A federal district court recently ruled that commercial fishing in a marine monument off the coast of Hawaii cannot legally continue.
In an April 17 presidential proclamation, President Donald Trump stated the prohibitions on commercial fishing within the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument (PRIMNM) “disadvantages” the US fishing industry:
“I find that appropriately managed commercial fishing would not put the objects of scientific and historic interest that the PRIMNM protects at risk.
“With respect to fish in particular, fisheries in the region are effectively managed by the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council. Management of the PRIMNM is doing little to guard fish populations against overfishing as tunas and other pelagic species found within the boundaries of the PRIMNM are migratory in nature, and do not permanently reside within the PRIMNM.”
Despite vociferous opposition by ocean advocacy groups, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) issued an April 25 letter that purported to authorize commercial fishing in the portions of the monument that President Barack Obama protected in 2014. NMFS issued the letter despite lawfully enacted regulations prohibiting such fishing that remain on the books.
However, the federal district court in Honolulu, Hawaii on Friday canceled that letter.
The court’s order states that “no commercial fishing operators may reasonably rely on [the letter].” Commercial fishing in the waters between 50 and 200 nautical miles (93 and 370 kilometers) around Johnston Atoll, Jarvis Island and Wake Island should cease immediately.
According to Solomon Pili Kaho’ohalahala, founding member of Kapa’a:
“The court acknowledged the importance of giving due consideration to the voices of our kapuna in these challenging times. The Fisheries Service cannot ignore our perspectives as the native people who belong to the islands and to the ocean that surrounds us. The law guarantees a process where we can advocate for protecting the generations of our children’s children who are yet to be born.”
The court issued its decision after hearing arguments in the case the previous Tuesday from Earthjustice on behalf of Kapa’a, the Conservation Council for Hawaii and the Center for Biological Diversity. These arguments focused on NMFS’s failure to follow the lawful process to change commercial fishing regulations within the monument’s boundaries under the Magnuson-Stevens Act. This law requires public notice and an opportunity for public comment (including expert input) before any changes to fishing regulations take effect.
Jonee Peters, executive director of the Conservation Council for Hawaii, said:
“We applaud the court for rejecting the Fisheries Service’s attempt to gut fishing protections in the monument without going through the formal rule-making process, which ensures a voice for all those concerned about protecting the monument’s vital species and ecosystems for today, and for future generations.”
Maxx Phillips, Hawai‘i and Pacific Islands director and staff attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity added:
“This is a huge win for the Pacific’s irreplaceable marine life and for the rule of law. The court made clear that the federal government cannot quietly sweep aside critical fishing protections without giving the public a voice. These sacred and irreplaceable ecosystems are home to endangered species, deep-sea corals, and rich cultural heritage. We will keep fighting to ensure these protections remain in place for generations to come.”
According to Earthjustice attorney David Henkin:
“The court forcefully rejected the Trump administration’s outrageous claim that it can dismantle vital protections for the monument’s unique and vulnerable species and ecosystems without involving the public. The court reaffirmed that, even if President Trump’s directive to allow some commercial fishing in the monument were legal (which we dispute), the Fisheries Service still has the discretion to ban highly destructive practices like longline and purse seine fishing. The court’s order means that the Fisheries Service cannot shirk its duty to ensure adequate protection for the monument.”
