Fishermen's Finest Inc. is seeking to intervene in the lawsuit major Kodiak processors have filed against the federal government over the new Central Gulf of Alaska rockfish catch shares program.
As you will recall, the processors argue the program is unlawful because it created shares only for fishing vessel owners.
Seattle-based Fishermen's Finest operates two large and well-known trawlers in Alaska, the American No. 1 and the U.S. Intrepid.
In its motion to intervene, Fishermen's Finest argues that if the processors win, the company would lose valuable quota.
What's more, a processor victory "would upend the rationalization process for many fisheries in the North Pacific," the motion says.
Rationalization means cutting up a fishery into individual shares. Fishery managers in Alaska have embraced rationalization as a way to alleviate safety and other problems that arise when boats "race for fish."
The processor lawsuit strikes at a burning policy question: Should the government award shares only to fishermen, or should processors receive them too?
While Gulf rockfish is not among Alaska's largest or richest commercial fisheries, it's apparent the rockfish lawsuit could turn into a titanic legal battle.
Deckboss hears we are likely to see more fishing vessel owners file to intervene in the case.
Showing posts with label lawsuit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lawsuit. Show all posts
Processors sue over new rockfish program
Five major processors with plants at Kodiak are suing the federal government over the new Central Gulf of Alaska rockfish catch shares program.
The plaintiffs are Trident, Westward, North Pacific, Ocean Beauty and International.
The 21-page lawsuit accuses federal regulators of failing to do proper environmental studies before adopting the program.
The real issue, however, is who controls the fish.
Because the program establishes catch shares, but not processor shares, all the profit in rockfish harvest will go to vessel owners, the companies argue.
Well, Deckboss is sure he's greatly oversimplifying this. So he strongly recommends you read the lawsuit for yourself.
In particular, check out page 15, paragraph 39 of the complaint.
For background on the rockfish program, click here.
The plaintiffs are Trident, Westward, North Pacific, Ocean Beauty and International.
The 21-page lawsuit accuses federal regulators of failing to do proper environmental studies before adopting the program.
The real issue, however, is who controls the fish.
Because the program establishes catch shares, but not processor shares, all the profit in rockfish harvest will go to vessel owners, the companies argue.
Well, Deckboss is sure he's greatly oversimplifying this. So he strongly recommends you read the lawsuit for yourself.
In particular, check out page 15, paragraph 39 of the complaint.
For background on the rockfish program, click here.
Counsel, I have a few questions...
On Wednesday afternoon, a bunch of attorneys met in a federal courtroom in Anchorage to argue the lawsuit over fishing restrictions imposed in the Aleutians to protect endangered Steller sea lions.
Deckboss, somewhat thankfully, was unable to attend the hearing.
While the case involves mountains of scientific data and legal briefs, the essential conflict really is very simple. The state and the industry don't feel the costly fishing restrictions are justified. The National Marine Fisheries Service, which is being sued, feels otherwise.
Shortly before Wednesday's proceedings began, something unusual happened. Judge Timothy Burgess filed a list of questions for lawyers to address during the hearing.
Here are some examples, and I paraphrase somewhat:
• Doesn't the plain language of the Endangered Species Act suggest that, if anything, NMFS has to err on the side of assuming a causal relationship exists between the fisheries and the sea lion population?
• Although it took five years for NMFS to determine the fisheries jeopardized sea lions in the Aleutians, the agency skirted the normal public notice and comment process and hurriedly imposed the fishing restrictions. What was the emergency? Why couldn't NMFS have taken another few months to collect comments given that it had already taken five years?
• Why didn't NMFS issue a full environmental impact statement, as it had done on past occasions? Was it just rushing to complete the process in order to protect itself against litigation from Oceana and Greenpeace?
Of course, one must be careful not to read too much into the judge's questions. But they are fascinating, no?
Deckboss, somewhat thankfully, was unable to attend the hearing.
While the case involves mountains of scientific data and legal briefs, the essential conflict really is very simple. The state and the industry don't feel the costly fishing restrictions are justified. The National Marine Fisheries Service, which is being sued, feels otherwise.
Shortly before Wednesday's proceedings began, something unusual happened. Judge Timothy Burgess filed a list of questions for lawyers to address during the hearing.
Here are some examples, and I paraphrase somewhat:
• Doesn't the plain language of the Endangered Species Act suggest that, if anything, NMFS has to err on the side of assuming a causal relationship exists between the fisheries and the sea lion population?
• Although it took five years for NMFS to determine the fisheries jeopardized sea lions in the Aleutians, the agency skirted the normal public notice and comment process and hurriedly imposed the fishing restrictions. What was the emergency? Why couldn't NMFS have taken another few months to collect comments given that it had already taken five years?
• Why didn't NMFS issue a full environmental impact statement, as it had done on past occasions? Was it just rushing to complete the process in order to protect itself against litigation from Oceana and Greenpeace?
Of course, one must be careful not to read too much into the judge's questions. But they are fascinating, no?
