FOR IMMEDIATE
RELEASE January 7, 2009
CONTACT: Ted Venker,
1-800-201-FISH
Process or Proclamation?
From the South Atlantic to the western Pacific, federal marine
management is a study in contrasts
The United States has acted twice
this week to impose restrictions on vast sections of ocean,
dictating the future accessibility of those important resources. One
action took years of scientific study and required dozens of public
meetings attended by hundreds of concerned citizens, and thousands
of hours of effort and organization before being implemented. The
other took just months and was accomplished by the stroke of a pen.
Taken together, the two recent marine management actions have cast a
confusing net over the world of federal fisheries management.
In one case, the
National Marine Fisheries Service announced plans to establish eight
management areas off the coasts of North Carolina, South Carolina,
Georgia and Florida designed to recover stressed populations of
deep-water snapper and grouper. The federal rule, prepared by the
South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, will prohibit bottom
fishing in the designated areas, but will allow trolling and surface
fishing over the protected bottom habitat.
Designation of the
areas is the result of an extensive public process over several
years that included input from various user groups, including the
sportfishing community and commercial fishers.
“We regret that past
management failures have left us today with a very short list of
options for recovering these important species,” said Frederic
Miller, chairman of Coastal Conservation Association’s (CCA)
National Government Relations Committee. “However, we recognize that
properly managing long-lived, slow-growing deepwater species is a
particular challenge, and the careful process that produced these
management measures demonstrates exactly how these decisions should
be made. The South Atlantic Council should be commended for pursuing
a course of action that was based on science and invited public
comment on all the various management options that were presented.”
The federal rule,
known as Amendment 14, also includes a provision that allows for the
ban on bottom fishing in affected areas to be reviewed, adjusted and
ultimately lifted when the science indicates that populations of
snapper and grouper have recovered enough to satisfy the management
goals. The designated areas range from nine to 30 nautical miles
offshore and vary in size from 50 to 500 nautical square miles.
“It should never be
an easy or quick decision to close public waters to the public, but
unfortunately there are situations where that is the best management
tool available to recover certain marine resources,” said David
Cummins, president of CCA. “When we are presented with that
situation, it demands a thorough, open process guided by science to
develop the trust and support of everyone involved in the fishery.
We hope the process that developed Amendment 14 can serve as a
blueprint for the careful use of closed areas in fisheries
management in the future.”
In stark contrast,
the President recently announced the creation of marine monuments in
the western Pacific, marking the second time in two years that the
rarely used Antiquities Act has been used to create a marine
monument.
“The Antiquities Act
is sparse on process. In fact, it has none,” said Matthew Paxton,
federal lobbyist for CCA. “The law in its entirety is roughly one
page long and has four sections, one of which provides absolute
discretion for the President to establish national monuments. There
is no NEPA process, no opportunity for public comment and no chance
for judicial review. This is dramatically different than the process
used by the South Atlantic Council.”
The Bush
Administration used the Act in 2006 to create
the Northern Hawaiian Islands Marine National Monument, at the
time the largest marine reserve in the world. Earlier this week, the
Administration used the Act once again to declare marine monuments
in the Pacific Ocean at three other locations: Rose Atoll, the
Marianas Trench and the Pacific Remote Island Area (PRIA). The new
monuments will span more than 195,000 square miles.
“No matter how noble
the intention, management by proclamation is not the way to properly
manage our oceans,” said Miller. “These are staggeringly large areas
of ocean that have been summarily taken out of any public process.
The Antiquities Act discounts the importance of receiving critical
input from all user groups and providing a comprehensive evaluation
of alternatives before any restricted area is put in place. Using
the Antiquities Act as a convenient and expeditious way to lock up
the marine environment runs counter to the entire conservation
ethic.”
The Northern
Hawaiian Islands Marine National Monument was created as a
no-fishing zone and allows neither commercial nor recreational
fishing. In announcing the new marine monuments, the President cited
a recent Executive Order requiring that recreational fishing be
managed as a sustainable activity in such areas, but a final
decision on whether or not to allow it in the new marine monuments
could be years away.
###