|
Local politics, the county, and the world, as viewed by Tammy Maygra Tammy’s views are her own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bill Eagle, his pastor, Tammy’s neighbors, Wayne Mayo, Betsy Johnson, Brad Witt, Former President Trump, Henry Heimuller, Joe Biden, Pat Robertson, Ted Cruz, Joe Biden’s dogs, or Claudia Eagle’s Cats. This Tammy’s Take (with the exception of this disclaimer) is not paid for or written by, or even reviewed by anyone but Tammy and she refuses to be bullied by anyone. See Bill’s Standard Disclaimer
|
|
Tangled whales, die from being caught in crab pot lines, it is time to fix the problem
This week I thought we would learn about lawsuits filed against the state and federal government. My Information is from The Center for Biological Diversity
Whales and Elk Killing
The National Marine has been accused of using fraudulent numbers of whale deaths because of net tangles. The number of healthy whales are less than the fisheries claim, so therefore the number of “allowed” deaths need to be reduced and needs to be accurate. This is what has prompted this suit. The Lawsuit Aims to Protect Pacific Humpbacks From Deadly Fishing Gear West Coast Pot Fishery Unlawfully Entangles Endangered Whales SAN FRANCISCO— The Center for Biological Diversity sued the National Marine Fisheries Service today for failing to protect endangered Pacific humpback whales from deadly entanglements in sablefish pot gear off the coasts of California, Oregon and Washington. Today’s lawsuit challenges the federal permit given to the fishery in December to kill and injure endangered humpback whales without any changes to avoid harming whales. Fishing gear entanglements are a leading threat to endangered humpbacks that migrate along the West Coast, where 48,521 square nautical miles were designated as critical habitat in April. “These migrating whales shouldn’t have to dodge deadly commercial fishing gear, especially in national marine sanctuaries,” said Catherine Kilduff, a Center attorney. “This is critical habitat for endangered humpbacks, but it’s full of long strings of fishing pots. It’s outrageous that the Fisheries Service rubber-stamped the status quo despite growing threats to these whales. Humpbacks are our magnificent, acrobatic neighbors, and we need to stop the increasing deaths in commercial fishing gear.” As climate change alters migration patterns and availability of food for whales, it’s harder for endangered humpbacks to avoid commercial fishing gear. Until last month, the West Coast fisheries for the bottom-dwelling sablefish — also known as butterfish or black cod — had operated for five years without authorization to take whales under the Endangered Species Act and Marine Mammal Protection Act. According to Fisheries Service estimates, the sablefish fishery on average kills or seriously injures about two humpback whales every year. The fishery uses 2-mile-long strings of 30 to 50 pots. Commercial fisheries in total entangle 25 humpback whales annually off the U.S. West Coast; more than half of the entanglements are not identified as being tied to a specific fishery. The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Northern California, focuses on several deficiencies in the Fisheries Service’s analyses of the sablefish fishery’s impact. These include outdated humpback whale stock assessments, the failure to recognize the smallest humpback population — that winters in Central America — as distinct, and the failure to consider the Fisheries Service’s own analyses of the growing whale entanglement threat. The Service found a 400% increase in humpback mortality and serious injury from human activities, including vessel strikes, since 2018 estimates. This year marks the 50th anniversary of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, a landmark law that recognized the “great international significance” of marine mammals, including their esthetic, recreational and economic importance. The law prohibits harming marine mammals except under specific circumstances. Commercial fisheries that occasionally or frequently kill or seriously injure endangered marine mammals must have only a negligible impact on the species or stock to get an incidental take permit. To make fishing safer for whales and other imperiled animals, the Center proposed last month that the Fisheries Service require all fisheries that use pot gear to covert to new ropeless or “pop-up” gear within in the next five years. The petition requests that the agency prioritize the transition in national marine sanctuaries. Most trap and pot fisheries use static vertical lines that can wrap around whales’ mouths, fins or tails, depleting their energy and drowning them as they drag the heavy traps. Pop-up traps use lift bags or buoys on coiled ropes triggered by remote or time-release sensors to float the traps to the surface, eliminating those static entangling lines. Lawsuit Challenges Point Reyes Ranching, Elk-Killing Plan POINT REYES, Calif.