January, 05 2010, 11:59am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Ben Enticknap, Oceana, (503) 329-4465 or benticknap@oceana.org
Andrea Treece, Center for Biological Diversity, (415) 436-9682
x 306 or atreece@biologicaldiversity.
Teri Shore, Turtle Island Restoration Network,
(707) 583-4428 or tshore@tirn.net
70,000 Square Miles of Habitat Proposed for Protection for Endangered Leatherback Sea Turtles
WASHINGTON
Today the National Oceanographic Atmospheric
Administration issued a proposed rule to designate more than 70,000 square
miles of critical habitat for endangered Pacific leatherback sea turtles in the
waters off California, Oregon,
and Washington.
If the rule is finalized, this would be the first time critical habitat is
designated for sea turtles in ocean waters off the continental United States.
The proposal is in response to a petition submitted in
September 2007 by Oceana, the Center for Biological Diversity, and Turtle
Island Restoration Network, seeking greater protections for endangered
leatherbacks and their critical foraging grounds and migratory corridors in
U.S. Pacific waters. The proposed rule will be open for public comments until
March 8, after which the agency must issue a final ruling on critical habitat
within one year.
"We have a duty to protect Pacific leatherbacks when
they visit our shores, and today's action brings us ever closer to fulfilling
that obligation," said Ben Enticknap, Pacific Project Manager for Oceana.
"Critical habitat designation provides another tool for protecting these
ancient creatures, but their survival still hinges on the U.S. fully protecting them in our
waters to set policy precedent for the world."
While today's proposal will advance protections for
leatherbacks and their critical habitat, there were some unfortunate exclusions
of important geographic areas, as well as a failure to identify protections for
leatherbacks from a primary threat, namely entanglement in commercial fishing
gear. The area proposed by the National Oceanographic Atmospheric
Administration stretches from northern Washington
to Southern California, but excludes a large expanse of foraging and migratory
areas between the Umpqua River in Central Oregon and Point Arena in Northern California. The proposed rule also excludes
consideration of fishing gear as a threat to migrating and feeding
leatherbacks, even though incidental interaction with commercial fishing gear
is a leading cause of death for this species.
"Today's proposal marks the first step in making
sure these giant turtles have a safe and productive place to feed after their
amazing swim across the entire Pacific Ocean," said Andrea Treece, an
attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Now the government
needs to take the next step and improve its proposal by incorporating more of
the species' key habitat areas and addressing one of the worst threats to
leatherback survival - entanglement in commercial fishing gear."
Leatherbacks can grow up to nine feet long and weigh up to
1,200 pounds (the equivalent of three refrigerators). Every summer and fall,
Pacific leatherbacks migrate from their nesting grounds in Indonesia to the ocean waters off
the U.S. West Coast to feed on jellyfish. This 12,000-mile journey is the
farthest known migration of any living marine reptile. During that journey,
leatherbacks face a gauntlet of threats across the Pacific, including capture
in commercial fishing gear, ingestion of plastics, poaching, global warming,
and ocean acidification. Protection of their foraging habitats and migratory
corridors is essential to the recovery of this imperiled species.
"Protecting these patches of ocean will help
leatherbacks survive," said Teri
Shore, program director
at the Turtle Island Restoration Network. "But turning a blind eye to
effects of allowing deadly fishing hooks in these critical areas is a major
oversight."
Background on the petition
The critical habitat proposal comes after a lengthy series
of efforts to protect leatherbacks off the U.S. West Coast. Oceana, the Center
for Biological Diversity, and Turtle Island Restoration Network submitted a
petition for the designation of critical habitat for Pacific leatherbacks on
September 26, 2007. The area the groups proposed for designation had already
been determined by the National Oceanographic Atmospheric Administration to be
a Leatherback Conservation Area, where the use of certain fishing gear was
prohibited during the foraging season. That determination itself was the result
of a lawsuit in March 2000 by the Center for Biological Diversity and Turtle
Island Restoration Network.
NOAA received the current critical habitat petition on
October 2, 2007, and was obligated to make a determination regarding how to
proceed in response to the petition within one year. In May 2009, after more
than a year and a half of agency delays, the groups filed a lawsuit under the
Endangered Species Act to secure a definitive timeline for findings on the
critical habitat petition. Under the terms of the settlement, the conservation
groups and NOAA eventually agreed that the agency would make its decision by
December 31, 2009. Under the Endangered Species Act, when an area is designated
as critical habitat, federal agencies must ensure they do not fund, authorize,
or carry out any actions, including activities such as energy projects and
aquaculture, which would harm that habitat.
