NOAA Scoping Session- Why do we have to kill one to protect the other?
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 24th, 2026, 5:00 PM TO 7:00 PM: Online scoping session with NOAA Fisheries. Select the link above to sign up for this session. This session is not a notice of proposed rulemaking, but a request for public input on the range of issues and measures that may be considered in the future. DMR acknowledges the difficult task of looking for public input when we do not have a risk reduction. The Maine Lobstering Union has found that these points should be entered on the record:
This is not "Whales versus Fishermen"
We support: Whale recovery, safer oceans, responsible fishing, transparent science, and real monitoring.
We reject: Symbolic rules that look decisive but cannot prove risk reduction or source attribution.
We ask for: Conservation decisions that are honest, local, testable, and effective.
Proof, not posture: Make better science concrete. If the goal is to save whales, we should be able to show which actions reduce risk, where, and by how much.
Map risk where whales and gear actually overlap | Separate gear types and regions in attribution | Fund monitoring: acoustic, visual, gear, and effort data | Measure whether rules reduce real risk | Publish assumptions and uncertainty |
Maine lobstermen are not anti-whale. They are pro-conservation, pro-working waterfront, and pro-better science.
Mainers understand and support our fishing heritage, families, working harbors, local food, and our pride in responsible stewardship.
⠀
Scientists shall provide transparent assumptions, gear attribution, spatial risk, uncertainty, and testable predictions.
Elected officials promote policy that protects whales while preserving coastal jobs and community resilience.
Support work with conservationists that puts collaboration over blame; monitoring and innovation that actually reduce risk.
Comments