Podcasts about National Marine Fisheries Service

House Committee on Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest Wednesday, December 3, 2025 | 10:00 AM On Wednesday, December 3, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in room 1324 Longworth House Office Building, the Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries will hold an oversight hearing titled “Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest.” Witnesses Panel I (Administration Witnesses) • Mr. Sam Rauch, Deputy Assistant Administrator, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD Panel II (Outside Experts) • The Honorable Ken Choke, Chairman, Nisqually Indian Tribe, Olympia, WA • Ms. Aja DeCoteau, Executive Director, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Portland, OR • Mr. Ed Johnstone, Chairman, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, Olympia, WA • Mr. Larry Phillips, Pacific Fisheries Policy Director, American Sportfishing Association, Olympia, WA (Minority Witness) Hearing Notice: https://naturalresources.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=418481

House Committee on Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest Wednesday, December 3, 2025 | 10:00 AM On Wednesday, December 3, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in room 1324 Longworth House Office Building, the Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries will hold an oversight hearing titled “Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest.” Witnesses Panel I (Administration Witnesses) • Mr. Sam Rauch, Deputy Assistant Administrator, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD Panel II (Outside Experts) • The Honorable Ken Choke, Chairman, Nisqually Indian Tribe, Olympia, WA • Ms. Aja DeCoteau, Executive Director, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Portland, OR • Mr. Ed Johnstone, Chairman, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, Olympia, WA • Mr. Larry Phillips, Pacific Fisheries Policy Director, American Sportfishing Association, Olympia, WA (Minority Witness) Hearing Notice: https://naturalresources.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=418481

House Committee on Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest Wednesday, December 3, 2025 | 10:00 AM On Wednesday, December 3, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in room 1324 Longworth House Office Building, the Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries will hold an oversight hearing titled “Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest.” Witnesses Panel I (Administration Witnesses) • Mr. Sam Rauch, Deputy Assistant Administrator, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD Panel II (Outside Experts) • The Honorable Ken Choke, Chairman, Nisqually Indian Tribe, Olympia, WA • Ms. Aja DeCoteau, Executive Director, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Portland, OR • Mr. Ed Johnstone, Chairman, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, Olympia, WA • Mr. Larry Phillips, Pacific Fisheries Policy Director, American Sportfishing Association, Olympia, WA (Minority Witness) Hearing Notice: https://naturalresources.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=418481

House Committee on Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest Wednesday, December 3, 2025 | 10:00 AM On Wednesday, December 3, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in room 1324 Longworth House Office Building, the Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries will hold an oversight hearing titled “Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest.” Witnesses Panel I (Administration Witnesses) • Mr. Sam Rauch, Deputy Assistant Administrator, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD Panel II (Outside Experts) • The Honorable Ken Choke, Chairman, Nisqually Indian Tribe, Olympia, WA • Ms. Aja DeCoteau, Executive Director, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Portland, OR • Mr. Ed Johnstone, Chairman, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, Olympia, WA • Mr. Larry Phillips, Pacific Fisheries Policy Director, American Sportfishing Association, Olympia, WA (Minority Witness) Hearing Notice: https://naturalresources.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=418481

House Committee on Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest Wednesday, December 3, 2025 | 10:00 AM On Wednesday, December 3, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in room 1324 Longworth House Office Building, the Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries will hold an oversight hearing titled “Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest.” Witnesses Panel I (Administration Witnesses) • Mr. Sam Rauch, Deputy Assistant Administrator, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD Panel II (Outside Experts) • The Honorable Ken Choke, Chairman, Nisqually Indian Tribe, Olympia, WA • Ms. Aja DeCoteau, Executive Director, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Portland, OR • Mr. Ed Johnstone, Chairman, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, Olympia, WA • Mr. Larry Phillips, Pacific Fisheries Policy Director, American Sportfishing Association, Olympia, WA (Minority Witness) Hearing Notice: https://naturalresources.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=418481

House Committee on Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest Wednesday, December 3, 2025 | 10:00 AM On Wednesday, December 3, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in room 1324 Longworth House Office Building, the Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries will hold an oversight hearing titled “Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest.” Witnesses Panel I (Administration Witnesses) • Mr. Sam Rauch, Deputy Assistant Administrator, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD Panel II (Outside Experts) • The Honorable Ken Choke, Chairman, Nisqually Indian Tribe, Olympia, WA • Ms. Aja DeCoteau, Executive Director, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Portland, OR • Mr. Ed Johnstone, Chairman, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, Olympia, WA • Mr. Larry Phillips, Pacific Fisheries Policy Director, American Sportfishing Association, Olympia, WA (Minority Witness) Hearing Notice: https://naturalresources.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=418481

House Committee on Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest Wednesday, December 3, 2025 | 10:00 AM On Wednesday, December 3, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in room 1324 Longworth House Office Building, the Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries will hold an oversight hearing titled “Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest.” Witnesses Panel I (Administration Witnesses) • Mr. Sam Rauch, Deputy Assistant Administrator, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD Panel II (Outside Experts) • The Honorable Ken Choke, Chairman, Nisqually Indian Tribe, Olympia, WA • Ms. Aja DeCoteau, Executive Director, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Portland, OR • Mr. Ed Johnstone, Chairman, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, Olympia, WA • Mr. Larry Phillips, Pacific Fisheries Policy Director, American Sportfishing Association, Olympia, WA (Minority Witness) Hearing Notice: https://naturalresources.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=418481

House Committee on Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest Wednesday, December 3, 2025 | 10:00 AM On Wednesday, December 3, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in room 1324 Longworth House Office Building, the Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries will hold an oversight hearing titled “Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest.” Witnesses Panel I (Administration Witnesses) • Mr. Sam Rauch, Deputy Assistant Administrator, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD Panel II (Outside Experts) • The Honorable Ken Choke, Chairman, Nisqually Indian Tribe, Olympia, WA • Ms. Aja DeCoteau, Executive Director, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Portland, OR • Mr. Ed Johnstone, Chairman, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, Olympia, WA • Mr. Larry Phillips, Pacific Fisheries Policy Director, American Sportfishing Association, Olympia, WA (Minority Witness) Hearing Notice: https://naturalresources.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=418481

House Committee on Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest Wednesday, December 3, 2025 | 10:00 AM On Wednesday, December 3, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in room 1324 Longworth House Office Building, the Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries will hold an oversight hearing titled “Sea Lion Predation in the Pacific Northwest.” Witnesses Panel I (Administration Witnesses) • Mr. Sam Rauch, Deputy Assistant Administrator, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD Panel II (Outside Experts) • The Honorable Ken Choke, Chairman, Nisqually Indian Tribe, Olympia, WA • Ms. Aja DeCoteau, Executive Director, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Portland, OR • Mr. Ed Johnstone, Chairman, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, Olympia, WA • Mr. Larry Phillips, Pacific Fisheries Policy Director, American Sportfishing Association, Olympia, WA (Minority Witness) Hearing Notice: https://naturalresources.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=418481