Courtroom showdown coming in Steller case
Deckboss is sure you've not forgotten that the state as well as a big segment of the Alaska fishing industry are suing the National Marine Fisheries Service.
At issue are commercial fishing restrictions NMFS put into place this year along the Aleutian chain to protect the endangered Steller sea lion.
The state and the industry argue the restrictions are unnecessary, and don't reflect sound science.
Each side has filed reams of paper arguments in the case.
Now opposing lawyers are preparing to duel in person before federal Judge Timothy Burgess of Anchorage. According to this order from the judge, oral argument will begin at 1 p.m. Dec. 21.
This hearing could be crucial in deciding a case in which fish harvests worth millions of dollars are at stake — not to mention the credibility of NMFS and the well-being of the Stellers.
At issue are commercial fishing restrictions NMFS put into place this year along the Aleutian chain to protect the endangered Steller sea lion.
The state and the industry argue the restrictions are unnecessary, and don't reflect sound science.
Each side has filed reams of paper arguments in the case.
Now opposing lawyers are preparing to duel in person before federal Judge Timothy Burgess of Anchorage. According to this order from the judge, oral argument will begin at 1 p.m. Dec. 21.
This hearing could be crucial in deciding a case in which fish harvests worth millions of dollars are at stake — not to mention the credibility of NMFS and the well-being of the Stellers.
Lawsuit challenges Cook Inlet 'emergency' regs
Here's that Cook Inlet lawsuit.
This is the gist of the 16-page suit, as stated in the introduction:
Plaintiff seeks declaratory judgment with respect to "emergency" regulations issued by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (the "Department") and the Alaska Board of Fisheries (the "Board") restricting commercial salmon fishing in Cook Inlet. These regulations will affect at least half of the regular fishing periods during the most important commercial salmon fishing window this summer by placing significant restrictions on those days. These emergency regulations were issued without public comment or due process on June 30, 2011, well after the 2011 fishing season started, and will have an immediate impact on commercial fishing beginning July 9, 2011.
This is the gist of the 16-page suit, as stated in the introduction:
Plaintiff seeks declaratory judgment with respect to "emergency" regulations issued by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (the "Department") and the Alaska Board of Fisheries (the "Board") restricting commercial salmon fishing in Cook Inlet. These regulations will affect at least half of the regular fishing periods during the most important commercial salmon fishing window this summer by placing significant restrictions on those days. These emergency regulations were issued without public comment or due process on June 30, 2011, well after the 2011 fishing season started, and will have an immediate impact on commercial fishing beginning July 9, 2011.
Lawsuit filed today against Board of Fisheries
A commercial fishing group today sued the state, but Deckboss hasn't yet seen the lawsuit and can't say for sure what it's about.
The "complaint for injunctive relief" was filed in Superior Court in Anchorage. A motion for a temporary restraining order also was filed.
The plaintiffs are listed as Stephen Vanek, Erik Huebsch, Ian Pitzman, United Cook Inlet Drift Association and Copper River Seafoods Inc.
Listed defendants include the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and the state Board of Fisheries.
My presumption is the plaintiffs are suing because they're unhappy with the state's treatment of the commercial salmon sector in Cook Inlet.
As we all know, Cook Inlet long has been a battleground pitting commercial, sport, dipnet and subsistence users.
The "complaint for injunctive relief" was filed in Superior Court in Anchorage. A motion for a temporary restraining order also was filed.
The plaintiffs are listed as Stephen Vanek, Erik Huebsch, Ian Pitzman, United Cook Inlet Drift Association and Copper River Seafoods Inc.
Listed defendants include the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and the state Board of Fisheries.
My presumption is the plaintiffs are suing because they're unhappy with the state's treatment of the commercial salmon sector in Cook Inlet.
As we all know, Cook Inlet long has been a battleground pitting commercial, sport, dipnet and subsistence users.
Disqualified halibut charter operators sue feds
Charter Operators of Alaska, a Homer-based nonprofit, today sued the federal government in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.
The lawsuit seeks to undo new regulations limiting the number of halibut charter boats in Southeast Alaska (Area 2C) and Southcentral Alaska (Area 3A).
Here's a press release from Charter Operators of Alaska.
The lawsuit seeks to undo new regulations limiting the number of halibut charter boats in Southeast Alaska (Area 2C) and Southcentral Alaska (Area 3A).
Here's a press release from Charter Operators of Alaska.
Aleut looks to join Steller sea lion fight
The Aleut Corp. and its subsidiary, Aleut Enterprise LLC, are seeking to intervene in the Steller sea lion lawsuit.
Aleut Enterprise owns the seafood processing plant and runs the fuel terminal on Adak Island.
The state and numerous fishing industry players are challenging the federal government's closure of some fishing grounds in the Aleutian chain to protect the endangered sea lions.
Aleut, the Native regional corporation for the Aleutians, and Aleut Enterprise want to intervene in the suit as a plaintiff.
