November 30, 2012 — Markey is right, Lang is right and Mitchell is right: This fight had to be fought. NOAA needed to be challenged because once again it was making decisions with disregard or even contempt for the fishing communities it tells us that it cares for.
Former New Bedford Mayor Scott Lang was not inclined to accept the court's reasoning. "I think our points were extremely valid. I think the agency acted as a renegade when it comes to laws and the day-to-day implementation of fishing regulations."
It was Lang who called for the Commerce Department's Inspector General to look into the rulemaking process at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. He never got it, but who can tell what lies ahead?
There's something else we're looking forward to, as well: Part 2 of the scathing Charles Swartwood III "special master" investigation, ordered by the Commerce Secretary, into fishery law enforcement in the Northeast.
Whatever is in there must be truly awful because Commerce has been keeping the report top secret while everybody waits around speculating on how bad it must be.
After all we've been through, here's a quote from the No. 1 sector advocate, the person who came from the Environmental Defense Fund to become administrator of NOAA, Dr. Jane Lubchenco, on the announcement in September of a fishery state of emergency in the Northeast:
"Fishing is the lifeblood of many coastal communities, providing jobs, a continuation of an historic tradition and culture, recreational opportunities for millions of anglers, and contributing to food security for the nation. Finding solutions will not be easy but, by continuing to work together, we can have healthy fish stocks, profitable fisheries and vibrant fishing communities."
Those sure are nice words. We've heard a lot of nice words from NOAA in the past two or three years, haven't we?
The real lesson runs counter to the lofty pronouncements about caring and cooperation. Instead, it is, Don't challenge anything NOAA does or says, or question its motives as it buries embarrassing reports, or point out the bugs in the science, or wonder why no one has lost their job over the law enforcement fiasco.
And if you want to take it to court, then remember: The law makes it almost impossible to overturn a regulation, which is what New Bedford and Gloucester and all the others were trying to do to save their communities and save their livelihoods.
P.S. Credit where credit's due: the briefs in the lawsuit and appeal were written by attorneys Mikaela McDermott, Julie Peterson and Pamela Lafreniere.
Read the full story at the New Bedford Standard Times