At an animal hospital in the Northeast United States, a biologist takes blood from a sick loggerhead sea turtle named Honey Bun. 在美国东北部的一家动物医院，一名生物学家从一只病态的Loggerhead海龟中取血，名为Honey Bun。 This is one of the first steps scientists must take before treating and rehabilitating the turtle so that it can be returned into the wild. 这是科学家在治疗和修复乌龟之前必须采取的第一步，以便它可以归还野外。 Cape Cod, in the state of Massachusetts, may have some of the largest numbers of turtle strandings in the world. 在马萨诸塞州，科德角（Cape Cod）可能拥有世界上最多的乌龟束缚。 The number of turtles that became trapped on Cape Cod beaches has risen over the past 10 years. That information comes from the Mass Audubon's Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary. 在过去的10年中，被困在鳕鱼角海滩上的海龟数量增加了。 这些信息来自大众奥杜邦的Wellfleet Bay野生动物保护区。 This year, volunteers found 829 turtles washed up on the sand. About half of them were dead, including some that were frozen solid. That number is nearly twice what workers found in 2016 and nearly 10 times more than 2008. 今年，志愿者发现829只乌龟在沙滩上冲洗掉。 其中大约一半死了，其中包括一些冷冻固体。 这个数字几乎是工人在2016年发现的两倍，是2008年的几乎10倍。 Some experts think the number of washed up turtles is related to climate change. 一些专家认为被冲洗的海龟的数量与气候变化有关。 A paper published in PLOS ONE notes that there were more strandings of Kemp's ridley sea turtles in years with warmer sea-surface temperatures. It added that of the threats to turtle populations, “climate change may present the broadest threat for sea turtle conservation.” PLOS在PLOS上发表的一篇论文指出，多年来，肯普的Ridley海龟的搁浅，海面温度更高。 它补充说，在对乌龟人群的威胁中，“气候变化可能对海龟保护构成最广泛的威胁”。 Over the past 10 years, many turtles have been moving north from the Gulf of Mexico into the warming waters of the Gulf of Maine. There, they feed on mussels, crabs and other sea creatures. 在过去的10年中，许多海龟从墨西哥湾向北移动到缅因州湾的温暖水域。 在那里，它们以贻贝，螃蟹和其他海洋生物为食。 Cape Cod extends into the Atlantic Ocean, serving as a kind of trap for turtles. When the waters cool there, the animals start to have health problems, like developing pneumonia. They have problems moving and eating. 科德角延伸到大西洋，是乌龟的陷阱。 当那里的水冷却时，动物开始存在健康问题，例如患肺炎。 他们在移动和饮食方面存在问题。 Bob Prescott is the director of Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary and helped to prepare the PLOS ONE paper. He notes that the sea turtles “know how to leave, but the Cape is like a trap – a hook within a hook.” 鲍勃·普雷斯科特（Bob Prescott）是Wellfleet Bay野生动物保护区的董事，并帮助准备了PLOS One论文。 他指出，海龟“知道如何离开，但斗篷就像一个陷阱 - 钩子里的钩子。” If the turtles survive, it can take months before they are fully recovered. Adam Kennedy is a biologist at New England Aquarium's sea turtle hospital in Quincy, Massachusetts. He says that when the turtles arrive at the hospital “they look like they are dead, especially in December.” 如果海龟生存，可能需要几个月的时间才能完全恢复。 亚当·肯尼迪（Adam Kennedy）是马萨诸塞州昆西的新英格兰水族馆海龟医院的生物学家。 他说，当海龟到达医院时，“它们看起来好像已经死了，尤其是在十二月。” Other experts argue that climate change alone cannot explain the increased number of turtle strandings. 其他专家认为，仅气候变化无法解释乌龟束缚的数量增加。Jeffrey Seminoff heads the Marine Turtle Ecology and Assessment Program at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Marine Fisheries Service. He believes that the high number of strandings “probably results from the simple fact that there's more turtles.” 杰弗里·塞诺夫（Jeffrey Seminoff）领导着国家海洋和大气管理局国家海洋渔业局的海龟生态和评估计划。 他认为，大量搁浅“可能是由于有更多海龟的简单事实而导致的。”Seminoff said that the recovery of the turtle population and “success of conservation efforts at the nesting beaches” could explain the higher number of turtle strandings. Seminoff说，乌龟种群的恢复和“筑巢海滩的保护工作的成功”可以解释乌龟的数量更高。 Kennedy, the biologist, said that he has mixed feelings when the turtles are released back into the wild. “It's bittersweet, because you spend so much time with them but ultimately every one of these guys getting back to the ocean helps the population.” 生物学家肯尼迪（Kennedy）说，当海龟被释放回野外时，他的感受也不同。 “这很苦乐参半，因为您花了很多时间与他们在一起，但最终，这些家伙回到海洋中的每个人都会帮助人口。” Recently, Honey Bun – the turtle we met at the beginning of our report – and other turtles were taken to Florida. They were released into the water. 最近，蜂蜜面包 - 我们在报告开头遇到的乌龟 - 其他海龟被带到佛罗里达。 他们被释放到水中。 Kelly Shaffer is with National Aquarium Baltimore, which worked with four other groups to organize the turtles' release. She noted that she feels a sense of “joy and accomplishment” at “being able to put them back out there.” 凯利·谢弗（Kelly Shaffer）与国家水族馆巴尔的摩（National Aquarium Baltimore）一起，该水族馆与其他四个团体合作组织了乌龟的释放。 她指出，她对“能够将它们放回那里”感到“喜悦和成就”感到“喜悦和成就”。

In this newscast: Juneau was one of nine communities selected for an annual grant by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, a health philanthropy group; Flood inundation maps that model how Juneau's Mendenhall River levee should perform have finally arrived; Initial results from a study of humpback whale health in Juneau found that the area is particularly important for females and their calves, and the findings could drive the city to consider restricting the growth of the whale watching industry; A Washington state-based conservation group is suing the National Marine Fisheries Service over king salmon, again 

A world class expert in data management, Dr. Mark Brady has served as Chief Data Officer for the Space Force, Chief Data Officer for the Air Force Space Command, Data Architect for The Department of Justice, and Information Architect for the National Marine Fisheries Service.He also helped established electronic trade standards as U.S. delegate to the United Nations, served on the White House Data Cabinet, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Big Data Council.Mark is the author of, "Next Generation Data Management: Using Your Data Assets to Drive Mission Success" Listen NOW to discover, "How To Turn Data Into Mission Success "

This week on Here's What We Know, catch an unexpected and riveting conversation with Eric Jay Dolan, bestselling author, about his incredible new book “Left for Dead.” Join us as we explore the thrilling story of Charles Barnard, a sealing captain marooned in the Falkland Islands during the War of 1812. Eric breaks down how he stumbled upon this almost forgotten piece of history and details Barnard's survival against unthinkable odds. Alongside personal anecdotes and rich historical context, we journey through the fascinating and tumultuous experiences that make this tale deserving of a movie adaptation. If you're a history buff or love incredible survival stories, this episode is a must-listen!In This Episode:Eric Jay Dolin's journey to discovering this forgotten piece of history.Charles Barnard's heroic leadership and survival strategies.The sealing industry's role in early America and its historical context.The tragic wreck of the Isabella.Why this book hasn't hit the big screen (yet) and why it absolutely should.This episode is sponsored by: Winchester Western Wear (Be sure to tell them Gary sent you so you can save 20%!) Dignity Memorial Bio:Eric Jay Dolin's lifelong fascination with the ocean and the natural world began on the shores of New York and Connecticut, where he spent his childhood exploring tidepools and collecting seashells along the Atlantic coast. Though he initially aspired to become a marine biologist, Eric's journey led him to environmental policy, where his passion for storytelling and advocacy flourished.With degrees from Brown University, Yale, and a Ph.D. in environmental policy and planning from MIT, Eric has held a range of impactful roles, including working for the National Marine Fisheries Service, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and as a curatorial assistant in Harvard's Mollusk Department.Today, Eric is best known as an acclaimed author and storyteller, weaving captivating narratives about the intersection of history, nature, and humanity. Through his books and articles, he shares the stories that inspire him, inviting readers to explore the wonders and complexities of the natural world.Website: https://www.ericjaydolin.com/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ericjayd/Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/user/ericjaydolinConnect with Gary: Gary's Website Follow Gary on Instagram Gary's Tiktok Gary's Facebook Watch the episodes on YouTube Advertise on the Podcast Thank you for listening. Let us know what you think about this episode. Leave us a review!

In this case, the court considered these issues: 1. Does the Magnuson-Stevens Act authorize the National Marine Fisheries Service to promulgate a rule that would require industry to pay for at-sea monitoring programs? 2. Should the Court overrule Chevron v Natural Resources Defense Council or at least clarify whether statutory silence on controversial powers creates an ambiguity requiring deference to the agency? The case was decided on June 28, 2024. The Supreme Court held that the Administrative Procedure Act requires courts to exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority, and courts may not defer to an agency interpretation of the law simply because a statute is ambiguous. Chevron U-S-A Inc. v Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. is overruled. Chief Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion of the Court (which also decided the consolidated case, Relentless, Inc. v Department of Commerce). The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) of 1946 requires courts to "decide all relevant questions of law" when reviewing agency actions. This means courts should use their own judgment to interpret laws, not defer to agencies' interpretations. The Chevron doctrine, established in the 1984 case Chevron U-S-A v Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., contradicts this principle. Chevron required courts to defer to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes if those interpretations were reasonable. Chevron was based on a flawed assumption that Congress intends to delegate interpretive authority to agencies whenever a law is ambiguous. This assumption doesn't reflect reality and goes against the traditional role of courts. Chevron has been difficult to apply consistently and has led to confusion in lower courts. It has also been gradually limited by subsequent Supreme Court decisions. Thus, Chevron should be overruled because it contradicts the APA, is based on faulty reasoning, has proven unworkable in practice, and hasn't created the kind of settled expectations that would justify keeping it in place. However, this decision does not necessarily overturn the specific outcomes of past cases that used Chevron. Those outcomes would need to be challenged separately. Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch each filed concurring opinions. Justice Elena Kagan authored a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined, and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson joined as to No. 22-1219. Justice Jackson took no part in the consideration or decision of No. 22-451. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.  --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scotus-opinions/support

The National Marine Fisheries Service changed the status of pillar coral from threatened to endangered under the ESA.

Massachusetts Lobstermen's Association, Inc. v. National Marine Fisheries Service

The National Marine Fisheries Service announced last Wednesday that it was shutting down the remainder of the Central Gulf of Alaska pollock season. Alaska's highest court ruled against the City of Soldotna on Friday in the city's long standing annexation case.