Rudy Tsukada, president of Aleut Enterprise, says in this affidavit the government's fishing restrictions likely will cut Adak marine fuel sales by half, cause fuel prices to spike by nearly 90 percent, cost five employees their jobs, decimate Adak tax revenues, and result in sundry other bad things.
Aleut Enterprise owns the seafood processing plant and runs the fuel terminal on Adak Island.
The state and numerous fishing industry players are challenging the federal government's closure of some fishing grounds in the Aleutian chain to protect the endangered sea lions.
Aleut, the Native regional corporation for the Aleutians, and Aleut Enterprise want to intervene in the suit as a plaintiff.
Rudy Tsukada, president of Aleut Enterprise, says in this affidavit the government's fishing restrictions likely will cut Adak marine fuel sales by half, cause fuel prices to spike by nearly 90 percent, cost five employees their jobs, decimate Adak tax revenues, and result in sundry other bad things.
'Arbitrary and capricious'
Another commercial fishing group, the Freezer Longline Coalition, has sued the federal government over new fishing restrictions put into place in the Aleutians to protect Steller sea lions.
Here is the lawsuit and here is a press release.
Here is the lawsuit and here is a press release.
Industry players sue feds over Steller restrictions
As expected, commercial fishing groups have gone to court in an effort to block federal restrictions on fish harvests in the Aleutians.
Here's the lawsuit, filed yesterday in U.S. District Court in Anchorage.
The restrictions, which took effect at the first of the year, are designed to leave more Pacific cod and Atka mackerel in the water for endangered Steller sea lions to eat.
The industry's concerns are summarized in this press release.
Looking at the lawsuit, the plaintiffs appear to be mainly trawlers at this point.
Here's the lawsuit, filed yesterday in U.S. District Court in Anchorage.
The restrictions, which took effect at the first of the year, are designed to leave more Pacific cod and Atka mackerel in the water for endangered Steller sea lions to eat.
The industry's concerns are summarized in this press release.
Looking at the lawsuit, the plaintiffs appear to be mainly trawlers at this point.
State sues NMFS over planned sea lion closures
Alaska Gov. Sean Parnell has made a habit of suing the federal government. Now he's suing again.
Here's the press release:
Dec. 14, 2010
State sues to overturn NMFS decision on western Steller sea lions
ANCHORAGE — The state of Alaska today filed suit in the U.S. District Court for Alaska against the National Marine Fisheries Service over the agency's decision to significantly curtail fishing in the western Aleutian Islands out of concern for Steller sea lions.
The state argues that NMFS failed to make "a rational connection" between the facts it found and the conclusions it reached, given that western Steller sea lions had an average annual population growth between 1 and 1.5 percent between 2000 and 2008, and now number more than 70,000.
"The agency's conclusion that additional fishing restrictions are necessary is not supported by the best available scientific information," Gov. Parnell said. "The drastic measures proposed by NMFS are simply not necessary given the overall health of the Steller sea lion population. This decision will have immediate and significant impacts on local communities and fishermen in the area."
As many as 900 people are employed by fishing fleets in the area facing restrictions. NMFS acknowledges that implementation of its decision would cost fishery losses of up to $66 million annually.
State officials also believe the federal agency committed numerous procedural violations, which had the effect of limiting the opportunity for public and expert comments.
"The state submitted extensive comments on both the process and the foundational science used to reach this decision," said acting Fish and Game Commissioner Cora Campbell. "We are extremely disappointed that NMFS did not adequately consider these concerns and did not more fully incorporate the recommendations of the North Pacific Fishery Management Council in its action. We are also very disturbed about the lack of meaningful public process."
A copy of the complaint is available here.
Here's the press release:
Dec. 14, 2010
State sues to overturn NMFS decision on western Steller sea lions
ANCHORAGE — The state of Alaska today filed suit in the U.S. District Court for Alaska against the National Marine Fisheries Service over the agency's decision to significantly curtail fishing in the western Aleutian Islands out of concern for Steller sea lions.
The state argues that NMFS failed to make "a rational connection" between the facts it found and the conclusions it reached, given that western Steller sea lions had an average annual population growth between 1 and 1.5 percent between 2000 and 2008, and now number more than 70,000.
"The agency's conclusion that additional fishing restrictions are necessary is not supported by the best available scientific information," Gov. Parnell said. "The drastic measures proposed by NMFS are simply not necessary given the overall health of the Steller sea lion population. This decision will have immediate and significant impacts on local communities and fishermen in the area."
As many as 900 people are employed by fishing fleets in the area facing restrictions. NMFS acknowledges that implementation of its decision would cost fishery losses of up to $66 million annually.
State officials also believe the federal agency committed numerous procedural violations, which had the effect of limiting the opportunity for public and expert comments.
"The state submitted extensive comments on both the process and the foundational science used to reach this decision," said acting Fish and Game Commissioner Cora Campbell. "We are extremely disappointed that NMFS did not adequately consider these concerns and did not more fully incorporate the recommendations of the North Pacific Fishery Management Council in its action. We are also very disturbed about the lack of meaningful public process."
A copy of the complaint is available here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)