For generations, commercial fishing has been a way of life. It is how families have supported themselves, how coastal communities have been built, and how fresh sustainably harvested wild seafood with a low carbon footprint has made its way to dinner tables.
Commercial fishing has long proven its ability to adapt, because in fishing if you don’t adjust, you don’t survive.
The ocean changes, fish and crab move, weather shifts and regulations tighten. Fishermen always work to find a way forward because that is what they do and it is what is needed to keep domestic seafood available and accessible to the public.
Yet today, adapting to ocean conditions is no longer the biggest challenge. Navigating an endless cycle of new regulations, legal threats from some NGOs (non-governmental organizations), spatial closures and bureaucratic hurdles have become the real battle.
Every time a new issue arises, another restriction is added. Fishermen are always asked to sacrifice more, making it easy to see why commercial fishermen describe their current reality as “death by a thousand cuts.”
PCFFA believes that fishermen have done their part and continue to do so. Now is the time to push back and ask whether all these regulations are actually working.
We believe that policies must be rooted in science, not based on political pressure or optics. We believe the time has come to stop restricting domestic food production and reducing domestic food security in the name of environmental protections that offer little measurable benefit.
As regulations have piled up over the years, the consequences are clear. When domestic seafood production is restricted, consumers do not stop eating seafood; they are forced to turn to imports, often from countries with far weaker environmental and labor protections.
This is not just harming the fishing industry; it is devastating coastal communities and local economies. Fishing families, processors, distributors and small businesses that rely on working waterfronts are being pushed out, while foreign seafood produced under looser sustainability standards fills the gap.
This should be considered contradictory to a conservation agenda.
As global trade tensions rise, it is more critical than ever to safeguard domestic seafood production. Current reliance on imports for more than 80% of the seafood consumed in the U.S. leaves our food supply vulnerable to international disruptions, tariffs and geopolitical conflicts.
Strengthening local fisheries and reducing regulatory barriers will not only support fishing communities but also enhance America’s food security in an increasingly uncertain global market.
With momentum growing at both the federal and state levels to reduce unnecessary regulations, now is the time to re-evaluate, refocus on science and re-prioritize local food production.
A Chain Reaction of Regulations and Unintended Consequences
The current regulatory system, though perhaps well-intentioned, has become a reactionary, piecemeal approach that is increasingly complex and contradictory and nearly impossible to navigate.
Each new rule often creates unintended consequences, leading to more restrictions rather than real solutions.
This cycle has been evident in the California Dungeness crab and salmon fisheries and the re-evaluation of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and other spatial closures, to mention a few. In each case, policies intended to protect resources have instead added layers of complexity, even as the commercial fleet continues to shrink.
With growing recognition of the need to reduce regulatory burdens, there is an opportunity to push for meaningful reform.
PCFFA, the fleet and the public must engage now to ensure outdated policies are re-evaluated, science-based solutions take priority and conservation efforts are balanced with sustainable seafood production.
Dungeness Crab: From One Crisis to Another
Nearly a decade ago, an algal bloom shut down the Dungeness crab season for months and also forced migrating whales much closer to shore in search of food. When the fishery reopened in the spring, just as whales were migrating north, entanglement numbers spiked, triggering a lawsuit from the Center for Biological Diversity.
To prevent a total shutdown, a settlement agreement was reached that imposed interim measures that were not based on science but instead represented a compromise to pause legal action while the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) worked to secure an Incidental Take Permit (ITP) for the fishery, the first permit of its kind.
Since then, the commercial fishing fleet has met every requirement imposed on it, participating in the process through the Whale Working Group and the Dungeness Crab Task Force, fishing with less gear, reducing gear, managing lost gear recovery programs, meeting reporting requirements, testing monitoring systems and struggling as fishing seasons that once lasted for months are being reduced to mere weeks.
The long-term impact and potential unintended consequences of these measures remain unknown. What is clear, however, is that the second version of the Risk Assessment and Mitigation Program (RAMP) regulations that is now under review will shape the future of the fishery.
We also know that a federal Take Reduction Team (TRT) is scheduled to convene in June, with a mandate to develop a Take Reduction Plan for five West Coast fisheries, including California Dungeness crab by year’s end.
The California Dungeness crab fishery was recently downgraded from a Category I to a Category II fishery under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, reflecting a lower overall risk to protected species based on Potential Biological Removal (PBR) and is consistent with the increase in humpback whale populations.
However, these realities, and best available science that should be available following the TRT, must be reflected in final regulations.
Commercial fishing interests also are frustrated that no comprehensive scientific evaluation has been conducted to assess the full scope of marine mammal interactions across all ocean users.
Instead, commercial fishing remains the primary focus, not because it poses the greatest threat, but because it is the easiest target. That is not responsible management and it is unacceptable when other significant risks, such as ship strikes and offshore development, continue to go largely unaddressed.
If the goal is truly to protect whales, all sources of risk must be considered, not just gear used by California’s small-scale, family-owned fishing operations.
PCFFA has taken a strong stance that the California RAMP update must align with the upcoming federal Take Reduction Team process. Our public comments, supported by the Dungeness Crab Task Force, emphasize that the marine management triggers currently embedded in RAMP regulations must be reassessed to reflect the best available science rather than outdated legal settlements.
As the TRT works to develop a long-term plan for managing whale entanglement risks across five West Coast fisheries, scientific data and analysis will be central to the process.
PCFFA remains committed to ensuring that final regulations are science-based and take a comprehensive, data-driven approach, rather than continuing to rely on outdated temporary measures that fail to account for current population assessments or ocean conditions.
Salmon: A Crisis That Needs a Different Approach
After two years of closure, the future of California’s salmon fishery remains uncertain in 2025. Local salmon has disappeared from menus, replaced by farmed fish flown in from across the world. This crisis is not due to overfishing, but rather decades of water mismanagement.
The history of these issues is complex, with plenty of blame to go around. Yet at its core, the issue is simple: this isn’t a fish problem, it’s a people problem.
Salmon are remarkably resilient. They’ll always do their part to survive, returning year after year in an attempt to complete their migration. The real issue is that human actions continue to kill them at every stage of their journey. There is simply not enough water to meet all competing demands and years of political and legal battles have done nothing to help salmon populations.
In fact, one could argue that these conflicts have only made things worse.
Spring- and winter-run Chinook salmon are listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and receive some protections, but fall-run Chinook salmon, the last potentially commercially viable salmon stock, does not.
Worse, ESA-driven water policies are pushing fall run salmon to dangerously low levels, increasing their risk of an ESA listing.
Interestingly, national fish hatcheries were among the earliest federal conservation efforts in the United States. The system was established by Congress in 1872 to raise food fish for commercial fisheries and mitigate the impacts of increasing water demands. Somewhere along the way, we lost sight of this mission.
Now is the time to refocus and make it a reality once again.
The only way to rebuild a healthy, harvestable salmon population is to increase hatchery production and expand diverse release strategies. A comprehensive hatchery review and renewed investment in hatchery expansion are critical.
PCFFA is committed to this effort and needs our government agencies to be partners, not roadblocks. Collaboration, not bureaucracy or litigation, will determine whether salmon remain a vital part of California’s ecosystem and economy or fade into history.
Regulating What’s Already Protected: The Illusion of Marine Closures
California’s Marine Protected Area (MPA) network has been under review, with the 30×30 process driving renewed efforts to expand MPAs. California already has some of the most heavily regulated waters in the world, and leading fisheries scientists, including Dr. Ray Hilborn, have raised concerns that MPAs often do not enhance biodiversity or fisheries sustainability, particularly when applied as broad, no-take zones.
Despite this, some conservation groups continue to push for additional closures, often targeting commercial fishing as the most convenient regulatory lever.
As we noted in our earlier article, The Truth About Fishing and Conservation (August 2024 FN), commercial fisheries have become a convenient target in these efforts, framed as an obstacle to conservation when, in reality, fishermen are among the most invested in protecting ocean health.
The question we should be asking is whether these closures are actually achieving their stated conservation goals or if they are simply being justified under broad, feel-good conservation slogans without the scientific basis to support their effectiveness.
PCFFA is committed to ensuring that science remains central to the conversation and that decisions affecting access to productive fishing grounds are based on data, not assumptions or fear. Fishermen’s firsthand knowledge of the ocean must play a key role in shaping policies that balance sustainability with food production.
Reining in Overregulation: A Turning Point for Fisheries
For too long, fisheries regulations have been layered on without evaluating whether they remain necessary, effective or based on the best available science. Outdated policies remain in place while new restrictions continue to be added, undermining a vital food-producing industry that should be protected and prioritized.
With the political climate shifting, there is growing recognition that overregulation places unnecessary burdens on industries, including commercial fishing.
California’s commercial fishing fleet has shrunk by 73% since the 1970s, leaving fewer than 3,000 active vessels statewide. Yet, regulations continue to expand, further restricting one of the last remaining sources of wild, sustainable, locally harvested food.
Instead of strengthening domestic seafood production, current policies weaken California’s ability to produce local seafood, pushing the U.S. toward even greater dependence on imports, which now account for more than 80% of all seafood consumed nationwide, according to NOAA. As global trade dynamics shift, ensuring a stable domestic seafood supply is more urgent than ever, and fishing families are prepared to meet that demand.
Fishermen have repeatedly proven their ability to adapt. Now, regulators and regulations must do the same. The future of sustainable fisheries depends on policies that protect marine resources while also recognizing the importance of domestic food production.
PCFFA supports the re-evaluation of existing policies and the removal of those that no longer serve a clear purpose. We will continue to push for a balanced approach that keeps fisheries open, protects marine life, and ensures that fishing families can continue providing wild, sustainable seafood to communities.
Lisa Damrosch is the Executive Director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations (PCFFA), and comes from a fourth-generation commercial fishing family working from Half Moon Bay, Calif. She can be reached at the Southwest Regional PCFFA office at P.O. Box 29370, San Francisco, Calif. 94129-0370, or at lisa@pcffa.org. The phone number for the PCFFA San Francisco office is (650) 209-0801.