Meet a big, beautiful, predatory fish that floats like a butterfly and whacks prey with its wings: the California Butterfly Ray! Scientist and Elasmobranch expert Joe Bizzarro from the National Marine Fisheries Service's Southwest Fisheries Science Center is our guest.

TreVaughn Ellis is a recent graduate of American University, and winner of the Scott A. Bass Outstanding Scholarship Award. During his studies, he interned as a researcher with the National Marine Fisheries Service, part of NOAA, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in Alaska. In this episode, he describes his research in Alaska, where...

In this episode of the Beyond Jaws podcast, co-hosts Andrew Lewin and Dr. David Ebert dive into an engaging conversation about living in Honduras and the allure of island life, especially for diving enthusiasts. They introduce their guest, Ivy Baremore, a newly minted PhD with extensive experience as a fisheries observer and work with the National Marine Fisheries Service. The hosts express their excitement about Ivy's career journey, particularly her move to Belize, and the various life changes she's experienced, including her recent marriage and navigating her PhD studies. Tune in to discover more about Ivy's fascinating adventures and insights into marine life and fisheries. Connect with us: Website: https://bit.ly/37TMqeKInstagram: https://bit.ly/3eorwXZ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@beyondjawspodcast7591 Dave:  Website: https://www.lostsharkguy.com/ Instagram: https://bit.ly/3q1J9Q5 Andrew: Website: https://www.speakupforblue.com/ Instagram: https://bit.ly/37g5WkG Dr. Ivy Barrymore's journey into marine biology and shark research is a compelling narrative that highlights the importance of early experiences and hands-on internships in shaping a successful career in the field. From a young age, Ivy exhibited a passion for marine biology, a dream ignited during childhood vacations to Dauphin Island, Alabama, where she spent time searching for shark teeth. This early fascination with the ocean laid the groundwork for her future endeavors. Ivy's academic path began at Florida State University, where she pursued a Bachelor of Science degree. During her undergraduate studies, she seized an internship opportunity with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), which proved pivotal in her career. This internship provided her with practical experience in marine research, working on a project that involved analyzing mackerel otoliths (ear bones). The hands-on experience she gained solidified her interest in marine biology and equipped her with valuable skills for her future roles. After completing her undergraduate degree, Ivy continued to build her experience as a biological technician for NMFS in Panama City, Florida. This role allowed her to engage directly with marine species and deepened her understanding of the complexities of marine ecosystems. Her work involved monitoring shark pupping and nursery areas, further fueling her interest in shark research. Ivy's journey took another significant turn when she pursued her Master's degree at the University of Florida, focusing on the angel shark, Squatina dumerale. Her master's research was closely tied to her work with NMFS, as she leveraged the data collected during her time as a technician. This integration of academic pursuits with practical fieldwork exemplifies the importance of hands-on experience in marine science. Following her master's degree, Ivy returned to NMFS, where she continued her work in shark research for nearly a decade. Her role involved coordinating fisheries observer programs, providing her with further opportunities to collect biological data essential for stock assessments. The experience she gained during this time was invaluable, allowing her to collaborate with established scientists and contribute to significant research projects. Eventually, Ivy made the bold decision to move to Belize to work with Mar Alliance, a nonprofit organization focused on marine conservation. This transition marked a new chapter in her career, where she could apply her skills to address complex marine issues in a different context. The flexibility and creativity offered by working in a nonprofit environment allowed her to explore new research avenues, particularly in deep-sea fisheries. Throughout her journey, Ivy's commitment to hands-on experience has been a driving force in her career. Her internships and practical roles have not only provided her with essential skills but have also shaped her understanding of marine biology and shark research. As she pursued her Ph.D. at the University of Exeter while working full-time, Ivy's ability to integrate her research with her professional responsibilities further underscores the importance of experiential learning in marine science. Her story serves as an inspiring example for aspiring marine biologists, emphasizing that hands-on experience is crucial for success in this dynamic and ever-evolving field. The Journey of Dr. Ivy Barrymore in Marine Science Dr. Ivy Barrymore's journey in marine science is a fascinating tale of passion, perseverance, and adaptability. Her story begins with a childhood fascination with marine biology, sparked during family vacations to Dauphin Island, Alabama. Despite growing up landlocked in Arkansas, her love for the ocean deepened when her family moved to Hawaii during her sophomore year of high school. This significant transition not only exposed her to the marine environment but also solidified her desire to pursue a career in marine biology. Education and Early Career Ivy's academic path led her to Florida State University, where she pursued a Bachelor of Science degree. During her undergraduate studies, she interned at the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), which became a pivotal experience in her career. This internship allowed her to work on a project involving mackerel and otoliths, providing her with hands-on experience in marine research. After graduating, she continued her journey with NMFS, where she worked for several years before returning to graduate school to obtain her Master's degree at the University of Florida, focusing on the angel shark. Her master's research was particularly noteworthy as it addressed a significant gap in knowledge regarding the angel shark, a species listed as prohibited due to insufficient data on its population status. This project not only contributed valuable data to NMFS but also set the stage for her future endeavors in marine science. Transition to Belize and Mar Alliance After nearly a decade of working with NMFS, Ivy faced a crossroads in her career. Despite her extensive experience, she found herself in a position with limited opportunities for advancement. This prompted her to explore new avenues, leading her to a job opportunity with Mar Alliance in Belize, a nonprofit organization focused on marine conservation. The decision to move to Belize was not without its challenges, especially as she had just gotten married. However, the prospect of working in a dynamic environment where she could apply her skills to new and exciting problems was too enticing to pass up. In Belize, Ivy quickly adapted to the challenges of conducting research in a remote location, gaining invaluable experience in logistics and fieldwork. Pursuing a PhD While working with Mar Alliance, Ivy also pursued her Ph.D. at the University of Exeter. This unique opportunity allowed her to continue her work in marine science while advancing her education. The structure of the Ph.D. program in the UK, which did not require her to be on campus full-time, was particularly beneficial for her situation. She was able to balance her responsibilities as a researcher and a mother while completing her doctoral studies. Ivy's research during her Ph.D. focused on deep-sea fisheries, an area that had previously been underexplored in Belize. Her work not only contributed to the scientific community's understanding of these fisheries but also aligned with Mar Alliance's mission to promote sustainable fishing practices and marine conservation. Conclusion Dr. Ivy Barrymore's journey in marine science exemplifies the importance of adaptability and seizing opportunities. From her early fascination with the ocean to her impactful research in Belize, Ivy's career is a testament to the diverse paths one can take in the field of marine biology. Her story serves as an inspiration for aspiring marine scientists, highlighting that with determination and the right opportunities, one can make significant contributions to the understanding and conservation of our oceans. Pursuing a Ph.D. can be a strategic career move, particularly when it aligns with one's professional goals and offers flexibility in managing work and personal life. This is exemplified by Dr. Ivy Barrymore's experience as she undertook her part-time Ph.D. while working at Mar Alliance. Alignment with Professional Goals Ivy's decision to pursue a Ph.D. was not made lightly; it was a calculated step toward advancing her career. After spending over a decade working with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), she reached a point where there were limited opportunities for advancement. Despite her extensive experience and a master's degree, Ivy found herself in a position where her title and pay did not reflect her qualifications. This realization prompted her to explore options that would allow her to grow professionally. When she joined Mar Alliance, she was encouraged by Rachel Graham to find a research focus that she was passionate about. This support was crucial as it allowed Ivy to align her Ph.D. research with her work at Mar Alliance, specifically in the area of deep-sea fisheries. By leveraging her existing knowledge and experience, she was able to create a research project that not only contributed to her academic goals but also benefited the organization. Flexibility in Work and Personal Life One of the significant advantages of Ivy's part-time Ph.D. was the flexibility it provided. As a working professional, she was able to continue her role at Mar Alliance while pursuing her degree. This arrangement allowed her to maintain a steady income and job security, which is particularly important for someone with a family. Ivy mentioned that she had a five-year-old son during her Ph.D. journey, and the ability to work full-time while studying part-time was essential for balancing her responsibilities as a mother and a professional. The structure of the Ph.D. program at the University of Exeter also contributed to this flexibility. Unlike traditional U.S. Ph.D. programs that often require students to be on campus and take courses, Ivy's program allowed her to conduct her research remotely. This meant she could manage her time effectively, focusing on her studies when it suited her schedule, without the need to relocate or disrupt her family life. Conclusion Ivy's experience illustrates that pursuing a Ph.D. can be a strategic career move when it is thoughtfully aligned with professional aspirations and personal circumstances. By choosing a part-time program that complemented her work at Mar Alliance, she was able to enhance her qualifications while continuing to contribute to meaningful research in marine biology. This approach not only advanced her career but also provided the necessary flexibility to balance her personal life, making her Ph.D. journey a successful and enriching experience. The Journey of Dr. Ivy Barrymore in Marine Science Dr. Ivy Barrymore's journey in marine science is a fascinating tale of passion, perseverance, and adaptability. Her story begins with a childhood fascination with marine biology, sparked during family vacations to Dauphin Island, Alabama. Despite growing up landlocked in Arkansas, her love for the ocean deepened when her family moved to Hawaii during her sophomore year of high school. This significant transition not only exposed her to the ocean but also solidified her desire to pursue a career in marine biology. Education and Early Career Ivy's academic path led her to Florida State University, where she pursued a Bachelor of Science degree. During her undergraduate studies, she interned at the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), which became a pivotal experience in her career. This internship allowed her to work on a project involving mackerel and otoliths, providing her with hands-on experience in marine research. After graduating, she continued her journey with NMFS, where she worked for over a decade, focusing on shark pupping and nursery surveys in the Gulf of Mexico. Her desire to further her education led her to pursue a Master's degree at the University of Florida, where she conducted research on the angel shark, Squatina dumerelle. This project was not only significant for her academic growth but also contributed valuable data to NMFS, which was in need of information on prohibited species. Transition to Belize and Mar Alliance After years of working as a contractor with NMFS, Ivy faced a career crossroads. With limited opportunities for advancement and a desire for new challenges, she decided to take a leap of faith and move to Belize to work with Mar Alliance, an organization founded by Rachel Graham. This decision marked a significant shift in her career, allowing her to apply her skills in a new and exciting environment. In Belize, Ivy was able to engage in diverse marine research projects, including deep-sea fisheries studies. This role not only reignited her passion for marine science but also provided her with the opportunity to work closely with local fishing communities, addressing complex problems related to marine conservation. Pursuing a PhD While working at Mar Alliance, Ivy also pursued a Ph.D. at the University of Exeter. This decision was strategic, as it allowed her to continue her work while advancing her education. The flexibility of the program, which did not require her to be on campus, was crucial for her, especially as she balanced her responsibilities as a full-time researcher and a new mother. Ivy's Ph.D. research focused on deep-sea fisheries, building on the data she had already collected during her time at Mar Alliance. This experience not only enhanced her expertise but also positioned her for future leadership roles within the organization. Conclusion Dr. Ivy Barrymore's journey in marine science exemplifies the importance of adaptability and seizing opportunities. From her early fascination with the ocean to her impactful work in Belize and her pursuit of a Ph.D., Ivy's story is a testament to the diverse paths one can take in the field of marine biology. Her experiences highlight the significance of hands-on research, collaboration with local communities, and the continuous pursuit of knowledge in addressing the challenges facing our oceans today. The differences between Ph.D. programs in the U.S. and the U.K. can significantly impact a student's experience, particularly for those already in the workforce. The U.K. system offers more flexibility, allowing students to balance work and academic commitments more effectively. Key Differences Course Requirements: In the U.S., Ph.D. programs typically require students to complete a set number of courses before they can begin their research. This often includes qualifying exams and comprehensive exams, which can extend the time spent in the program. Conversely, the U.K. system does not have a formal requirement for coursework if the student already holds a master's degree. This allows students to focus primarily on their research from the outset. Funding and Assistantships: U.S. Ph.D. students often receive funding through teaching or research assistantships, which cover tuition and provide a stipend. This financial support is crucial for many students, especially those who may not have the means to pay for their education upfront. In the U.K., while there are opportunities for funding, many students may need to pay tuition out of pocket. Scholarships may be available, but the financial model can be less supportive compared to the U.S. system. Duration and Structure: U.S. Ph.D. programs typically last around five to seven years, with a significant portion dedicated to coursework before research begins. This can be a lengthy commitment for someone who is already working. U.K. Ph.D. programs are generally shorter, often taking three to four years, and they allow for part-time study. This structure is particularly beneficial for individuals who wish to continue working while pursuing their degree. Research Focus: In the U.S., the path to a Ph.D. often involves a broad exploration of the field before narrowing down to a specific research topic. This can be beneficial for students who are still determining their specific interests. The U.K. system encourages students to define their research focus early on, which can lead to a more streamlined and efficient process. This is advantageous for those who already have a clear idea of their research interests and want to integrate their work experience with their academic pursuits. Impact on Students For individuals like Dr. Ivy Barrymore, who transitioned from a career in marine biology to pursuing a Ph.D. while working with Mar Alliance, the U.K. system provided the flexibility needed to manage both responsibilities. She was able to conduct her research in Belize while completing her Ph.D. part-time at the University of Exeter. This arrangement allowed her to leverage her professional experience and apply it directly to her academic work, creating a cohesive narrative for her thesis. In summary, the U.K. Ph.D. system's flexibility, reduced course requirements, and shorter duration make it an attractive option for working professionals. This structure enables students to balance their academic and professional lives more effectively, ultimately enhancing their educational experience and career development.

Dr. Don and Professor Ben talk about the risks from eating fish in the Olympic Village. Dr. Don - not risky

The U.S. Supreme Court recently handed down one of the most significant decisions in decades. In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, a case involving a little-known National Marine Fisheries Service regulation, SCOTUS overturned the Chevron doctrine, and in so doing, removed the forty-year old legal foundation that many federal agencies relied upon when promulgating their regulations. In this first of several podcasts to examine the impact of Loper Bright in various industries and practice groups, Labor & Employment Practice Group member Logan C. Hibbs joins Briefly Legal to discuss the two-step test used to determine the amount of deference given to federal agencies when determining the validity of agency regulations under the now defunct Chevron doctrine, and the potential impacts the Court's ruling in Loper Bright could have on ongoing litigation involving workplace regulations including, the Department of Labor's (DOL) new Rule on wage requirements for exempt workers under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the National Labor Relations Board's joint-employer rule, and the DOL's new Rule on who is an independent contractor and who is an employee. About Logan C. HibbsAdditional Resources Chevron Overruled - What Does this Mean for Employers?Connect with Crowe & Dunlevy:Website | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn

Hello Interactors,We're fully into Summer in the Northern Hemisphere, and as the earth tilts toward the sun, Interplace tilts toward the environment. And what a crucial moment to do so. Just last week, the Supreme Court made sweeping decisions that could unravel over fifty years of environmental legislation, threatening to plunge us into chaos. This upheaval comes precisely when our world's natural boundaries desperately need regulatory stability and security to make any meaningful progress in combating global warming.Let's dig in…POLLEN, POLLUTING, AND POLITICSI recently returned from the Midwest visiting family. I like looking out of the airplane window at the various crop patterns from state to state. Trying to discern which state I was over; I was reminded of a corny Midwest joke.Why do Iowa corn stalks lean to the east? Because Illinois sucks and Nebraska blows. Folks in Illinois tell the same joke, but it's Ohio that sucks and Iowa that blows. You get the idea.The truth is the wind does commonly blow from west to east oblivious to state borders. It sends whatever it wants across the border — clouds, dust, seeds, pollen…pollution. And if there's money to be made, borders become porous or disappear altogether.Those rivalrous corn jokes mirror an economic reality. Bordering states all compete for federal subsidies and access to markets — mostly across international borders. Access to these markets can be impacted by corn pollen drifting from one state to another.With the widespread adoption of genetically modified (GMO) corn varieties, there's potential for contamination of non-GMO corn fields by pollen from GMO corn fields on state lines. One study suggest cross-pollination could be detected up to 600 feet away from the source, although counts dropped off rapidly beyond 150 feet.But the more pressing concern isn't pollen drift, but pollution drift. As part of the Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has a “Good Neighbor” rule designed to reduce air pollution that crosses state lines. It requires "upwind" states to reduce emissions that affect air quality in "downwind" states which can cause significant health problems.Last week, on June 27, 2024, the Supreme Court's ruling in Ohio v. EPA temporarily blocked this rule.Fossil fuel companies and industry associations celebrated the decision as a win, viewing it as a check on the EPA's regulatory power. Meanwhile humans with a heart and lungs worry the decision leaves upwind states free to contribute to their neighbors' ozone problems for years.It's worth noting that this is a temporary stay, not a final ruling on the merits of the case. The legal challenge will continue in lower courts, with the possibility of oral arguments as soon as this fall. But this ruling can also be seen as part of a pattern of the Supreme Court's conservative majority expressing skepticism towards federal regulatory authority, especially in environmental matters.Take, for example, the ruling that came the very next day on June 28, 2024. The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, curtailed EPA, and other executive agencies', power by overturning the Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council precedent. This shift endangers numerous regulations and transfers authority from the executive branch to Congress and the courts. Chevron has been a cornerstone in American law, cited in 70 Supreme Court and 17,000 lower court decisions.The case began with fishermen challenging two similar rulings, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless v. Department of Commerce. These involved a 1976 law requiring herring boats to carry federal observers to prevent overfishing. A 2020 regulation mandated boat owners to pay $700 daily for the observers. Fishermen from New Jersey and Rhode Island, supported by conservative groups opposing the "administrative state," sued, arguing the law didn't authorize the National Marine Fisheries Service to impose the fee.Adam Liptak of the New York Times reported the fisherman case was brought “by Cause of Action Institute, which says its mission is ‘to limit the power of the administrative state,' and the New Civil Liberties Alliance, which says it aims ‘to protect constitutional freedoms from violations from the administrative state.'” Liptak also reports these institutions are funded by Charles Koch, the climate change denying billionaire who has long supported conservative and libertarian causes.It's curious how the Environmental Protection Agency came from a conservative libertarian and the first most dishonest president in my lifetime, Richard Nixon. The EPA will likely be obliterated should the least trusted former president get reelected — Felonious Trump.GORSUCH'S GRIM GREEN GUTTINGI wrote about the formation of the EPA in July of 2021.

In this episode of American Potential NOW with host Jeff Crank, we delve into a recent Supreme Court case that has far-reaching implications for the administrative state and the interpretation of the term "reasonable". Our guests, fisherman Wayne Reichle and Cause of Action Institute Council Ryan Mulvey, were both directly involved in this landmark case. They share their insights and experiences, shedding light on the legal battle that challenged the power of administrative agencies and the burdensome regulations imposed on small businesses and everyday Americans.The case in question arose when the National Marine Fisheries Service decided that fishermen should bear the costs of increased monitoring for herring fishing, a decision that led to a legal battle reaching the Supreme Court. Wayne, one of the fishermen involved, shares his personal experiences and the financial burden this decision would have imposed on fishermen. The episode explores the implications of the court's ruling, which challenges the Chevron doctrine and puts the responsibility of interpreting the law back on judges. This episode is a testament to the extraordinary potential of Americans to challenge and reshape the administrative state. Tune in to hear this story on Spotify, Pandora, iHeartRadio, and anywhere you can find your podcasts.

According to the Associated Press, on Friday, June 28 the US Supreme Court overturned the decades old Chevron decision. The Supreme Court overturned the Chevron decision, which allowed federal agencies to interpret unclear laws, thereby empowering them in regulatory matters. The Chevron decision, established in 1984, outlines a principle of judicial deference to administrative agencies' interpretations of ambiguous statutes that they administer. It holds that courts should defer to these agency interpretations as long as they are reasonable and not contrary to the clear intent of Congress. This doctrine has been pivotal in shaping the balance of power between regulatory agencies and the judiciary in the United States. This decision to overturn Chevron is seen as a major win for business interests, potentially affecting regulations across environment, public health, workplace safety, and consumer protections. It impacts regulatory agencies by diminishing their discretion and authority in interpreting and implementing ambiguous statutes. It shifts more decision-making power to the judiciary, requiring courts to independently assess the legality and scope of agency actions without automatically deferring to agency interpretations from subject matter experts. This change potentially complicates the regulatory process, making it harder for agencies to enact and enforce regulations without facing greater scrutiny and challenges in court. The judiciary or the court now has the ability to veto and edit regulations that typically would be deferred to experts like those at the EPA, FDA, OSHA, and other agencies. Instead, judges are now able to make decisions based on their economic interests and personal beliefs surrounding the proposed and enacted regulations. The court's conservative majority, aligned with Justice John Roberts, reinforced the role of courts over agency experts in interpreting statutes, limiting agency discretion. The ruling could lead to challenges worth billions, impacting regulations like the National Marine Fisheries Service's fee requirements for herring fishermen. It also reflects broader conservative efforts to curtail the regulatory state, aligning with previous rulings under the Trump-appointed justices. Dissenting justices, including Kagan, criticized the decision as undermining agency authority and legislative intent, with implications for future regulatory oversight. Industry groups supported the decision for economic reasons, while advocacy groups warned of threats to public safety and environmental protections. A lawyer from Earthjustice stated after the ruling that: “The Supreme Court is pushing the nation into uncharted waters as it seizes power from our elected branches of government to advance its deregulatory agenda. The conservative justices are aggressively reshaping the foundations of our government so that the President and Congress have less power to protect the public, and corporations have more power to challenge regulations in search of profits. This ruling threatens the legitimacy of hundreds of regulations that keep us safe, protect our homes and environment, and create a level playing field for businesses to compete on.”  The ruling shifts power dynamics away from federal agencies toward courts, potentially influencing future regulatory frameworks and major legal challenges. In short, things will now be decided by 9 bureaucrats in robes rather than the public and subject matter experts. Source: https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chevron-regulations-environment-5173bc83d3961a7aaabe415ceaf8d665 --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/outdoor-minimalist/support

Dr. Eric Jay Dolin wanted to be Jacques Cousteau as a child, but he changed his plans in college when he realized he wasn't very good at science. Fortunately, he was able to pivot into environmental management, policy, and planning. Eric has written numerous books including A Furious Sky: The Five-Hundred-Year History of America's Hurricanes. In this episode, Alan talks with Dr. Dolin about the history of studying hurricanes in the United States, the advances that have been made in predicting and tracking them, as well as what we can expect from them in future due to our changing climate. Dr. Eric Jay Dolan attended Brown University where he earned a bachelor's degree in Biology and Environmental Studies. He then completed a master's in environmental management at Yale and a PhD in environmental policy and planning at MIT. Dr. Dolan has worked with institutions like the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Marine Fisheries Service. However, his true passion is storytelling. Eric has been widely published and is an award-winning author of books such as Rebels at Sea: Privateering in the American Revolution, Leviathan: The History of Whaling in America, and today's featured book, A Furious Sky: The Five-Hundred-Year History of America's Hurricanes.

On this episode: Last month on January 17th, SCOTUS heard oral arguments in a cases that deals with the National Marine Fisheries Service's (NMFS) interpretation of a federal fishery law. The court's ruling, one of the most anticipated in 2024, could affect future applications of Chevron deference.   Chief policy editor Caitlin Styrsky joins the show to unpack Chevron Deference's history, how the doctrine works, the arguments for and against keeping it around, and what its future might look like after SCOTUS's likely decision later this year.  An in-depth guide: https://ballotpedia.org/Chevron_deference_(doctrine)  Our Learning Journey: https://ballotpedia.org/Journey:_Chevron_deference  SCOTUS might release a related decision in June: https://news.ballotpedia.org/2024/01/30/scotus-looks-at-chevron-but-what-exactly-does-that-mean/  Sign up for our Newsletters: https://ballotpedia.org/Ballotpedia_Email_Updates  Stream "On the Ballot" on Spotify or wherever you listen to podcasts. If you have questions, comments, or love for BP, feel free to reach out at ontheballot@ballotpedia.org or on X (formerly Twitter) @Ballotpedia. *On The Ballot is a conversational podcast featuring interviews with guests across the political spectrum. The views and opinions expressed by them are solely their own and are not representative of the views of the host or Ballotpedia as a whole.

This is the second in the Future Fisheries Management series that we are producing in collaboration with the Mercatus Center at George Mason University and the Center for Governance and Markets at the University of Pittsburgh. In this episode, Michael speaks with Bubba Cook, the Western and Central Pacific Tuna Programme Manager at the World Wildlife Fund, or WWF. Bubba's career has included multiple phases. He obtained his law degree from Lewis and Clark Law School, working for the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service in Alaska where he led a team in the implementation of of a catch share, also known as an individual transferable quota, program for the North Pacific crab fishery made famous by the TV show “Deadliest Catch.” Bubba later joined WWf's Arctic Programme to support fisheries conservation and management efforts across the Bering Sea from the Russian Far East to Alaska's remote indigenous communities. In 2010, he joined the U.S. Peace Corps and servedin  Fiji, where he supported several grassroots marine conservation projects over two years. Since 2012, Bubba has worked as the Western and Central Pacific Tuna Programme Manager for WWF out of Suva, Fiji, and Wellington, New Zealand, where he focuses on improving tuna fisheries management at a national and regional level in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean through policy improvements, market tools, and technological innovation. Michael and Bubba discuss the lessons that Bubba has learned at each step along the way, and Michael asks him about the recent WTO fishing subsidies agreement that were a central focus of the workshop where they met.

