Saving Seafood

Federal lawsuit targets Louisiana coastal restoration project

January 13, 2024 — A pair of Louisiana seafood processors joined conservationists and a local resident Thursday to file a federal complaint against the ambitious Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion Project, a $2.9 billion effort to combat the state’s trend of coastal land loss.

In the complaint, the plaintiffs claim the project “will have serious, permanent, adverse impacts on [the basin’s] resources,” including its species diversity, its economy and human health.

They say that in authorizing the project, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers violated administrative procedures and the National Environmental Policy Review Act (NEPA), while federal agencies conducting environmental reviews violated the Endangered Species Act.

The project, which is primarily funded with $2.26 billion from Natural Resource Damage Assessment funds from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill settlement, broke ground in August 2023. A joint effort of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Louisiana’s Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority, it will feature a controlled gate structure through the river’s existing levee connected to a new, approximately 2-mile manmade channel with an outfall structure in the basin.

Read the full article at the Courthouse News Service

NMFS announces draft EIS available for deep-set buoy gear authorization, Amendment 6 to the HMS FMP

August 23, 2021 — The following was released by the Pacific Fishery Management Council:

NOAA Fisheries announces the release of a draft environmental impact statement (EIS), in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, which includes an analysis of the potential short- and long-term impacts of the proposed action to authorize fishing with deep-set buoy gear (DSBG) in federal waters off the U.S. West Coast, on the human (biological, physical, social, and economic) environment.

Please see the public notice on the Council’s website for a link to the Draft EIS and additional details.

For further information, please contact:

  • NOAA Fisheries:  Amber Rhodes at (562) 477-8342, Amber.Rhodes@noaa.gov
  • Pacific Council staff officer Dr. Kit Dahl at 503-820-2422; toll-free 1-866-806-7204.

D.C. Circuit Affirms that Offshore Wind Lease Does Not Trigger NEPA Review

June 4, 2021 — The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) does not need to conduct full environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) when granting an offshore wind farm lease, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed. The decision followed a lawsuit by commercial fishing organizations and seaside municipalities who claimed that BOEM violated NEPA and the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) when it auctioned an offshore lease to Equinor (formerly Statoil) without performing an environmental review of the anticipated windfarm project. The decision puts to rest the question of whether a mere lease sale may trigger extensive environmental review under NEPA, potentially streamlining the initial lease acquisition process, but also requiring the investment of significant funds before developers have cleared environmental review.

In Fisheries Survival Fund, et al. v. Sally Jewell, et al.,1 plaintiffs challenged BOEM’s issuance of the lease, arguing that it violated NEPA because it failed to analyze the environmental impacts of constructing and operating a wind energy facility. Leases for offshore energy projects proceed under different processes depending on whether BOEM or the developer proposes an area for lease. Either way, BOEM must consult with state task forces, other state and local representatives, and with representatives of Indian Tribes whose interests may be affected. Before issuing a lease, BOEM follows a four-step process, issuing a Call for Information and Nominations, completing the Area Identification process, publishing a Proposed Sale Notice, and publishing a Final Sale Notice.

Here, BOEM published an environmental assessment at the same time it published the Proposed Sale Notice for the wind energy lease at issue. The environmental assessment found that the reasonably foreseeable impacts of the lease sale would not significantly impact the environment. Plaintiffs argued that that more extensive environmental review was required, not just of the lease itself but of the full impacts of the anticipated wind farm, alleging that BOEM violated NEPA by failing to perform this more extensive review. BOEM maintained throughout the litigation that additional analysis and environmental review under NEPA was not required until Equinor conducted a site assessment and proposed a construction and operations plan for the wind energy facility.

Read the full story at The National Law Review

Nation’s Fishery Councils Recommend Ways to Support American Seafood, Improve Coordination with NMFS

September 30, 2020 — An executive order, changes to National Environmental Policy Act measures, guidance related to overfishing and a National Seafood Council were among several issues fishery leaders from around the country discussed last week. The biannual meeting of the Council Coordination Committee was held virtually, but hosted by Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council.

Leaders from all eight regional councils had the opportunity to talk with National Marine Fisheries Service managers during the open public meeting.

Read the full story at Seafood News

ANDY SABIN: The conservative case against developing Alaska’s Pebble Mine

August 28, 2020 — The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers this week warned that the proposed Pebble project — a vast gold and copper mine near the headwaters of Alaska’s Bristol Bay — was impossible to build without causing significant damage to the region’s pristine waters and salmon fishery.

The Corps stopped short of halting the mine but found the developer, the Pebble Limited Partnership, was unlikely to meet the level of mitigation that would be required under the Clean Water Act to offset the impact on wetlands.

The Trump administration has now done what the previous administration would not — it gave the proposed Pebble project full consideration under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). While the previous administration pre-judged the project with an unprecedented preemptive veto, the Trump U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and all cooperating agencies have given it a full review.

It is time for President Donald Trump to be the decider. Given an already strong conservation record, President Trump should instruct his agencies to declare the Pebble project unworkable. 

I am a miner and a fisherman. I am also a dedicated conservationist who believes that we have a duty as conservatives to leave this great land better than we found it. I am also a staunch supporter of the president and his policies.

