Thursday, March 5, 2026

NOAA APPOINTS "FISHERMAN IN RESIDENCE"

 

NOAA Fisheries reportedly appointed Maine lobsterman Dustin Delano as “Fisherman in Residence.”  What that means isn’t completely clear, as the agency isn’t providing much information about the position.  I didn’t learn about it from an agency press release, but rather heard about it while down in Washington earlier this week, speaking to Senate staff on a totally different, if still fisheries-related, manner—even though, according to Delano’s Facebook page, he has held the position since November 1, 2025.

Still, the appointment is apparently real, and both NOAA and the Department of Commerce have received a letter from the ranking member of the House Committee on Natural Resources, Jared Huffman, and the ranking member of its Subcommittee on Oversight and Regulation, Maxine Dexter, questioning whether it was the right thing to do.

It’s a reasonable question to ask.

The fisherman who was selected for the position is Dustin Delano, a lobsterman from Maine (it’s interesting to see that NOAA Fisheries chose  a lobsterman for the position, as American lobster is managed by the states through the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, and not by NOAA Fisheries).

Delano also bears the titles of chairman and chief strategist for a group called the New England Fishermen’s Stewardship Association, an organization that is a frequent critic of United States fisheries management and marine policies.  In an essay that appears on the Association’s website, dated February 10, 2026—more than three months after Delano’s appointment—Delano wrote,

“…I speak for people who work these waters every day and for communities that depend on them.

“We see ocean conditions as they exist, not months later in reports.  Yet policy too often prioritizes theory over experience and paperwork over outcomes.  Commercial fishermen are not line items.  We live with the consequences of every decision made in Washington.  On the water, those decisions can make fishing less safe, manage fish poorly and drive American commercial fishermen out of business…

“We cannot credibly claim to support domestic seafood or food security while allowing the industrial takeover of our ocean.  Offshore wind destroys habitat, displaces fishing from historic grounds and embeds permanent industrial hazards into working waters.  It would be like setting our farm fields on fire and calling it progress…

“Our New England groundfish fishery is in turmoil.  Fishermen face quota swings that shift from feast to famine, often driven by incomplete surveys and outdated data.  A stock can be abundant one year and effectively unavailable the next, not because the fish disappeared, but because the survey failed to capture reality.

“When that happens, fishermen cannot simply pivot.  If the fishery they depend on is suddenly closed and they do not hold permits for others, boats tie up, crews are sent home and coastal businesses suffer despite healthy fish in the water…

“…Through President Trump’s leadership, the federal government has recognized that domestic seafood production is a matter of national interest, economic resilience and food security.

“Commercial fishermen stand ready to meet that call.  With a clear vision from the White House and policies grounded in real-world experience, we can protect and strengthen fisheries that are already sustainable, restore working waterfronts, and once again make American seafood a backbone of our national food supply.  We are a nation of fishermen ready to roll up our sleeves, do the work and get the job done with the president’s help, feeding America first and leading the world by example.”

So it’s clear that Delano, and presumably his Association, supports the White House’s fisheries policies, and it wouldn’t be particularly surprising if that support won him his new position of “fisherman in residence.”

But what isn’t particularly clear is exactly what a fisherman in residence’s duties might be, and why a lobsterman from New England is more suitable for the role than a trawler captain from New York, a bandit gear fisherman from the Gulf of Mexico, or a gillnetter from Alaska.

And then there is the question of litigation.  In the past, Delano’s Association has brought legal action against the Department of Commerce, NOAA Fisheries’ parent agency, suing to invalidate the authority of the regional fishery management councils, arguing that, because of the nature of their duties, the United States Constitution requires that all persons nominated to be council members must be confirmed by the Senate.  There was just enough truth in the Association’s argument to have the Court invalidate some very minor provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, while leaving the council system intact.

Should the Association decide to take legal action against the agency again, how could Delano reconcile his roles as chairman and chief strategist of the Association with his role as fisherman in residence at NOAA Fisheries, particularly if the latter role is a paid position?

