COMMERCE
Subscriber Services
Classified Ads
Subscribe
Advertise
NEWS
This Month
Editorial
Letters
F/V Safety
Past Issues
ABOUT US
Contact Us
Latest Issue
Subscribe
History
MORE CONTENT
CFN Archives
Links
Each month exclusively in the PRINT edition of CFN
Along the Coast
Ask the Lobster Doc
Bearin’s
Classifieds
Coming Events
Editorial
Enforcement Report
FISH SAFE
Fleet Additions
Letters
Lobster Market Report
New Boats
News Catch
Quahog Market Report
|
EDITORIAL
Commercial Fisheries News
Volume 34 Number 9
May 2007
Strahan case against lobsterman is serious
When self-appointed “citizen prosecutor” Max Strahan sued a law-abiding Plymouth, MA lobsterman for $1.1 million dollars back in February following a whale entanglement, it seemed like such an outrageous act that we and others hoped the federal district court would move quickly to throw the case out.
But two months later, the case is still alive, and the Massachusetts Lobstermen’s Association (MLA) has agreed to use its legal defense fund to cover the lobsterman’s legal expenses. Attorneys are now preparing a defense.
As crazy as he sometimes seems, it’s a mistake to underestimate Max.
The action against Dan Holmes, whose legally rigged and properly set gear was removed from a humpback whale without harm to the animal on Aug. 2, 2006, is only the latest in a long series of lawsuits Strahan has filed over the last two decades.
Sometimes he targets state and federal agencies, but he also has sued state workers personally, outside of their official capacities, when he felt they were getting in his way. Additionally, Strahan has sent threatening letters and e-mails to fishermen, attorneys, and government officials and subjected them to screaming phone calls and voice mail messages.
Despite all this, the court continues to entertain his cases because the Endangered Species Act gives him – as well as any other individual so inclined – standing to sue.
And he has been successful. The whale-safe gear measures mandated in Massachusetts state waters have evolved over the years in part due to pressure applied by Strahan through the court.
Today, Massachusetts has the most restrictive rules of any state, mandating the most whale-friendly gear on the entire East Coast. But Strahan now seems re-energized for his campaign to force an outright ban on all gear remotely capable of entangling a whale.
In a ruling issued last November on a separate lawsuit against the commonwealth of Massachusetts, federal District Judge Nathaniel Gorton declined to give Strahan what he really wanted – a ban on the licensing and deployment of most fixed gear.
However, Gorton did order the commonwealth to file a series of reports with the court on whale entanglements involving Massachusetts-licensed fishermen fishing in state and/or federal waters. The first report is due this fall. It was through this case that Strahan was able to force federal officials to give up Holmes’ name, and the outcome of the case apparently emboldened Strahan to file his suit against the lobsterman.
In a Nautical Talk Radio interview broadcast on WATD in Marshfield on Feb. 4, Strahan laid out his long-term goals. He contended, “There won’t be any demand for whale-safe gear until the law is routinely enforced and fishermen are fined and have their gear confiscated.”
He further said that it would be best “for family-based commercial fishermen to go extinct” and be replaced by “professional corporations” capable of hiring “more highly educated individuals” to conduct fishing operations.
This kind of hot-button pushing is another way Strahan tries to upset and bully fixed-gear fishermen. As one person familiar with Strahan’s escapades pointed out, “He knows there’s an aspect of terror in all of this, and that’s part of his strategy.”
We hope that all fixed-gear fishermen will turn that fear into action and support the MLA in its commitment to defend Holmes.
Back to story list
|
|
Tell us what you think.