— Three conservation groups today filed a federal lawsuit challenging the National Park Service’s controversial management plan for expanding private agriculture at California’s Point Reyes National Seashore, one of a handful of national parks that permits cattle grazing. The Park Service plan paves the way for 20-year leases for beef and dairy ranchers in the park, enshrining and expanding commercial ranching on public lands at the expense of native wildlife and natural habitats. The plan would also allow harmful water pollution to continue, and permit the agency to kill native tule elk — a unique subspecies found in no other national park — that ranchers say interfere with cattle operations. "This plan is a giveaway to the cattle industry,” said Deborah Moskowitz, president of the Resource Renewal Institute. “It perpetuates decades of negligence by the very agency charged with protecting this national treasure. The Trump administration fast-tracked the plan without regard for the climate crisis or the hundred rare, threatened and endangered species that depend on this national park. One-third of the national seashore is fenced off from public use.” “The Park Service has long mismanaged Point Reyes by allowing ranchers to use and abuse the park for private profit,” said Jeff Miller with the Center for Biological Diversity. “Now the agency wants to treat our beloved tule elk as expendable problem animals to be shot or removed. Point Reyes belongs to the public, not a handful of ranchers. It’s time to manage the park the way Congress intended when it passed the Point Reyes Act — for public benefit and protection of the natural environment.” “The Park Service needs to stop authorizing chronic water contamination, harassment and suppression of Tule elk, degradation of public recreation and destruction of native coastal prairies for the sake of a handful of unsustainable ranching operations,” said Laura Cunningham, California director at Western Watersheds Project. “Having studied California’s native grasslands for decades, I’m shocked at the destruction of native ecosystems and the epidemic of invasive weeds at the Point Reyes Seashore, and the agency’s callous disregard of its mandate to protect and preserve the park’s ecosystems and wildlife for the use and enjoyment of the people.” “The Park Service is unlawfully prioritizing the commercial needs of ranchers over the natural environment and the public’s use and enjoyment of these majestic public lands,” said Lizzy Potter, a staff attorney at Advocates for the West, which represents the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. “The Park Service decided that ranching should continue in perpetuity without fully disclosing its plans or the environmental consequences.” The plan violates several federal environmental laws, including the Point Reyes Act, which established the Point Reyes National Seashore in 1962 for the purposes of “public recreation, benefit and inspiration;” the Organic Act, which requires the agency to leave natural resources “unimpaired” for the benefit of future generations; and the Clean Water Act by allowing ranches to circumvent water quality standards. The Park Service’s inadequate environmental review for the plan violates the National Environmental Policy Act. The plaintiffs — the Resource Renewal Institute, Center for Biological Diversity and Western Watersheds Project — first sued the Park Service in 2016 for failing to update its antiquated General Management Plan and perpetuating commercial ranching in the park without adequate environmental review and public comment. A settlement agreement required the Park Service to produce the first-ever Environmental Impact Statement for Point Reyes ranching. More than 90% of public comments opposed ranching and killing native tule elk. The Park Service adopted the plan in September 2021, ignoring tens of thousands of public comments and coalition letters from more than 100 environmental and social justice organizations representing millions of members calling on the agency to phase out ranching. Background For decades the National Park Service has leased about 28,000 acres of public lands within the Point Reyes National Seashore and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area for beef and dairy ranching, despite significant conflicts with natural resources, wildlife and public recreation. Ranching has led to overgrazing, soil erosion, degraded water quality, damaged vegetation and endangered species habitats, increased levels of invasive weeds and suppressed wildlife populations at these parks. The plan expands the public lands zoned for ranching; quadruples the potential terms of existing grazing leases from five years to a maximum of 20 years; allows ranchers to pursue new commercial activities such as mobile slaughterhouses and row crop production; and provides for ranching to continue in perpetuity. The plan perpetuates overgrazing and does little to restore public lands and resources harmed by ongoing commercial cattle operations in the national park. It also allows the Park Service to shoot native tule elk to appease ranchers and to harass elk away from leased ranch lands. It sets an arbitrary population cap of 140 elk for the Drakes Beach herd, currently estimated at 138 elk. The Park Service can also kill any free-roaming elk to prevent new herds from forming in the park. Some 91.4% of public comments submitted on the plan opposed ranching on the Point Reyes National Seashore, while only 2.3 percent approved of allowing cattle ranching to continue. The Park Service improperly rejected a “no ranching” alternative that would provide maximum protection for the environment — as required under the Point Reyes Act — along with reduced-ranching alternatives that would provide greater protection than the adopted plan. The Park Service also refused to consider whether private ranching operations in the park damage Coast Miwok archeological sites. The Park Service discarded a proposal to protect those sites in 2015 and instead adopted a plan that protects “historic” ranches. The Coast Miwok Tribal Council, lineal descendants of the original inhabitants of Point Reyes, formally objected to the Point Reyes ranching elk killing plan.
Tammy
|