In October 2008 CLF and three citizens petitioned NOAA to protect the Atlantic wolffish under the Endangered Species Act. You may recall the news headlines from that time such as “Protection sought for sea brute” or ”Group to seek protection for a toothy sea monster,” not to forget my personal favorite “Group seeks protection for ugly New England fish.”  The Atlantic wolffish is, apparently, considered unattractive by both humans and most headline editors. In any event, it’s largely true that wolffish are best known for their fang-like teeth. What can you say about the fact that their eating habits consist of crushing whole scallops and sea urchins — not to mention the occasional wayward crab? Check our video, courtesy of Jonathan Bird, of the wolffish in action. It’s an admitted charismatically gruesome fish, but there are those of us who love it.

So, after sitting patiently by the mailbox for almost 14 months we received the answer from NOAA: DENIED! No protection for you, wolffish!

How could that be? The number of wolffish being caught crashed 95% in less than 15 years, the species has been listed as a “Species of Concern” (two steps shy of an endangered listing) since 2004, numbers have not gone up since then, and even more wolffish habitat has been plowed by bottom trawls in the last half-decade. Well, says NOAA, there are a lot of them in Canada. How is that the case since Canada protected Atlantic wolffish under their Species at Risk Act several years ago? That may be, NOAA says, but fewer wolffish “will likely” be caught once the Amendment 16 fishery management plan for groundfish like cod and haddock gets into place. How can we be sure that will work since Amendment 16 is not yet approved and if it does get approved it still won’t go into effect until May of 2010? By the way, the New England Fishery Management Council, not known for its preservationist tendancies, voted to create a zero possession limit for commercial and recreational fishing. NOAA claims that “although Atlantic wolffish discard mortality rates are not specifically known” the catch and release of bycatch will help wolffish survive at a rate that “may be as high as 100%.” Can I ask another question here — how do you measure that 100% when the boats are out to sea with few onboard observers and the crew have no training in catch and release of wolffish?

Friends, can you see where I’m going with this? Let’s just say we have a lot of questions.