The Feb. 6 proclamation — “Unleashing American Commercial Fishing in the Atlantic” —revokes an Obama- and Biden-era policy that prohibited commercial fishing within the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument. Created in 2016 by the Obama administration, the marine national monument covers nearly 5,000 square miles on the edge of the continental shelf about 150 miles east of Cape Cod. The monument designation included a ban on commercial fishing, which Trump lifted in his first term. The Biden administration reimposed the ban in 2021, a step Trump 2.0 is now reversing.
When it reimposed the prohibition on commercial fishing within the marine monument’s boundaries, the Biden White House, like the Obama administration before it, cited the need to protect sensitive marine life in the area. “Restoring the prohibition on commercial fishing,” the Biden administration said, “will ensure that the unique, fragile, and largely pristine canyons and seamounts, and the dynamic ocean systems and marine life they support … will be safeguarded and will continue to provide an important venue for scientific study and research.”
While the monument does contain three underwater canyons, four underwater mountains known as seamounts, along with deep-sea corals and an assortment of marine life, none of this justifies banning commercial fishing in the area, the Trump administration argues.
“Prohibiting commercial fishing is not necessary for the proper care and management of the Monument,” a White House fact sheet says, “as many fish species are highly migratory, not unique to the area, and are already protected through existing laws, such as the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.”
Indeed, commercial fishing in the United States is already governed by a comprehensive, science-based, and publicly-accountable regulatory system. “Under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, fishing activities in federal waters must meet strict sustainability standards, undergo vigorous scientific review, and follow a transparent process that includes stakeholder input and council oversight,” Bob Vanasse, executive director of Saving Seafood, an industry group, said in a statement.
By contrast, “the 2016 Obama designation of the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts National Marine Monuments excluded commercial fishermen from a region they had sustainably fished for generations. It was imposed unilaterally through executive order — without public hearings, without a cost-benefit analysis, and without input from those whose livelihoods were affected.” Vanasse added.
The establishment of national monuments on federal lands via presidential proclamation was authorized by the 1906 Antiquities Act. As originally envisioned, national monuments were to “contain historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, or other objects of historical or scientific interest.” Under the law, the president is to reserve “the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.”
In the 120 years since the Antiquities Act’s enactment, national monuments have come to include not just federal lands but also federal waters, and the small monuments originally envisioned in the law have grown, in some cases, to encompass thousands of square miles. Critics have asserted that the law’s narrow mission to safeguard archaeological sites and small areas surrounding them has been transformed into a mechanism to quash development of natural resources. The 1996 proclamation of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah by President Clinton, for example, withdrew the monument’s lands (1.7 million acres) from energy and mineral development.
Environmental groups have been outspoken in their support of national monuments, and they lost little time in blasting President Trump’s latest action. “These magnificent canyons and seamounts are protected because vulnerable animals like the endangered sperm whale depend on them for survival. It’s illegal and unconscionable for Trump to try to strip way safeguards just to throw commercial fishing a few more bucks,” said Kristin Monsell, oceans legal director for the Center for Biological Diversity.
But Mayor Jon Mitchell of New Bedford, Mass., home to the nation’s highest-value fishing port, who warned Congress in 2016 that the monument designation would harm fishing communities, welcomed Trump’s action. “[The designation] stretched the language of the Antiquities Act to close the area to fishing without undertaking a thorough analysis of the conservation and economic tradeoffs,” Mitchell told The Bedford Light.
With environmental groups pledging to sue the Trump White House, the future of this vast New England fishing ground will be settled in court.
Bonner R. Cohen is a senior fellow at the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, where he concentrates on energy, natural resources, and international relations. This article was sourced HERE
While the monument does contain three underwater canyons, four underwater mountains known as seamounts, along with deep-sea corals and an assortment of marine life, none of this justifies banning commercial fishing in the area, the Trump administration argues.
“Prohibiting commercial fishing is not necessary for the proper care and management of the Monument,” a White House fact sheet says, “as many fish species are highly migratory, not unique to the area, and are already protected through existing laws, such as the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.”
Indeed, commercial fishing in the United States is already governed by a comprehensive, science-based, and publicly-accountable regulatory system. “Under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, fishing activities in federal waters must meet strict sustainability standards, undergo vigorous scientific review, and follow a transparent process that includes stakeholder input and council oversight,” Bob Vanasse, executive director of Saving Seafood, an industry group, said in a statement.
By contrast, “the 2016 Obama designation of the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts National Marine Monuments excluded commercial fishermen from a region they had sustainably fished for generations. It was imposed unilaterally through executive order — without public hearings, without a cost-benefit analysis, and without input from those whose livelihoods were affected.” Vanasse added.
The establishment of national monuments on federal lands via presidential proclamation was authorized by the 1906 Antiquities Act. As originally envisioned, national monuments were to “contain historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, or other objects of historical or scientific interest.” Under the law, the president is to reserve “the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.”
In the 120 years since the Antiquities Act’s enactment, national monuments have come to include not just federal lands but also federal waters, and the small monuments originally envisioned in the law have grown, in some cases, to encompass thousands of square miles. Critics have asserted that the law’s narrow mission to safeguard archaeological sites and small areas surrounding them has been transformed into a mechanism to quash development of natural resources. The 1996 proclamation of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah by President Clinton, for example, withdrew the monument’s lands (1.7 million acres) from energy and mineral development.
Environmental groups have been outspoken in their support of national monuments, and they lost little time in blasting President Trump’s latest action. “These magnificent canyons and seamounts are protected because vulnerable animals like the endangered sperm whale depend on them for survival. It’s illegal and unconscionable for Trump to try to strip way safeguards just to throw commercial fishing a few more bucks,” said Kristin Monsell, oceans legal director for the Center for Biological Diversity.
But Mayor Jon Mitchell of New Bedford, Mass., home to the nation’s highest-value fishing port, who warned Congress in 2016 that the monument designation would harm fishing communities, welcomed Trump’s action. “[The designation] stretched the language of the Antiquities Act to close the area to fishing without undertaking a thorough analysis of the conservation and economic tradeoffs,” Mitchell told The Bedford Light.
With environmental groups pledging to sue the Trump White House, the future of this vast New England fishing ground will be settled in court.
Bonner R. Cohen is a senior fellow at the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, where he concentrates on energy, natural resources, and international relations. This article was sourced HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.