The same settlement related to critical habitat also
addressed the agency's obligation to respond to petitions calling for
loggerhead sea turtles in the Atlantic and
Pacific to be listed as endangered instead of threatened under the Act. NOAA is
required to submit its determination about these petitions by February 19,
2010.
The
Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation
organization with more than 240,000 members and online activists dedicated to
protecting endangered species and wild places. For more information, please
visit www.biologicaldiversity.org.
Oceana
campaigns
to protect and restore the world's oceans. Our teams of marine
scientists, economists, lawyers and advocates win specific and concrete
policy
changes to reduce pollution and to prevent the irreversible collapse of
fish
populations, marine mammals and other sea life. Global in scope and
dedicated
to conservation, Oceana has campaigners based in North America, Europe
and South America. More than 300,000 members and e-activists
in over 150 countries have already joined Oceana. For more information,
please
visit www.oceana.org.
Turtle Island
Restoration Network is an
international marine conservation organization headquartered in California whose 10,000 members work to protect sea
turtles and marine biodiversity in the United States and around the world.
For more information, visit www.SeaTurtles.org.
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252LATEST NEWS
'Crushing Blow to the Labor Agenda' as Manchin, Sinema Block Biden NLRB Nominee
"These two senators effectively handed Trump control of the board when his term begins," noted one observer.
Dec 11, 2024
In a move likely fraught with major implications for worker rights during the impending second administration of Republican President-elect Donald Trump, Democratic-turned-Independent U.S. Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema on Wednesday blocked Democrat Lauren McFerran's bid for a second term on the National Labor Relations Board.
With every Republican senator except Sen. Roger Marshall of Kansas voting against President Joe Biden's nomination of McFerran for a new five-year term, the fate of the woman who has led the agency since 2021 was up to Manchin and Sinema—who, as More Perfect Union founder and executive director Faiz Shakir put it on social media, "consistently spoiled the story of 'what could have been'" by years of fighting to thwart their own former party's agenda.
Sinema struck first, her "no" vote on McFerran grinding the confirmation tally to a 49-49 tie. Manchin, who showed up later, cast the decisive vote, negating speculation that Vice President Kamala Harris, the Senate president who lost the presidential contest to Trump last month, would break the stalemate.
"It is deeply disappointing, a direct attack on working people, and incredibly troubling that this highly qualified nominee—with a proven track record of protecting worker rights—did not have the votes," lamented Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).
Chris Jackson, a former Democratic Lawrence County, Tennessee commissioner and longtime labor advocate, called Manchin and Sinema's votes "a crushing blow to the labor agenda."
"By casting decisive NO votes against President Biden's NLRB nominee, they've guaranteed Democrats will lose control of the national labor board until at least 2026," Jackson said. "Their votes effectively hand Donald Trump the keys to the board the moment he takes office again. This is a betrayal of working families—and a gift to corporate interests, which is par for the course for these two."
Trump's first term saw relentless attacks on workers' rights. Critics fear a second Trump administration—whose officials and agenda are steeped in the anti-worker Project 2025—will roll back gains achieved under Biden and work to weaken the right to organize, water down workplace health and safety rules, and strip overtime pay, to name but a handful of GOP wish-list items.
The latest votes by Manchin and Sinema—who are both leaving Congress after this term—sparked widespread outrage among workers' rights defenders on social media, with one account on X, formerly known as Twitter, posting: "Manchin is geriatric and Sinema has a long fruitful career ahead of her in a consulting firm that advocates child slave labor, but at least they kicked the working class in the teeth one last time. Nothing to do now but hope there's a hell."
Keep ReadingShow Less
With Defeat of Megamerger, Sanders Thanks Khan for Taking On 'Corporate Greed'
"The proposed Kroger-Albertsons merger would have led to higher prices at the grocery store and harmed workers," said the Vermont senator.
Dec 11, 2024
Praise for Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan continued to pour in on Wednesday after a pair of judges blocked the merger of grocery chains Kroger and Albertsons following challenges by the FTC and state attorneys general.
"The proposed Kroger-Albertsons merger would have led to higher prices at the grocery store and harmed workers," said U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders. "Let me thank FTC Chair Lina Khan for successfully fighting this merger and standing up to corporate greed."
Congressman Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) also welcomed the rulings and sent "a big thank you to Lina Khan and her team at the FTC."
