Front Page  »  

SLO County judge rules against local fishermen

May 21, 2024

By KAREN VELIE

A San Luis Obispo County judge last week rejected a request from Morro Bay and Port San Luis fishermen for a preliminary injunction to stop wind energy companies from surveying the ocean floor.

Signed into law in Oct. 2023, Senate Bill 286 requires the statewide strategy for wind energy to include best practices for addressing impacts to commercial and recreational fisheries. Local fishermen argue wind companies have failed to follow best practices because they have not put protocols in place to protect the fishing industry.

San Luis Obispo Superior Court Judge Craig van Rooyen found the requirements in Senate Bill 286 vague. Specifically, when the protocols and protections need to be in place: before or after work is completed.

On Feb. 29, two groups of commercial fishermen filed a legal challenge against the state’s wind energy plans, arguing the process violates their constitutional right to fish. The lawsuit asks the court to revoke survey permits and not to allow any new permits until proper mitigation and protections are in place.

Then on April 19, the fishermen filed an ex parte application seeking to stop Atlas Wind, also known as  Equinor, from conducting any site surveys in state waters.

Also on April 19, Atlas Wind’s survey vessel, Island Pride, began survey work on the ocean floor. Since then, commercial fisherman report 67% to 70% declines in catch numbers.

However, the judge said he would not consider evidence submitted after the initial April 19 filing for an injunction, so he did not consider the reduction in catch rates.

The federal government auctioned off three offshore wind energy sites located between 20 and 30 miles off the coast near Morro Bay in 2022. Then in Dec. 2023, the state issued a permit allowing survey work to begin.

Signed into law in Oct. 2023, Senate Bill 286 requires the statewide strategy to include best practices for addressing impacts to commercial and recreational fisheries regarding wind energy. Local fishermen argue the wind companies have failed to follow best practices.

Filed in February, the  lawsuit seeks to protect the fishermens’ constitutional right to fish through mitigation of impacts from the off-shore wind farms, including during the site surveys, construction, operation and decommissioning. The suit is ongoing.

 


Loading...
Subjects:     
Related:


24 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Van Rooyen tough on sleazebags–not looking good when self-appointed MB fishermen poster boy is “Pedo Gio.”


-5

Hmmm this lawsuit smells fishy. Like maybe it’s cheap insurance so the fisherman can sue the wind farm in the future.

The survey has not been going on long enough to create any meaningful data on fishing impact.

When I have a bad day fishing it has to be someone or something else to blame. Hahaha.

Keep believing the conspiracies and cult propaganda luddites.

Meanwhile America is in 17th place in the freedom contest and China continues to invest in education and infrastructure.


-12

Okay, when one has at least ten years of fish tickets from that area, which show a pretty consistent landing pattern and then the fish tickets that coincidence with the testing show a dramatic decrease that shows us that something is happening. Also we’ve had experience with these mapping studies before back in the 80’s. The fishing dropped off dramatically in those years.


6

The lawsuit is lame and is based on purposely misleading propaganda from the fossil fuel industry. There is no credible evidence that the surveying has contributed to the decline in the number of fish that are being harvested.


-43

Obviously you don’t commercial fish. And I can guarantee this lawsuit was NOT based on propaganda.


38

OK, then please share your evidence if you have any. we would all appreciate that


-8

This lawsuit is based on facts from commercial fishing fleet and our brothers on the East Coast’s experience. Just because many of us don’t have PhD’s behind our names, doesn’t mean we don’t know the ocean.


8

Actually it kind of does… Dismissing a PhD is a poor choice of support for your side of the argument lol


-8

Fisherman complaining about best practices is ironic and amusing as they are responsible for a huge portion of ocean pollution. Don’t trust me; look it up. Good on this judge for using what used to be common sense. Bully’s don’t get to complain about other bully’s lol


-59

Wow! I don’t know where you got your information, but I can tell you it makes no sense for commercial fishermen to trash the ocean that feeds people and provides out livelihood. Every fisherman I know looks for their lost gear and others lost gear. I can’t speak for other countries and their fishing practices.


31

2022 study published in Scientific Reports. “75–86% of the plastic in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch (GPGP) comes from fishing activities at sea. This includes fishing nets, which make up at least 46% of the GPGP’s debris. Other fishing debris, such as buoys, lines, and ropes, account for more than two-thirds of large plastic debris found in the oceans.”


I agree; it makes “no sense” to me either but there it is.


-23

Well you just took a world problem and made it seem like it was local. We can NOT control foreign fleets behavior. Locally, that ain’t happening, just saying.


9

Actually, If we create a marine sanctuary, we absolutely can control foreign fleets behavior within the sanctuary. This will help our local fishing industry as well as our tourist industry and preserve our priceless treasure we call our coastal environment.


-4

Tourism and preservation do not go together by any means.


-3

It is happening locally. Go to the beaches. Not the section everybody else is that gets patrolled for trash. Go to the tougher to access sections of rocky beach. You WILL find PLENTY of fishing related refuse. I promise.


-3

Van Rooyen is one of the worst judges we have seen here in decades. He has demonstrated a lust for power and total contempt for women victims over and over again, so this decision should come as no surprise. The fish are dying off, but since they didn’t die before the deadline, it’s irrelevant? It’s OK? Once the fish are gone, they are gone. Period. This isn’t that hard. A delay would help but NO, these are mere fishermen, not well-heeled lawyers, they are not important, they had their chance, too late, goodbye. This stinks!


40

Had the fishermen filed under the name “No More Nukes”, the injunction would have been issued in a heartbeat…


…Just like it did against Diablo Canyon


28

THis has nothing to do with Diablo, which should be shut. NOW. But the fisherman have a good case against a corrupt judge. Sad Day.


-18

Another brain dead judge making a brain dead ruling.


45

Let’s try to remember this person when it comes to election time. I have been upset with him more than once.


31

The powers that be who prefer the privatization and monopoly of our energy systems are a difficult force to counter. This is going to be a much bigger fight. It is key that we don’t allow them to destroy what we have in their effort to get what they want. They are not used to or OK with being told no.


28

When have our energy systems not been privatized?


2

Oh man. David vs. Goliath.


41
1 2