Tuesday, December 30, 2014

Vast Aleutian marine sanctuary proposed

Environmental groups want the Obama administration to designate the Aleutian Islands as a national marine sanctuary.

As you can see from the map above, the sanctuary would take in far more than just local waters along the chain. Rather, it would encompass Bristol Bay and the Bering Sea shelf, where some of the nation's most important commercial fisheries occur.

Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility is spearheading the proposal. The Center for Biological Diversity is among other groups listed in the nomination letter.

Here's a press release discussing the basis for establishing an Aleutian Islands National Marine Sanctuary.


Anonymous said...

That's funny.

Ernie Weiss said...

The nomination process for marine sanctuaries clearly requires local community support. January meetings will be an opportunity for local tribes, cities and villages to weigh in with resolutions and letters to NOAA. I am not aware of ANY local support, but plenty of local opposition to the proposed AINMS. Just say no to AINMS!

Anonymous said...

I wonder whose money is really behind this effort to close Bristol bay and the Alaska Crab industry? I guess if there was no fishing in Bristol Bay, There would be no reason to oppose Pebble

Anonymous said...

What a pipe dream.
Does that mean no commercial fishing in the blue area?
What about subsistence ?
Chignik looks like it is in there also.
So lets humor the greenies for a minute. Would there be a buy out
for everyone that fishes in the blue?
They really don't have a firm grip on reality.

mike svenson said...

so now all of you Obama voting fishermen have something to think about. t do wonder were you just stupid and you thought he was a god or did you know this was coming and you were okay with it. it will be interesting to see what ufa does since they like to vote for democrats of which these environazi groups are apart of mike svenson

Anonymous said...

"I wonder whose money is really behind this effort to close Bristol bay and the Alaska Crab industry? I guess if there was no fishing in Bristol Bay, There would be no reason to oppose Pebble"

ngo's and greens are supported by those who only wish to make vast sums of money at the expense of others.

Anonymous said...

That's just like you Mike blame everything on Obama. He is one of the reasons there is no Pebble mine while the governor and Steve Samuleson whom you both supported were for the pebble mine. Stop trying divide us and say something that can bring us together. Obviously you vote with the party and not on the issues. Isn't about time to retire back to Washington.

Anonymous said...

Folks, do some reading and educate yourselves please before making rash statements.

Check out the AINMS fact sheet:


And by the way, you can't blame everything on Obama! When was the last time you wrote to your local/state politician about something you cared about?

Anonymous said...

Stop trying to divide us Jan 1?

Isn't it about time to read Judge Holland, on the Chief Executive's Pebble Plan's.

Whoop's, we forgot about the laws of the United States.

Even Wally Hickel's "Who owns America" explained these imbeciles decades ago, then resigned from Trickey Dick's Cabinet.

Too many secret back room deals, it works the same way with any Executive.


Anonymous said...

You have to be nervous about anything that the Center for Biological Diversity has their name attached to. With these things, first get the sanctuary then work to restrict the activities allowed in the sanctuary. Hard to imagine the CBD not going after commercial fishing down the road if they get this in.

Anonymous said...

Rick Steiner's behind this, among others

Anonymous said...

I'd be a little more nervous about the Center for No Biological or Genetic Diversity shown best in a local drainage. These groups need a tax committee for sustainability, to educate a group fishing in the most biologically diverse fishery in the world.

50 million non-resident red salmon swimming up 5 rivers for thousands of years now need Judge Holland to explain what a preliminary injunction even "IS?"

"Here, the balance of hardships and public interest both tip sharply in plaintiff’s favor," Judge Holland wrote in his order. "The public will not be harmed by a preliminary injunction allowing the court to evaluate plaintiff’s claims because there is no work going on at the proposed Pebble Mine site, and plaintiff has not even applied for a permit to construct such a mine. It is in the public interest that government agencies comply with FACA."

The world goes around in a Circle. When your doomed just find out who's to blame.

1% braindead, and 99% clueless; Big numbers always confuse 32 braincells.



Anonymous said...

thanks but no thanks we got this, unless live or work in AK your voice is limited