This Day in Legal History: The United Nations Security Council Convenes its First MeetingOn January 17, 1946, the United Nations Security Council convened for its inaugural meeting, marking a crucial moment in international law and governance. This event symbolized the global commitment to peace and security following the devastations of World War II. The meeting, held at Church House, Westminster, London, brought together representatives from 11 nations, reflecting the diverse political landscapes of that era.The council's establishment under the United Nations Charter represented a new approach to international conflict resolution and legal diplomacy. Unlike its predecessor, the League of Nations, the Security Council was endowed with the authority to make binding decisions. This feature underscored a collective endeavor towards maintaining international peace and stability.Discussions at this first meeting set the tone for future operations, emphasizing cooperation and legal frameworks to address global challenges. The Security Council's ability to impose sanctions, authorize military interventions, and make legally binding decisions was a novel development in international law. It signaled a shift from purely diplomatic negotiations to actionable, enforceable resolutions.Importantly, the Security Council's first session underscored the principles of sovereign equality and non-intervention, foundational elements in modern international law. It highlighted the role of international cooperation in addressing conflicts, a principle that continues to influence global legal practices and policies.This historic meeting laid the groundwork for numerous legal precedents and interventions in the years to follow. It showcased the potential of international law as a tool for peace and justice, shaping the landscape of global governance in the 20th century and beyond.California's leading role in the artificial intelligence (AI) industry is being challenged by new initiatives in New York and New Jersey. These states, under their respective governors, are positioning themselves as emerging centers for AI. New York Governor Kathy Hochul announced a partnership with state universities and a $250 million investment over ten years to create a super-computer facility in upstate New York. New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy has aligned with Princeton University and the New Jersey Economic Development Authority for a similar AI endeavor.Both governors are focused on enhancing research capabilities to attract more AI firms and jobs. New York is already home to companies like IBM and PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, while New Jersey hosts Panasonic Corp.'s North American headquarters and a major IBM facility. In contrast, California hosts many of the largest AI companies, including OpenAI, Alphabet, and Meta, as well as major research centers like UC Berkeley and Stanford University.California Governor Gavin Newsom is determined to maintain California's AI dominance, promoting a hands-off approach to AI regulation in the private sector, while ensuring state agencies effectively control AI systems. Other governors are adopting similar administrative strategies, avoiding sweeping regulations that could hinder AI development. These approaches echo federal AI rules introduced by President Joe Biden, allowing government use of AI with monitoring of its impacts.New York and New Jersey have avoided imposing broad restrictions on AI, focusing instead on facilitating its growth and mitigating potential risks. Their budget processes and collaborations with academic institutions will shape the scope of these AI initiatives. New York Assemblymember Alex Bores highlighted the importance of computing power as a key factor in attracting tech talent and industry growth, aiming to rival California's AI dominance.Elected officials in other states also express a desire to diversify the AI landscape beyond Silicon Valley. Efforts are underway to ensure wider participation in AI development and to address concerns such as algorithmic discrimination, job losses, surveillance, and misinformation. This national interest in AI underlines its potential to reshape the economy and influence a variety of sectors.California Tech Dominance Challenged By AI Initiatives in NY, NJApple Inc. is adjusting its US App Store policies to include external payment options, following the Supreme Court's decision not to hear its appeal in an antitrust lawsuit. This change will allow third-party apps to use links directing to external websites for processing in-app purchases, thereby bypassing Apple's own payment system which typically charges a 15% to 30% commission. However, Apple intends to collect a revised revenue share of 12% or 27% from developers opting for external payment systems.The Supreme Court's choice left in place a 2023 appeals court ruling, which found Apple's business model compliant with antitrust laws but in violation of California's Unfair Competition Law due to restrictions on developers' communication about alternative, potentially cheaper, payment systems.The decision comes amidst the legal battle between Apple and Epic Games, with both companies having sought the court's review. The ruling impacted Apple's stock, which experienced a temporary decline.Developers will now need to apply for an "entitlement" to access external payment options. Apple had previously allowed reader apps to direct users to external websites for subscriptions. The company will issue a warning to customers about external transactions before proceeding.Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney criticized Apple's plan to charge a fee on external transactions, arguing it would prevent developers from offering lower costs to consumers. Sweeney also disapproved of Apple's warning message to customers, calling it a "scare screen," and plans to challenge Apple's compliance approach in court.The stakes are high, with in-app spending projected to reach $182 billion in 2024 and $207 billion by 2025. Competitors like Microsoft Corp. are already considering entering the mobile app market, with a focus on gaming.The decision aligns with previous court findings largely rejecting claims by Epic that Apple's App Store policies violated federal antitrust law, while acknowledging some issues with its business practices. This ruling also concludes the temporary stay in the case, allowing Apple to proceed with its new policy. The case is one among several global challenges Apple faces, including pending antitrust cases in Europe against its App Store rules.Apple to Allow Outside Payments for Apps After US Decision (4)Coinbase, a major cryptocurrency exchange, is set to argue in federal court that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) should not regulate the tokens traded on its platform as securities. This hearing marks a significant development in the ongoing legal battle between Coinbase and the SEC, which could have major implications for the digital asset sector. The SEC's lawsuit against Coinbase, filed in June, claims the exchange facilitated trading in at least 13 crypto tokens that should have been registered as securities. The agency also targeted Coinbase's "staking" program, asserting it should have been registered. Coinbase has requested the dismissal of the lawsuit, referencing a separate case where a judge ruled in favor of Ripple Labs, while the SEC cites another case to support its stance.Coinbase, SEC set to face off in federal court over regulator's crypto authority | ReutersThe U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear a case that could significantly impact the regulatory powers of federal agencies, centered on a dispute over a government program monitoring overfishing of herring off New England's coast. Two fishing companies, Loper Bright Enterprises and Relentless Inc, are challenging the National Marine Fisheries Service's requirement for commercial fishermen to help fund this program. This case presents an opportunity for the Court's conservative majority to reconsider the 1984 "Chevron deference," a legal doctrine that directs judges to defer to federal agencies' interpretations of ambiguous U.S. laws. If you have any interest in Chevron deference and learning a bit more about what might be at stake, see our Max Min episode on the topic. The Supreme Court case, seen as part of a broader effort to limit federal bureaucratic power, involves the cost of monitoring fishing activities, with implications for other cases concerning agency authority, including those involving the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Decisions in these cases are expected by the end of June.Supreme Court may reel in US agency powers in fishing dispute | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Today on the Wild For Change podcast, we are speaking with Teresa Becher and Mandy Migura from Alaska Wildlife Alliance (AWA) about the special population of endangered beluga whales who live in the Cook Inlet in the central Gulf of Alaska.  Teresa is the Beluga Whale Monitoring Coordinator who coordinates monitoring sessions of a whole team of volunteer community scientists and is the go-to expert on the beluga whales' behaviors in the Kenai and Kasilof rivers.  Mandy is the Deputy Director and Marine Program Officer for AWA.  One of her responsibilities is to coordinate a group of nonprofits who advocate for the recovery of Cook Inlet beluga whales, a position she is uniquely suited for given her prior 11-year experience as the Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Recovery Coordinator when she worked for the National Marine Fisheries Service (now called NOAA Fisheries). NOAA Fisheries is the federal agency responsible for the management of Cook Inlet beluga whales.The beluga whales of the Cook Inlet live explicitly in this inlet and because of this limited habitat, they also must face continued threats such as water waste pollution, noise pollution, climate change affecting their food availability as well as the rising temperature of the water in which they live, disease, habitat loss, as well as vessel strikes to name a few.  Their numbers have declined so dramatically, that approximately 300 beluga whales remain in the inlet.  They are now listed as endangered species under the Endangered Species Act.  Alaska Wildlife Alliance is on the front lines, researching the various threats to the beluga whales, addressing these threats to ensure this very specialized group of beluga whales have a chance at surviving as well as raising awareness of how we can become involved and support this small group of beluga whales.  If you live in Alaska near the Cook Inlet and would like to volunteer to monitor the beluga whales, please go to www.akbmp.org to learn more.  If you would like to provide support for the beluga whales via your smartphone, text beluga to (833) 541-0408. If you encounter any stranded marine mammal along a coastal area, please call NOAA at (877) 925-7773.  To learn more about AWA's work, please go to https://www.akwildlife.org.Website: http://www.wildforchange.com Twitter: @WildForChange Facebook: /wildforchange Instagram: wildforchange

Center for Biological Diversity v. National Marine Fisheries Service

Gov't Tries to Scrap Challenge to IG Committee's Structure and Illegal Interference with IG Operations Vec explains the government's recent motion to dismiss NCLA's Inspector General case in Fredericks v. CIGIE. NCLA Amicus Brief Challenges SCOTUS to Deep-Six Chevron NCLA has filed an amicus curiae brief calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn its destructive Chevron precedent in Loper Bright Enterprises, et al. v. Gina Raimondo, et al. The brief also asks the Court to set aside a rule promulgated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Marine Fisheries Service. Mark and Vec detail NCLA's Supreme court amicus brief arguments against Chevron deference in Loper Bright.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

:  Earlier this month, a panel of judges for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals allowed the Chinook salmon season in Alaska to open for the summer while it considers arguments in a lawsuit filed by the Wild Fish Conservancy. The Seattle-based organization sued the State of Alaska, the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Alaska Trollers Association to stop the harvesting of Chinook, also known as king salmon, which is the primary food source for an endangered population of orcas in the Puget Sound. Julia O’Malley is a third-generation Alaskan and freelance journalist based in Anchorage, Alaska. She recently wrote an article for the New York Times that explores how declining numbers of Chinook impact the culture and livelihoods of coastal communities in Alaska, and the demand for wild salmon on dinner tables and gourmet restaurants. She joins us to talk about her reporting. 

