Community leaders worry expanded protected waters could threaten livelihoods without adequate transition plan
STT News Staff
A groundswell of concern is emerging among St. Thomas fishing families over a proposed expansion of marine sanctuary protections that could restrict access to traditional fishing grounds, with community members questioning whether federal planners have adequately considered the economic impact on an already fragile local industry.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced last month that it is considering an expansion of the Virgin Islands Marine Protected Area, potentially adding nearly 15,000 additional acres of restricted waters around St. Thomas, St. John, and Water Island. While the proposal aims to enhance coral reef protection and marine biodiversity, local fishermen say they were not meaningfully consulted before the federal agency moved forward with the plan.
Captain Marcus Williams, who has fished waters off St. Thomas for 38 years, said the proposal feels like it came without warning. “They talk about protecting the reefs, which I agree with, but they don’t talk about protecting the people who depend on those waters to feed their families,” Williams said during an interview at the St. Thomas Fish Market on Wednesday morning. “Nobody from NOAA came down here and sat with us. Nobody asked how this would affect our business.”
According to preliminary NOAA documentation, the expanded sanctuary would prohibit commercial fishing in several key areas currently used by local operators, including waters off Red Point and near the southern shelf of St. Thomas. Recreational fishing would be allowed in some zones with limitations. The agency has framed the expansion as necessary to improve fish population recovery and restore degraded coral ecosystems.
The fishing community’s concerns align with broader challenges facing St. Thomas’s commercial fishing sector. Industry data shows that the number of licensed commercial fishermen operating from the island has declined from approximately 200 in 2010 to roughly 120 today. Many attribute the decline to declining fish populations, rising fuel costs, increased regulations, and limited access to credit for boat maintenance and upgrades.
Sheila Joseph, executive director of the St. Thomas Chamber of Commerce, said the timing of the proposal raises red flags for the local economy. “We’re already dealing with post-pandemic recovery and inflation,” Joseph explained during a telephone interview. “Any policy that restricts economic activity needs to come with real support for affected workers, not just a comment period and a timeline.”
The USVI Department of Planning and Natural Resources has indicated it will review NOAA’s proposal before the federal agency moves to formal designation. A spokesperson for the department told STT News that territorial officials are “committed to balancing conservation and community needs” but declined to comment specifically on the fishing community’s objections while the review process is ongoing.
The proposal represents a significant escalation in marine protection efforts in the territory. The Virgin Islands already maintain a network of smaller marine protected areas, including the Virgin Islands Coral Reef Monument established in 2001. That designation has been credited with improved fish populations in some areas but has also faced ongoing criticism from fishermen who say their own conservation practices have been overlooked by federal environmental policy.
Economists and policy experts point to the tension between conservation and economic survival that plays out globally in small island communities. Dr. Patricia Gonzalez, an environmental economist who has studied Caribbean fishing communities, noted that protection without economic transition planning often fails both conservation and community objectives.
“You get resentment, illegal fishing increases, and you lose the traditional knowledge that local fishermen have,” Gonzalez said during an email exchange with STT News. “The most successful marine protections happen when you include the fishing community from day one and create legitimate pathways for livelihood transition if restrictions are necessary.”
Local officials have called for NOAA to extend its comment period and conduct in-person community meetings on St. Thomas before proceeding. A petition circulating among fishing families has garnered over 450 signatures. The petition requests that any expanded sanctuary include dedicated funding for fishermen to transition to alternative livelihoods, such as sustainable aquaculture or marine tourism, and that fishing representatives be included on the management board for any new protected areas.
Senator Novelle Francis Jr., who represents the East End district where many fishing operations are based, announced he would introduce a territorial senate resolution calling for a delay in NOAA’s timeline. “Conservation is important, but not at the cost of our people’s survival,” Francis said during a brief statement on Tuesday. “We need federal agencies to understand that St. Thomas is not a park. It’s a community with working people.”
Environmental advocates argue that the fishing community and conservation goals need not be in conflict. Several groups, including the St. Thomas Reef Alliance, have called for a collaborative approach that includes fishermen in monitoring and protection efforts rather than exclusion-based policies.
The formal comment period for NOAA’s proposal runs through March 31. The agency is scheduled to hold a virtual public hearing on March 15, with in-person sessions at the Charlotte Amalie library on March 17 and 18.
For fishing families like the Williams household, the coming weeks represent a critical moment to be heard. “We’re not against saving the reefs,” Captain Williams emphasized. “We just want a seat at the table when decisions are made about how to do it.”
