Exempt fisheries decisions from environmental review
What the document says“Allow a NEPA Exemption for Fisheries Actions.”
The chapter argues that the requirements for analyzing biological, economic and social impacts are already contained in the Magnuson-Stevens Act, that environmental review overlays them with what it calls onerous, redundant and time-consuming process requirements, and that the department and the Council on Environmental Quality should collaborate to reduce the redundancy.
What the document actually says“Allow a NEPA Exemption for Fisheries Actions.”
Let fishing rules skip that green check.
Big federal decisions need an environment report first. The book says fishing rules already do that check. It says the extra step should be dropped.
Read against the documents indexed here on August 26, 2026, and nothing was found that answers this. The Council on Environmental Quality removed its government wide environmental review regulations from the Code of Federal Regulations, and agencies including Energy, Interior, Agriculture and Veterans Affairs then rewrote their own procedures. That changes the procedural overlay the chapter objects to, but it exempts nothing: the statute still applies, and no fisheries action is excluded from it. No NOAA or National Marine Fisheries Service environmental review procedure appears among the rules indexed here, and the fisheries candidates, such as rule-2025-07884, are catch limit actions rather than review policy. That is a record of a search, not a finding that nothing has happened: an act this site does not hold, or one that answers the proposal in words unlike its own, would not be caught by it.