Dear Editor,
Here in American Samoa, the recent fisheries-related Executive Orders issued by President Trump have certainly stirred up a lot of discussion and generated considerable buzz. For too long, well-intentioned but, often, misguided conservation efforts have threatened the livelihoods of American Samoans and have not always aligned with the best available science regarding highly migratory fish stocks. These new directives offer a more balanced approach, promising both economic revitalization and sustainable management.
American Samoa’s economy is inextricably linked to tuna fishing and canning – over 80% of our private sector jobs and over 99% of our exports depend on this vital industry. The establishment and expansion of large Marine National Monuments, while intended for conservation, have been met with strong opposition from people in our communities such as myself who fear the loss of fishing grounds and the subsequent detrimental impact on our canneries and employment. Our Governor, delegate to Congress, the vast majority of local legislators and community members have all told the federal government, “NO! We do not want the designation of a National Marine Sanctuary on top of the existing Marine National Monuments in our region. However, the federal government up to this point has forged ahead in spite of this wide opposition, which has made our people feel left out of conversations that dictate our own economic future.
The recent Executive Orders appear to address these concerns by recognizing that appropriately managed commercial fishing would not put the objects of scientific and historic interest within certain monument areas at risk. This acknowledges the scientific reality that highly migratory species like tuna do not permanently reside within these vast, deep-sea monument boundaries. As highlighted in public testimony, the areas being opened to fishing are generally thousands of feet deep and fished with methods that don’t impact the sea floor or nearshore resources.
Furthermore, scientific research, such as the study by Hampton et al. (2023), indicates that large-scale oceanic Marine Protected Areas (MPA) like these sanctuaries often have limited conservation efficacy for wide-ranging tropical tunas like skipjack and bigeye due to their wide larval dispersal and the high mobility of adult fish. This research, utilizing sophisticated spatial modeling, found that the stock-wide conservation benefits of even large hypothetical MPAs were often modest. As Ray Hilborn, a Professor at the University of Washington’s School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, notes, even if abundance is higher inside a reserve, it doesn’t automatically mean it benefits the fishery or increases total abundance. These findings suggest that restricting fishing in vast offshore areas may not be the most effective tool for tuna conservation.
Instead, the focus should be on robust international management through bodies like the Western & Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC), which establishes quotas and fishing limits designed to ensure the sustainability of tuna stocks. US fishing vessels that deliver tuna to our StarKist cannery that are operating in these areas are already subject to strict monitoring, often using GPS satellite trackers and on-board observers. This level of oversight shows an uneven playing field compared to the Chinese fishing fleet in the Pacific that is highly subsidized by its government and is widely suspected of engaging in unregulated and illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing in our region — a far greater threat to fish stocks. As Vince Haleck, a long-line fishing vessel owner, stated, an expanded marine sanctuary is “meaningless without proper policing of American Samoa’s own waters to prevent unregulated fishing by China-flagged vessels.”
The Executive Orders also align with the need to reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens on American fishermen. This is crucial for the competitiveness of the US fleet and for ensuring a consistent supply of fish to the canneries in American Samoa, which are the bedrock of our economy. The potential loss of access to fishing grounds due to expanded “no-take” zones directly threatens this supply chain and the thousands of jobs it supports here. As the petition letter signed by over 1,200 StarKist employees urged, it is vital to “reconsider and reverse this expansion in order to safeguard the American Samoan fishing industry, protect the local economy, and promote sustainable fishing practices.”
The emphasis on reviewing existing marine national monuments with an eye towards opening them to commercial fishing where consistent with the preservation of historic and scientific objects demonstrates a pragmatic approach. It acknowledges the economic realities faced by communities like ours here in American Samoa while maintaining a commitment to genuine conservation goals. This is not about abandoning environmental stewardship; it’s about adopting strategies that are scientifically sound, economically viable, and respectful of the needs and traditional rights of Pacific Islanders.
Trump’s recent fisheries-related Executive Orders represent a positive step towards a more balanced and effective approach to fisheries management in the Pacific. By recognizing the migratory nature of tuna, the limited conservation benefits of vast static MPAs for these species, and the critical economic dependence of American Samoa on its tuna industry, these directives offer a pathway to both economic prosperity for the territory and sustainable utilization of valuable marine resources, supported by scientific understanding and the voices of the affected communities.
Lastly, consider this, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act is the legislation providing for the management of marine fisheries in U.S. waters. This law’s first two National Standards state that conservation and management measures shall prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum yield from each fishery for the United States fishing industry and that conservation and management measures shall be based upon the best scientific information available.
According to all available scientific data, the tuna stocks targeted by the fishermen who deliver to our StarKist cannery are not overfished nor are they experiencing overfishing. Yet the federal government, under the last administration, attempted to close over 750,000 square miles of ocean to our US fishermen anyway, even when we so loudly said it was not something we wanted. Over 99% of all the Marine National Monuments are in the Pacific Islands Region. Why? They won’t do this to Maine’s lobster fishing grounds, or Alaska’s pollock fishing grounds. So why us? Luckily these two executive orders save us from having to find out. And we should all be very thankful, regardless of how we feel about the man who signed them.
Nate Ilaoa
Concerned Local Resident