NCLA Cert Petition Joins Effort Asking U.S. Supreme Court to Overturn Chevron and Scrap Fishy Rule The U.S. Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and its National Marine Fisheries Service have imposed an unconstitutional rule requiring fishing companies to pay for at-sea government monitoring of their herring catch. Unfortunately, relying on Chevron deference to do the heavy lifting, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld that rule. NCLA has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari in Relentless Inc., et al. v. Dept. of Commerce, et al., seeking to overturn the Chevron precedent and vacate the rule. Mark touts NCLA's recent cert petition.The SEC's Continuing Control Deficiency Cover Up NCLA Senior Litigation Counsel Peggy Little joins Mark to discuss the U.S. Securities andExchange Commission's continuing control deficiency cover-up.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In This Episode Erin and Weer'd discuss: Time magazine's interview with Gabby Giffords, and her talk of gun confiscation; Nebraska joining the ranks of permitless (but still concealed) carry; Illinois' Assault Weapons Ban getting blocked by the courts; Operation Blazing Sword - Pink Pistols filing an Amicus Brief against the Rhode Island Magazine Ban; and how a SCOTUS case against the Chevron Deference of the National Marine Fisheries Service relates to the abuse of gun owners by the ATF. David continues his series on optics,  this time with the history of reflex sights. Oddball bought a new knife, and this one is the high-priced Sandrin Torino. Did you know that we have a Patreon? Join now for the low, low cost of $4/month (that's $1/podcast) and you'll get to listen to our podcast on Friday instead of Mondays, as well as patron-only content like mag dump episodes, our hilarious blooper reels and film tracks. Show Notes Main Topic: Time: 'No More Guns. Gone': Why Gabby Giffords Isn't Giving Up Gov. Pillen signs Nebraska's permitless conceal carry bill Federal Court Blocks Illinois ‘Assault Weapons' Ban Amicus Brief Filed in Ocean State Tactical v. State of Rhode Island Supreme Court to hear major case on limiting the power of federal government, a long-term goal of legal conservatives Rep. Thomas Massie WRECKS ATF Director! Gun Lovers and Other Strangers; Reflector sight Howard Grubb US Patent 683,203 The Scientific Transactions of the Royal Dublin Society, Volume 7 Reflex Sight: Past, Present, and Future Brena Bock Author Page David Bock Author Page Team And More Oddball's Corner Pocket: Sandrin Torino Nick Shabazz Torino disassembly The Sandrin Knives Monza Pocketknife: The Full Nick Shabazz Review Sandrin Kitchen Knifes Weer'ds Broken Sandrin  

The Supreme Court has decided to take up a case that could clip the wings of our federal regulators. The case was brought by a coalition of fishing companies challenging the power of the National Marine Fisheries Service. Sarah Isgur from The Dispatch breaks down the Chevron doctrine precedent that the high court could overturn and how it would impact federal agencies.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Chevron doctrine is a legal principle that has been in place since a Supreme Court decision in 1984. It states, in sum, that when Congress passes a law that is unclear or ambiguous, the courts should defer to the interpretation of that law made by the relevant federal agency responsible for administering it. The doctrine has been used in countless cases and has provided support for agencies to make decisions on complex issues without explicit instructions from Congress. Now, the US Supreme Court has agreed to review the Chevron doctrine. The doctrine has been criticized by conservatives as fuelling government overreach. The case taken up by the Supreme Court, Loper Bright v. Raimondo, centers on the requirement by the National Marine Fisheries Service that certain vessels fishing for herring off the Atlantic coast must hire monitors for conservation and management purposes. The challenge is being mounted by four New Jersey fishing companies, who want the rule invalidated and Chevron pared back. Conservative groups are organizing against the doctrine, with the case described as a “textbook example of the conservative legal movement ‘manufacturing' a case”.Supreme Court's Chevron Review Caps Years-Long Conservative PushThe US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has adopted a new filing deadline of 5 p.m., effective from July 1, despite opposition from a group of 43 appellate lawyers who stated that the new deadline was "undesirable and counterproductive." The deadline change applies to documents filed after the initiation of a proceeding in the court but not to documents initiating an appeal or other proceedings. The court said the move was aimed at improving work-life balance and avoiding late-night filings that deprive opponents of hours to consider and formulate responses. The new rule ends a practice by some of intentional late-night filings.Third Circuit Adopts Early Filing Deadline Despite Dissent (1)At least 125 lawyers from Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith are leaving the firm to join a new offshoot boutique, Barber Ranen, which has been launched by former leaders of its employment practice. Barber Ranen's founders, John Barber and Jeff Ranen, said they were yearning for an opportunity to build something on their own. The majority of the departures are California-based labor and employment attorneys. The mass exodus roughly halves the size of the firm's employment group, which had about 200 attorneys nationally.100-Plus Lewis Brisbois Lawyers Exit for New Employment Firm (1)A federal judge in Detroit has reversed a jury verdict that ordered Ford Motor Co to pay Versata Software $104.6m for breaching a licensing contract and misappropriating trade secrets. The judge said Versata had offered sufficient evidence of a contract breach, but not enough to let jurors calculate damages accurately. The jury had no basis to determine how long Ford would have needed to develop three trade secrets it allegedly stole, so the damages award was voided. The judge ordered Ford to pay Versata $3 for breach of contract. The $104.6 million award was about 85% of what Versata had sought. $3 is … less. Ford wins reversal of $105 million trade-secrets verdict | ReutersThe trial of Nathaniel Chastain, a former product manager at OpenSea, the world's largest NFT marketplace, began with jury deliberations. He is accused of making more than $50,000 in illegal profits by buying NFTs before featuring them on OpenSea's website, and then selling them when their value rose. Prosecutors have charged him with one count of wire fraud and one count of money laundering, alleging that he traded on inside information to profit. This case is the first insider trading case in digital assets, and its outcome could have broad implications for assets that don't fit into existing regulations. Legal experts said the case could affect investment advisers, brokers, and others trading on material nonpublic information. Chastain's attorney argued that the trades did not break OpenSea's rules and that the case was about whether Chastain intended to defraud OpenSea.Jury starts deliberating in ex-OpenSea manager's NFT insider trading case | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Oregon's spring ocean salmon season was supposed to open in mid-March, but the National Marine Fisheries Service closed both the recreational and commercial seasons through mid-May in much of the state. Marine agencies expect extremely low returns of California Chinook salmon in the Klamath and Sacramento rivers, meaning the fall-run season could be further restricted. The Pacific Marine Fisheries Council is considering three alternatives for the season, all of which would cancel commercial and recreational Chinook fishing south of Cape Falcon through Sept. 1. Though the closure is meant to protect future salmon populations, it could mean the loss of a year's income for fishers along the coast. Barry McCovey, fisheries department director for the Yurok Tribe, and Brett Montague, a commercial salmon troller based in Newport join us to talk about the impacts of the closure.

Last week a federal judge ruled that the National Marine Fisheries Service can no longer continue to issue permits for the incidental take of humpback whales when they get tangled in sablefish pot gear off the West coast. The lawsuit was filed by the nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity. Kristen Monsell, the oceans legal director at the center, joins us to discuss what the ruling means.

The sunflower sea star is one of the world's largest sea stars, growing more than three feet across with two dozen limbs and a territory that once stretched from Baja California, Mexico to the Alaskan Aleutian Islands. But more than 90 percent of these marine invertebrates have been wiped out, and can now mainly be found in the cooler coastal waters of Washington State and British Columbia. Since 2013, sea stars along the West Coast have been decimated by a mysterious wasting disease that may be linked to climate change, and results in loss of limbs, melting tissues and death, often in just a few days. On Thursday, the National Marine Fisheries Service proposed listing the sunflower sea star as threatened under the Endangered Species Act to aid in its recovery. While there is no cure for sea star wasting syndrome, staff at the Oregon Coast Aquarium in Newport spent two years developing a treatment that has helped save stressed, injured and sick sea stars, including those afflicted with the disease. Evonne Mochon Collura, a sea jelly specialist and assistant curator of fish and invertebrates at the Oregon Coast Aquarium, joins us to share details of the treatment program.

We apologize — the previously uploaded Chapter 11 has an audio glitch. It's now been corrected. To make sure everyone can access the corrected audio, we are uploading it again, here.  Spurred by drought, the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service accelerates a plan to restore winter-run Chinook salmon to the McCloud River. Chief Caleen Sisk weighs whether to collaborate with federal officials. Salmon spotted on Dry Creek for the first time in 30 years are celebrated as an answer to the Winnemem Wintu's Run4Salmon prayer.