Such concerns were raised in the March 2 letter from representatives Huffman and Dexter, which read, in part,

“We have learned that in lieu of [the Marine Fisheries Advisory Committee], NOAA appointed a single “Fisherman in Residence.”  We are concerned that this singular position cannot speak for the diverse fishing communities and fishing sectors across our country and we are concerned with NOAA’s lack of transparency regarding the appointment of this position and the role.  For the sake of the 2.1 million jobs that rely upon healthy, sustainably managed fisheries, we seek full transparency regarding the role of ‘Fisherman in Residence.’

“It is our constitutional obligation to oversee NOAA, the primary scientific agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce, including whether its federal employees are complying with federal ethics laws governing conflicts of interests, impartiality, and outside activities, and whether ethics screening controls have been adequately implemented and enforced.

“It is our understanding that Mr. Dustin Delano has been appointed as ‘Fisherman in Residence’ at NOAA.  As such, we assume he is a NOAA employee, has been drawing a federal paycheck, and is advising on fisheries policy within NOAA.  However, it is clear from his Facebook posts and other public activities that he continues to serve as an industry association advocate on matters before NOAA, raising questions about his impartiality and ability to serve in the best interests of the American people and fishing interests across the country…

“Mr. Delano presents these affiliations in his advocacy and litigation-facing work in areas where NOAA is a decision-maker and, at times, a defendant.  His resume lists ‘opposition to offshore wind projects in the Gulf of Maine’ as an accomplishment under his ongoing work with NEFSA.  It also reflects his involvement with the Maine Lobstermen’s Association in association with litigation against the U.S. Department of Commerce, including Maine Lobstermen’s Association v. Raimondo, which challenged NOAA’s actions related to endangered species protection, including for the North Atlantic right whale.  In other words, Mr. Delano’s non-government roles and professional work involve representing fishermen in litigation and advocacy that directly implicate NOAA and regulated industries and stakeholders before it…

“These facts raise a straightforward question: did Mr. Delano participate personally and substantially in official matters in violation of federal law, and did [the Department of Commerce] and NOAA implement effective safeguards at the outset of his federal service to prevent disqualifying participation?..”

To help determine the answers to those questions, Rep. Huffman and Rep. Dexter instructed the Department of Commerce and NOAA to provide copies of all financial and other disclosure forms completed by Delano and relevant to the Fisherman in Residence position; any documents or other communications relating to Delano, and dating from his time as Fisherman in Residence, involving any of the agencies’ ethics personnel; any documents or other communications relating to Delano’s ethics and/or conflict of interests training; all documents and other communications relating to Delano’s employment by NOAA, including date of hire, pay grade, job description, reporting and supervisory relationships, and other similar data; any documents or communications maintained or provided by any of the agencies’ ethics personnel, concerning or related to Delano’s participation before the agencies, including participation in regulatory matters, litigation-related matters, policy development, and enforcement; and all calendars, schedules, meeting agendas, or similar matters maintained by Delano in his official capacity as an agency employee.

The agencies were given two weeks to provide the requested materials, which would clearly be relevant to the question of whether Delano’s appointment as Fisherman in Residence created any ethical issues.

Delano has apparently said that, as Fisherman in Residence, he is not paid by NOAA, while a spokesman for the agency reportedly said that there were no ethical violations due to the type of agreement in place between Delano and NOAA.  In addition, Representative Jared Golden (D-ME), heralded Delano’s new position, saying

“I applaud NOAA for identifying the need for a real harvester, not another bureaucrat, to have a seat at the table and to provide input and clarity on fisheries issues…

“These accusations [in the Huffman/Dexter letter], however subtle, reflect the misguided belief that there is nothing government bureaucrats could possibly learn from those working Mainers who actually have lived and fished our coasts for generations.  They could not be more wrong.”

Yet the fact that NOAA only publicly identified Delano’s role this week, the same week that the agency began rewriting an 18-year-old rule originally intended to protect endangered right whales from collisions with vessels, stoked some people’s concerns.

The easiest way for the agencies to allay such concerns would be to promptly respond to the Huffman/Dexter letter, provide the requested materials, and allow them to speak for themselves.

Always assuming, of course, that if the documents were all produced, Reps. Huffman and Dexter wouldn’t find that their worries were justified.

 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment