Trump opens marine protected areas to commercial fishing
Trump signed a proclamation June 11 reopening three Pacific marine monuments to commercial fishing, removing restrictions from Papahānaumokuākea, Mariana Trench, and Rose Atoll monuments.
Objective Facts
President Donald Trump on Thursday, June 11, 2026, signed a presidential proclamation opening protected Pacific Ocean waters to commercial fishing by lifting restrictions within portions of the Papahānaumokuākea, Mariana Trench, and Rose Atoll Marine National Monuments. The proclamation reopens nearly half a million square miles of water around the northwestern Hawaiian Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa. All three monuments were originally designated by President George W. Bush, with the Hawaii monument subsequently expanded by Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick called the proclamation a win for fishermen, stating that restoring commercial fishing creates economic opportunity for coastal communities and restores U.S. seafood competitiveness. Environmental groups including Earthjustice's David Henkin argue that commercial fishing in protected marine monuments would be disastrous for the environment and does nothing for the fishing industry, while also asserting that without fishing in monuments, U.S.-based fisheries hit their catch limits for tuna every year.
Left-Leaning Perspective
Left-leaning outlets and environmental groups heavily criticized Trump's proclamation. Maxx Phillips, Hawaii and Pacific Islands director for the Center for Biological Diversity, called it "a reckless attack on the world's greatest ocean sanctuaries" and characterized Papahānaumokuākea as "a sacred place and a refuge for endangered wildlife found nowhere else on Earth." Earthjustice's deputy managing attorney David Henkin argued that commercial fishing in protected monuments would be disastrous for the environment and accomplish nothing for the fishing industry, claiming that without fishing restrictions in monuments, U.S.-based fisheries hit their tuna catch limits every year, and that science-backed management requires protected areas as safe havens where marine life maintains healthy populations and prevents corporate greed from stripping the ocean of life. Kekuaewa Kikiloi, co-chair of the Papahānaumokuākea Native Hawaiian Cultural Working Group, expressed disappointment that the Trump administration would take such drastic steps to privilege special interest groups in industrial longline fishing. Maxx Phillips stated it was showing systematic dismantling of America's ocean protections monument by monument. Critics argue that opening all protected waters to commercial fishing ignores science, undermines Native stewardship, and risks irreparable damage to oceans for no public benefit. Left-leaning coverage emphasized environmental and cultural stakes, focusing on endangered species, sacred Native Hawaiian lands, and the precedent of decades of scientific consensus supporting marine protections. Conservation groups had pushed to add sanctuary status to Papahānaumokuākea toward the end of President Joe Biden's administration in case Trump returned to power and sought to revoke monument protections.
Right-Leaning Perspective
Right-leaning outlets and Trump administration officials framed the proclamation as pro-worker economic opportunity and restoring fairness to U.S. fishermen. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick stated Trump is delivering for American fishermen by opening prized Pacific fishing grounds and creating economic opportunity while restoring U.S. seafood competitiveness. PJ Media commentary noted that American fishermen weren't asking for another study but wanted access to American waters without being treated as ocean enemies, and that Trump is cutting needless barriers and reminding federal agencies that fishermen are workers trying to feed families and help feed the country. The nation's eight regional fishery management councils, representing fishermen's interests, argued in a June 2025 letter that prohibitions on fishing within monuments are counterproductive to domestic fishery goals. Right-leaning supporters argued U.S. boats already operate under strict rules with many targeted species being highly migratory; pushing American fishermen aside hands market share to foreign fleets facing weaker standards, and noted that the U.S. controls over 4 million square miles of prime fishing grounds yet nearly 90 percent of seafood on American shelves is imported. Right coverage emphasized economic nationalism, competitive disadvantage against foreign fleets, and the argument that existing federal fisheries law provides adequate environmental protection, making additional monument closures unnecessary.
Deep Dive
Trump's June 11 proclamation represents the latest escalation in a longstanding conflict between commercial fishing interests and marine conservation. The administration has now opened three separate marine monuments: the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument in April 2025, the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument in the Atlantic in February 2026, and three Pacific monuments in June 2026. The three monuments at issue were originally established under President George W. Bush, with the Hawaii monument later expanded by Presidents Obama and Biden. The administration argues that existing federal fisheries law under the Magnuson-Stevens Act provides adequate environmental protection, making additional monument restrictions redundant and economically harmful. Eight regional fishery management councils have endorsed the position, arguing in a June 2025 letter that monument prohibitions are counterproductive to domestic fishery goals and eliminate American vessels' ability to act as watchdogs against foreign incursions. Left-wing critics raise two distinct concerns that sometimes conflict. Environmental groups emphasize ecosystem damage, citing the monuments' unique biodiversity and the role of protected areas as climate refuges. The monuments provide protection to threatened and endangered sea turtles, 22 species of protected marine mammals, several million seabirds, and coral reefs found nowhere else on Earth. However, Hawaiian cultural practitioners like Kekuaewa Kikiloi argue on different grounds—that the fishing industry is already meeting all quota requirements, so the supply argument fails on its own terms. Notably, conservation groups strategically added marine sanctuary status to Papahānaumokuākea under Biden precisely because sanctuary designation requires an act of Congress to undo, whereas monument status can be modified by presidential proclamation. Earthjustice previously sued over the 2025 Pacific Islands Heritage proclamation, and a federal district court struck down that resumption of commercial fishing in August 2025. What remains unresolved: whether the Trump administration's claim that existing federal law provides sufficient marine protection will survive judicial scrutiny, and whether Hawaiian cultural and political interests—which appear divided from mainland environmental groups on the supply question—will mount separate legal challenges. Immediate commercial access is not automatic; vessels must still go through federal scrutiny and a rule-making process before approval. The sanctuary designation may become a critical legal battleground distinct from the monument designation itself.
Regional Perspective
Hawaii's longline fleet leaders and the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council welcomed Trump's order as a major win after decades of lobbying against commercial fishing bans, pressing for access to more fishing grounds to compete with larger fishing operations out of China and other Asian countries. Eric Kingma, executive director of the Hawaii Longline Association, said he welcomed a science-based review from NOAA that considers best available data, environmental protections, and cultural significance, noting the proclamation initiates a regulatory review process and does not immediately reopen monument waters. However, Hawaii's Native Hawaiian communities mounted significant opposition. Cultural leaders described the monument as a sacred space linked to Hawaiian origin stories and where ancestral spirits return after death, characterizing the removal of protections as deeply disrespectful. Kekuaewa Kikiloi, co-chair of the Papahānaumokuākea Native Hawaiian Cultural Working Group, expressed disappointment that the Trump administration took such drastic steps to privilege special interest groups in industrial longline fishing. During a Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council vote in September 2025, dozens of Native Hawaiians, fishers, and scientists voiced opposition, including former Department of Hawaiian Home Lands director William Aila Jr., who stated it meant extractive industrial fishing takes precedence over the sacredness of Papahānaumokuākea. A unique complication exists: Papahānaumokuākea has dual designation as both a monument and a marine national sanctuary, with conservation groups strategically adding sanctuary status toward the end of the Biden administration, since taking an act of Congress is required to undo a sanctuary whereas monuments can be modified by presidential proclamation.