Their comments on Wednesday followed similar applause from Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Pramila Jayapal as well as groups including the American Economic Liberties Project (AELP) and Groundwork Collaborative.
Khan addressed the win during a Tuesday stream with political commentator Hasan Piker, noting that "this is the first time that the FTC has ever sought to block a merger not just because it's gonna be bad for consumers, but also because it's gonna be bad for workers."
Khan, an appointee of outgoing Democratic President Joe Biden, has won praise from progressives for taking on not only grocery giants and other companies trying to build monopolies but also Big Pharma and Big Tech.
Sanders recently called her "the best FTC chair in modern history" and AELP earlier this year published a document detailing how, under Khan's leadership, the agency "has entered a new era of more effective, modern, and democratic enforcement to better protect consumers, workers, and independent businesses."
Examples included in the AELP roundup include Khan's "crackdown on deceptive 'junk fees,'" a ban on noncompete clauses that's being challenged in court, a historic lawsuit against Amazon.com, and a "click-to-cancel" rule that requires sellers to "make it as easy for consumers to cancel their enrollment as it was to sign up."
However, the new era of the FTC is set to soon come to an end. Since President-elect Donald Trump's victory last month, speculation has been building that he would replace Khan with someone who would do the bidding of big business. Amid celebrations of the rulings against the Kroger-Albertsons merger on Tuesday, the Republican announced Andrew Ferguson as his pick for chair.
As Common Dreamsreported earlier Wednesday, Basel Musharbash, principal attorney at Antimonopoly Counsel, said that elevating Ferguson, who already sits on the FTC, to chair, "is an affront to the antitrust laws and a gift to the oligarchs and monopolies bleeding this country dry."
Although the agency is expected to be friendlier to mergers under the next Trump administration, Albertsons responded to the Tuesday rulings by bailing on the $24.6 billion deal and suing Kroger for billions of dollars on Wednesday, rather than appealing or moving to in-house FTC hearings.
That move could reflect industry fears of U.S. courts that are willing to block major mergers, as The Prospect executive editor David Dayen pointed out after the federal court decision on Tuesday.
"The important thing here is not that Biden's enforcers blocked a merger... it's that courts are increasingly comfortable with merger enforcement," he said. "States can sue under the Sherman Act, and they will. The real change to track is in the judiciary. Wall Street, take note."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Watchdog Says Wray Should Not Assist Trump's Attack on FBI by Resigning
"FBI directors are given 10-year terms for a reason: to insulate them from political pressure," said Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen.
Dec 11, 2024
Current FBI Director Christopher Wray announced Wednesday that he will depart his post when President Joe Biden's term ends in January—a move that drew criticism from the watchdog group Public Citizen.
Public Citizen co-president Robert Weissman pointed out that Wray's planned departure follows President-elect Donald Trump's threat to fire him.
"FBI directors are given 10-year terms for a reason: to insulate them from political pressure. To defend the vital independence of the FBI, Director Wray should not preemptively resign in face of Donald Trump's bad-faith threats to remove him," Weissman said in a statement.
Patel, who served as chief of staff to acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller at the end of Trump's first term, was characterized by The Associated Press earlier this year as a "trusted aide and swaggering campaign surrogate who mythologizes the former president while promoting conspiracy theories and his own brand."
Some of Patel's past statements have alarmed critics, who worry he may be willing to weaponize the agency to go after political enemies or media critics of Trump.
"We will go out and find the conspirators, not just in government, but in the media. Yes, we're going to come after the people in the media who lied about American citizens, who helped Joe Biden rig presidential elections," he said during an appearance on former Trump advisor Steve Bannon's War Room podcast last year.
Weissman said that "if Donald Trump fires [Wray], so be it. But Wray should not aid and abet the effort to weaponize the FBI by bowing out in advance."
Weissman was not the only person to criticize Wray along these lines: "A profile in courage, Chris Wray is not. Wray bowed to political pressure; his early resignation is the easy way out. It avoids a very public conversation when Trump inevitably would have fired him," wrote Anthony Coley, an analyst at NBC News, CNBC, and MSNBC.
In announcing his decision to leave, Wray said the choice "is the best way to avoid dragging the bureau deeper into the fray, while reinforcing the values and principles that are so important to how we do our work," according to The New York Times.
He also struck a wistful tone. "This is not easy for me," Wray said, per the Times. "I love this place, I love our mission, and I love our people."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular