, saying the new rules are a threat to the local economy.

Last month, the state's two biggest fishing ports — New Bedford and Gloucester — joined a legal case in an attempt to stymie the switch to commercial fisheries sector management and catch shares.

The chamber's Board of Directors voted unanimously in favor of supporting the lawsuit last week.

Read the complete SouthCoastToday.com story

 

 

The director of the state's Division of Marine Fisheries said Thursday the administration might decide in as little as a week whether to join New Bedford's federal lawsuit over tough new fishing regulations.

Paul Diodati told The Standard-Times, "I don't think it's a matter of a single organization or agency to make the call," but rather a collaborative decision.

"The commonwealth has been down the road several times in recent years, entering lawsuits against the federal government," he said. The results, he said, have been mixed.

State Rep. William M. Straus, D-Mattapoisett, chairman of the Environmental and Natural Resources Committee, met with Diodati on Thursday afternoon along with Mary Griffin, commissioner of the Department of Fish and Game, and David Cash, assistant secretary of Environmental and Energy Affairs, to talk about the state's intentions.

In mid-May, Gov. Deval Patrick told The Standard-Times the decision was in the hands of Attorney General Martha Coakley, but since then the consensus has been that Coakley's role will be to proceed as directed by the client in the issue, which would be Diodati's department.

Patrick told The Standard-Times at the time of his visit that he had told Coakley, "I think it's a good idea" that the state join New Bedford and Gloucester in the lawsuit.

Read the full story in SouthCoastToday.com