Spurred by drought, the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service accelerates a plan to restore winter-run Chinook salmon to the McCloud River. Chief Caleen Sisk weighs whether to collaborate with federal officials. Salmon spotted on Dry Creek for the first time in 30 years are celebrated as an answer to the Winnemem Wintu's Run4Salmon prayer.

Finding sand for beach renourishment is a never-ending quest for beach towns. Could Frying Pan Shoals be the answer? BOEM is paying for a study of the shoals as the National Marine Fisheries Service worries dredging could harm this essential fish habitat.

Fifth Circuit Tosses Back Rule Trying to Track Charter Boats Without a Warrant In a landmark win for charter boat fishermen across the Gulf of Mexico, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has set aside a controversial Final Rule issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service, which required 24-hour GPS tracking of recreational charter boat fishing vessels and reporting of confidential economic data. As Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod wrote, “in promulgating this regulation, the Government committed multiple independent Administrative Procedure Act violations, and very likely violated the Fourth Amendment.” The ruling is major for many reasons, including that the government tried to claim that charter boat fishing is a “closely-regulated industry” to which the Fourth Amendment does not apply. Vec discusses NCLA's recent win in Mexican Gulf Fishing Company v. U.S. Department of Commerce.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Maine Lobstermen's Association v. National Marine Fisheries Service

When a government tells its people that it is opening up its coasts to oil and gas leasing like the Trump Administration did from 2016-2020, there are quite a few things that happen behind the scenes that we don't realize until it is too late and it is difficult to fix the changes (or they get ignored). For example, The Trump administration opened up a swath of habitat along the shelf break on the Northern Gulf of Mexico for oil and gas development. The same swath is the habitat of a critically endangered whale called the Gulf of Mexico whale (Rice's whale). You would think that the Biden administration would take the area away from the oil and gas industry; however, the National Marine Fisheries Service did not do anything to change the rule. This example proves that the laws and regulations are very difficult to change for the better   Link to article: https://bit.ly/3iuomV3   Fill out our listener survey: https://www.speakupforblue.com/survey   Join the audio program - Build Your Marine Science and Conservation Career: https://www.speakupforblue.com/career   Facebook Group: https://bit.ly/3NmYvsI Connect with Speak Up For Blue: Website: https://bit.ly/3fOF3Wf Instagram: https://bit.ly/3rIaJSG Twitter: https://bit.ly/3rHZxpc   

Imagine being audited by the IRS and having to pay the salary of your IRS auditors! Well, some New England commercial fishermen are now required to pay for the daily wages of federal inspectors from the National Marine Fisheries Service while those inspectors are on board as mandated “federal observers”. Attorney Dan Winslow of the New England Legal Foundation joined Dan to discuss the implications of this rule.

December 29, 2022 — The license for the Potter Valley Project is undergoing a variety of considerations. As PG&E prepares its plan for decommissioning the inter-basin hydropower project that diverts water from the Eel River into the Russian River, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, announced that it is considering reopening the license. That means that, although it granted PG&E an annual license in April, it's thinking about adding requirements for a number of wildlife protection and habitat monitoring measures that were proposed in March by the National Marine Fisheries Service, another federal regulatory agency. PG&E argues that the decommissioning process will provide plenty of opportunity to review protective measures, and that there's no evidence of harm to embattled salmon. But FERC appears to have taken notice of legal threats by environmental groups claiming the project violates the Endangered Species Act. FERC has accepted comments for and against the proposed reopening of the license, and PG&E has pledged to submit its decommissioning documents by January of 2025. By that time, the project may technically be under new ownership. This month, PG&E asked FERC to allow it to transfer a list of hydropower projects to a new Delaware-based LLC called Pacific Generation, writing that the transfers “are part of a broader corporate reorganization being undertaken to facilitate raising equity for PG&E's utility needs.” PG&E spokesman Paul Moreno noted in an email that, “Nothing will change for Potter Valley or the decommission process. Pacific Generation LLC will be a majority-owned subsidiary of PG&E, which will own other PG&E hydropower facilities as well as natural gas power plants and some solar arrays and battery storage. It was not created just for (the) Potter Valley Project.” PG&E assured FERC that it plans to “remain the majority and controlling owner of Pacific Generation;” and that its employees “will continue to operate and maintain the assets…just as they do today.” The restructuring would have to be approved by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) , which in 2023 will also set the rates for the next four years. In September, PG&E requested that CPUC expedite the process, completing testimony, hearings, and filing of briefs by May first. Mark Toney, the Executive Director of The Utility Reform Network, or TURN, a ratepayer advocacy group, said TURN is “opposing the deal strenuously.” One of TURN's many worries is that if PG&E goes bankrupt again, its assets could be out of reach of settlements. TURN filed an objection to PG&E's proposal and the request for expediting the proceeding, declaring that, “this application benefits shareholders, and an expedited schedule would only serve to benefit shareholders…not avoid ratepayer harm.” TURN also asked if it was reasonable for PG&E to indemnify Pacific Generation for wildfire damages caused by PG&E's equipment, writing that “The Commission should examine whether this would result in an unreasonable transfer of risks.” Environmentalists are concerned, too. Redgie Collins is legal counsel for California Trout, one of the groups that filed a notice of intent to sue PG&E for harming endangered species. Collins is also a steering committee member of the Hydropower Reform Coalition, a statewide consortium of environmental groups dedicated to “restoring environmental and recreational values at hydropower projects presently being relicensed,” according to its website. The licenses for three of the 21 hydropower plants PG&E wants to transfer to Pacific Generation are being surrendered, while seven are up for renewal. Collins suspects that PG&E is “trying to sneak bad assets into its portfolio,” in part by overstating how viable they are. In its transfer application to FERC, PG&E wrote that Potter Valley is a 9.4-megawatt project, though it hasn't generated any power since a transformer broke down over the summer. Earlier this year, Moreno said the utility expected to recoup the unspecified costs of replacing the failed equipment within five years. But by mid-December, PG&E filed a brief update with FERC, stating that, “PG&E is currently in the process of considering long-term planning associated with Power Generation's portfolio. As a result, numerous projects are being reassessed to ensure resources are utilized prudently, including the Potter Valley transformer replacement project.” Collins also speculates that if the transfer is approved, the company could raise debt on some of its projects. The utility insists that the transfer should enable Pacific Generation to issue debt at lower rates than PG&E, but TURN worries that “the total amount of debt could very well increase as a result of this transaction.” One thing is certain: ratepayers will cover the costs of decommissioning. Mark Pocta, a program manager at the Public Advocate's Office at the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), doesn't believe the transfer would make much of a difference from a regulatory perspective. PG&E would still be regulated on a cost of service basis, and he does not believe that the rates would be set any differently if the assets are held by a subsidiary. The Public Advocate's Office is an independent group within the CPUC that is charged with representing the interests of ratepayers. Its members participate in proceedings, but they do not set rates or make decisions. Pocta noted that the cost of decommissioning hydropower plants is “typically funded through rates;” but that no money has been set aside for the purpose, because when hydro projects were built, there was an assumption that they had economic value. Before the Potter Valley license expired in April of 2020, PG&E tried hard to sell it. And a regional coalition tried unsuccessfully to drum up enough money to pay for the studies that were required to take over the license. Even without the costs that could accrue if FERC orders additional environmental monitoring and mitigation measures, PG&E estimates that decommissioning the project could cost $93 million in 2020 dollars. CalTrout estimated that it could cost between $133-$155 million. Pocta said a stipulation to set aside $48 million per year for the next four years to decommission Potter Valley and Battle Creek, a hydropower project in Shasta county, will come before the CPUC at its general rate case hearings in 2023. Decommissioning hydropower projects isn't something that happens frequently, so there are no set procedures in place. But Pocta remembers when plans to decommission another set of dams first got underway: Klamath, he remembers thinking, will take longer than ten years.

In Episode 322 of District of Conservation, Gabriella digs deeper into the attacks on the Maine lobster industry and how the Biden administration is regulating it. Tune in! SHOW NOTES Rep. Jared Golden Tweet on State Dinner with Lobsters February 2021 Maine Delegation Letter Against BiOp Conservation Framework on Lobsters Maine DNR Opposition to 98% Lobster Reduction Rate May 2021 BiOp Conservation Framework on Lobster September 2021 NMFS Rule on Lobster with 98% Reduction Goal Maine Lobstermen's Association v. National Marine Fisheries Service, et al MLA files opening brief with U.S. Court of Appeals Bloomberg: Endangered Whales at Risk From Offshore Wind, US Scientist Warns --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/district-of-conservation/support