Read the full story at The Hill

Cape May Fishermen, Processor Sues NOAA’s At-Sea Monitoring Rule

February 21, 2020 — Cause of Action Institute, on behalf of six trawlers and a processor based in Cape May, NJ, filed a lawsuit yesterday against Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross and NOAA Fisheries to block a new rule forcing them to pay for third-party “at-sea monitors.”

The plaintiffs claim that NOAA Fisheries and the Department of Commerce violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) when designing and implementing the final rule.

Read the full story at Seafood News

Push to scale back US environmental law draws ire at hearing

February 13, 2020 — The Trump administration on Tuesday hosted the first of two hearings on its proposal to speed energy and other projects by rolling back a landmark environmental law. Opponents from Western states argued the long-term benefits of keeping the environmental reviews.

Among other changes, President Donald Trump wants to limit public reviews of projects — a process that’s enshrined in the National Environmental Policy Act signed in 1970 by President Richard Nixon. The administration also wants to allow project sponsors to participate at an early stage of drafting federal environmental impact statements.

Dozens of environmental and tribal activists testified at the Denver hearing of the president’s Council on Environmental Quality.

The act “is not just a tool to reduce impacts to the environment,” said Gwen Lachelt. a commissioner in Colorado’s La Plata County. “It’s a basic tool of democracy.”

Representatives of oil and gas groups countered that multiyear environmental reviews of pipelines, coal mines and renewable energy projects kill jobs. increase costs and often outlast a project’s economic feasibility.

That proposed changes chagrined Jeannie Crumly, a rancher from Nebraska who has fought construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline for more than a decade. President Barack Obama canceled the project, only to have it resurrected by Trump.

Read the full story at the Associated Press

NEPA climate overhaul could unleash energy projects

January 8, 2020 — The White House is poised to exclude climate considerations from its controversial rewrite of rules surrounding the nation’s core environmental law.

The Council on Environmental Quality’s proposed changes to National Environmental Policy Act guidelines will likely emerge this week.

NEPA, signed into law by President Nixon, gives communities input and allows them to challenge federal decisions on projects like pipelines, highways and bridges. And it requires federal regulators to analyze a host of impacts.

The Trump plan is expected to “simplify the definition of environmental ‘effects’ and clarify that effects must be reasonably foreseeable and require a reasonably close causal relationship to the proposed action,” according to a draft White House memo obtained by E&E News.

In other words, the government could only study the impacts tied directly to a project — not how a project would add to a larger problem, something environmentalists have been clamoring for.

“No one pipeline causes climate change, so that wouldn’t be considered a reasonably close causal relationship,” explained Christy Goldfuss, a senior vice president at the left-leaning Center for American Progress (CAP). “I suspect that’s the intent.”

Read the full story at E&E News

Aquaculture industry under pressure on both coasts

October 31, 2019 — Maquoit Bay in Brunswick and Puget Sound in Washington state are separated by thousands of miles, but shellfish farmers in both places are feeling some heat.

Earlier this month, a federal judge in Seattle ruled that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit that authorizes virtually all shellfish aquaculture in Washington state was void because “the Corps has failed to adequately consider the impacts of commercial shellfish aquaculture activities” as required by the federal Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.

The court’s order could force Washington’s shellfish farmers to cease activities other than the harvest of animals already in the water until the Corps issues individual permits for each shellfish farming site.

For the moment, the court’s decision applies only to the Washington state aquaculture industry but, even if the court expands its reach, Maine’s aquaculture industry won’t be affected.

“It has no bearing in the rest of the country,” Jay Clement, chief of the Maine Project Office in the Corps of Engineers’ New England District Regulatory Division, said last week.

The permit the court considered was a “nationwide permit” authorizing discharges, structures and work related to commercial shellfish aquaculture activities.

“There have been no nationwide permits in New England since 1995,” Clement said. “It really doesn’t apply to how we do business in Maine.”

Read the full story at The Ellsworth American

BOEM Releases Draft Wind Energy Areas in New York Bight

November 15, 2018 — The following was released by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM):

Intergovernmental Renewable Energy Task Force Meeting on the New York Bight

November 28, 2018
Hotel Pennsylvania
401 Seventh Avenue at 33rd Street
New York, NY 10001

Draft Wind Energy Areas

After reviewing the comments received in response to the Call for Information and Nominations, comments received during stakeholder meetings and general feedback, BOEM has delineated draft Wind Energy Areas in the New York Bight.

What is a Wind Energy Area?

As a reminder, a Wind Energy Area is a portion of the Outer Continental Shelf identified by BOEM for an Environmental Assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Traditionally, BOEM has identified a Wind Energy Area and then offered that entire area for sale as a Lease Area. However, the fact that an area is designated as a Wind Energy Area does not mean that it will necessarily be offered for sale. The proposed area for sale, or Lease Area, will be determined at the Proposed Sale Notice stage.

What do the different colors mean?

The Draft Wind Energy Areas are depicted in two colors, dark green and light green.  The dark green areas are BOEM’s primary recommendations, areas that relative to others with in the Call Areas present the least amount of conflict with a potential offshore wind facility.  Areas in light green are secondary recommendations, which are slightly more conflicted than the dark green areas, and are where BOEM welcomes additional stakeholder perspectives.

Task Force Agenda

Please see a draft task force agenda below.  Note that it is subject to change prior to the meeting date.

New York Bight Task Force Roster (as of November 14, 2018)

If you would like to provide updated contact information to BOEM, please reach out to luke.feinberg@boem.gov.

Read the announcement here